TEACHING NUMBER LINE, FRACTIONS, DECIMALS AND

PERCENTAGES AS A WHOLE SYSTEM

Regina Reinup
Tallinn University
Fractions and decimals have two different meanings. On the one hand they are
rational numbers with the concrete places on the number line. On the other hand they
express ratio and relationship, which can also be expressed using percentages. This
ambiguousness evokes difficulties in calculation. The pupils are often in a quandary
which of these meanings of fractions and decimals they must use in different exercises
(or in real life situations). They probably do not understand that the reason of
difficulties in these exercises lies in choosing the appropriate meaning. Therefore it is
very important to show to pupils the whole system of number line, fractions, decimals
and percentages. This article presents an overview of this system, and proposes some
examples and exercises which can be used in teaching of this topic in the 6th grade.
INTRODUCTION
The teaching and learning of fractions, ratio, and proportionality is a complex process
as described by many teachers and researchers (e.g. Moss, 2005; De Corte, Depaepe,
Op t Eynde & Verschaffel 2005; Adjiage & Pluvinage, 2007). Fractions and
decimals can be taught on the one hand as rational numbers, with concrete location
on the number line. So we can speak of the triangle of fractions decimals number
line (hereafter FDN). On the other hand fractions and decimals express ratios and
proportionalities, and are in this sense closely related to percentages. So we can speak
of the triangle of fractions decimals percentages (hereafter FDP) as well.
Although the pupils can do mathematical operations with decimals and fractions, they
come face to face with difficulties when they must use decimals and fractions in
sense of ratios and proportionalities (Moss, 2005). Duval (2006) points out that for
pupils it is very difficult to change from one semiotic system to other. It is necessary
to show to pupils the whole system of number line fractions decimals
percentages, and to illustrate it with examples and exercises from real life (Adjiage
& Pluvinage, 2007; De Corte et al. 2005) when and why we are in which triangle
and how to change own thinking from one triangle to the other.
The purpose of this paper is to describe this whole system (hereafter WS), and to find
suitable examples and exercises for better understanding it. In the first part of this
paper I present the WS. In the second part I describe the 7th grade pupils choices of
transformations, and their skills in FDP. In the third part I introduce examples from
real life, and in the last part I discuss principles of the design of exercises linked with
the WS.

THE WHOLE SYSTEM

Fractions Decimals Number Line
The pupils first contact with FDN takes place already in primary school. The number
line is known from first grades as the line where at first are situated only natural
numbers, later whole numbers, decimals and fractions as well. It is very natural that
mathematics operations related with number line are first and foremost adding and
subtraction, because these operations can be visualized easily on number line, and
they can be handled as going forwards or backwards on it. To visualize multiplication
of integers, fractions and decimals on the number line is more difficult (usually the
multiplication here is based on the adding again), and dividing is almost impossible
to visualize on number line. Number line seems to support mainly additive thinking
(Moss, 2005).
The teaching of fractions usually begins with the pictures of pizzas or cakes, divided
to the equal pieces, and some pieces are shaded or taken away. The pupils learn to
count the number of all pieces and number of marked pieces, and to write these two
numbers to the top and to the bottom of the fraction bar as a numerator and a
denominator. That kind of approach counting of rational numbers is based on
additive thinking as well (Moss, 2005). Further the pupils find out that a particular
rational number can take many forms (e.g. 3/5 = 6/10 = 18/30 = = 0.6 = 0.60 =
), and this is a new and odd fact in comparing with whole numbers (Moss, 2005).
Duval (2006, p. 108) tells about this same problem in notion changing of the semiotic
system:
If for any mathematical object we can use quite different kinds of semiotic
representation, how can learners recognize the same represented object trough semiotic
representations that are produced within different representation systems?

Almost all of pupils attention goes to the learning these new facts. Calculating with
rational numbers is mathematical-technical acrobatics, and it may be guessed that
here is not much place to think about measure or relation.
Fractions Decimals Percentages
Relative (also multiplicative) thinking, fractions and decimals related with
percentages, are studied in school mathematics usually in the 6th grade (pupils aged
12 13), and it is a difficult topic for pupils. At first, the additive thinking is deeply
rooted in the previous grades. For many years additive thinking has been the norm,
and now, in relatively short time (a couple of months) the pupils must apprehend that
fractions and decimals are not only numbers on the number line (Moss, 2005) but
they embody a relation and a ratio as well (Adjiage & Pluvinage, 2007).
Again, the pupils learn fractions and decimals, but at this time in the new sense of
ratio, related to the whole. These are another kind of fractions and decimals, although
they look the same as earlier. Big amount of rules and algorithms are bound with this
topic, and if the teachers teach these rules mechanically, the pupils often do not

know, which of the rules they must use in each case. Talking about fractions,
Charalambos & Pitta-Pantazi, (2007, p. 311) say:
instead of rushing to provide students with different algorithms to execute operations
of fractions, teachers should place more emphasis on the conceptual understanding of
fractions.

The decimals are used too easily as indicator of ratio, and using decimals in this sense
in the first stage of learning ratio is too mechanical way of calculating for the pupils.
Meaningful use of fractions instead of mechanic using of decimals would be much
better (Roche, 2005).
The problems with transformations
Big amount of exercises on ratio are designed for mechanic training of
transformations fraction decimal percentage (e.g. 3/5 = 0.6 = 60%). The skills of
transformations are certainly important, because big amount of mistakes are done in
this area. It is quite common that when the pupils cannot do transformations
correctly, they begin to construct answers with the numbers what they are seeing.
Hallett (2008) found that 55% of 13-year-olds answer to the question Which of the
following numbers: 1, 2, 19 and 21 are closest to sum 12/13 + 7/8 either 19 or 21.
Moss (2005, p. 313) writes:
One of the questions we asked was how the students would express the quantity 1/8 as a
decimal. This question proved to be very challenging for many, and although the
students ability increased with age and experience, more than half of the sixth and eighth
graders we surveyed asserted that as a decimal, 1/8 would be 0.8 (rather than the correct
answer, 0.125).

It can be assumed that some types of transformations are simpler for the pupils. In
order to understand pupils skills and preferences in transformations of FDP better, I
interviewed some pupils (aged 13 14) of 7th grade. A short overview of interview
and its results is given in the second part of this paper.
Whole System
As it is difficult to recognize an object written in different ways, it is also difficult to
recognize two different meanings, when they are written in the same way. In both
cases we are talking about changing the semiotic system (Duval, 2006) but in
different ways. The problem here resembles using homographs in the language.
When we have two homographic words, for example party and present, it is
impossible to know in which meaning these words are used. Only by adding the third
word, birthday or chairman we can firmly say about what the story is about.
In the Figure 1 two senses of fractions and decimals are shown: firstly, related with
number line they are rational numbers with certain location on it; secondly, related
with percentages they express ratio. It depends on context of concrete situation
(exercise), in which sense it can use them, and which (additive or multiplicative) is

the strategy of solving. Therefore, in the time when pupils learn rational numbers as
expressing the ratio and relation, it is necessary to introduce the WS to them. The key
problem is to teach pupils (1) to understand ambiguousness of fractions and decimals
(see Charalambos & Pitta-Pantazi, 2007), and (2) to choose right solving strategy
(additive or multiplicative).
Additive
thinking

Number line

FDL
Fractions

Decimals

FDP
Multiplicative

Percentages

thinking

Figure 1. The whole system.

White, Wilson, Faragher, & Mitchelmore (2007) found in their study that the most
complicated lesson (in series of percentage lessons designed by them) mentioned by
mathematics teachers was a lesson How do I choose? where pupils compared the
appropriateness of additive versus multiplicative strategies. Thus, even teachers feel
themselves not confidently when explaining choice of the strategy. It can be guessed
that mathematics teachers have not enough good examples and exercises to work on
this topic.
THE STUDY
In the autumn of 2008 a questionnaire was carried out in seven primary schools in
Estonia (with N = 261 children, in 15 different classes) to test seventh grade pupils
(age 13-14) skills of percentage calculation. These pupils had learnt percentages in
the 6th grade, and in the purpose of the test was to test what they remembered about
calculating percentages. Additionally I interviewed 10 pupils from this sample. In this
paper I will report results from one of the questions in the interview. This question
concerned all 6 sorts of transformations in FDP: Which of these transformations is
the simplest? Collate these transformations in order from the simplest to the most
difficult. To help pupils answer to this question I used the concrete examples with
numbers 3/5, 0.35 and 35%. I presumed that some of pupils would do transformation

3/5 = 0.35 (see Moss, 2005). One boy refused to answer to this question. He claimed
that he has forgotten all these transformations. Therefore I have results from nine
pupils. All names are pseudonyms.
Table 1. Pupils preferences of performing different transformations. Incorrect
trasnsformations are marked with a *.
transformation

%
decimal

%
fraction

decimal
fraction

decimal
%

fraction
decimals

fraction
%
3/5 = 60%

pupil

35% = 0.35

35% = 7/20
or = 35/100

0.35 = 7/20
or = 35/100

0.35 = 35%

3/5 = 0.6

1. Emilia

3.*

1.*

2.*

4.

5.

6.*

2. Harry

1.*

2.

6.

3.*

4.

5.

3. Richard

3.

4.*

1.*

2.

6.*

5*.

4. Harold

1.

6.*

3.*

4.

2.

5.

5. Rebecca

4.

1.

3.

5.

2.

6.

6. Pamela

1.

2.*

4.*

3.

6*

5.*

7. Karen

1.

5.

2.

4.

3.

6.

8. Ken

3.

4.

2.

5.

1.

6.*

9. Norma

4.

3.

6.

2.

5.

1.*

Average

1. (2.33...)

2. (3.11...)

3. (3.22) 4. (3.55...)

5. (3.77) 6. (5)

I analysed the results of answers to this question from two aspects: pupils
preferences (Table 1) and skills (Table 2) of transformations. From Table 1 it can be
seen in which order the pupils wanted to do these transformations. The most preferred
transformation (in average) was from percentage to decimal. The pupils said that it is
easy because here must just move the decimal point. Secondly the pupils chose the
transformation from percentage to fraction. When the pupil got to answer 35% =
35/100 (without reducing to 7/20), I consider it was correct. The third transformation
was from decimal to fraction. Again, the answer 0.35 = 35/100 I consider as correct.
The forth transformation was from decimal to percentage. The two latest
transformations were from fraction to decimal and from fraction to percentage.
The two basic mistakes in transformations were moving the decimal point only one
gap instead of two gaps (35% = 3.5) or a conversion percentage sign not to hundredth
but to tenth, (35% = 35/10 = 3.5), and as I was guessed, a combination (3/5 = 0.35 =
35%), (see Moss, 2005; Hallett, 2008). The transformation from fraction to
percentage was the most difficult for pupils. Here appeared most of mistakes. (See
Table 2)

From Table 1 it seems as if the pupils dont choose the transformations in order of
how well they master them. For example four pupils (Emilia, Harry, Richard and
Norma) started from transformation in which they gave an incorrect answer. I assume
that the question here is not the level of mastery. These pupils had an incorrect
subjective knowledge of this topic (Pehkonen & Pietil, 2003), and they were sure
that their answer was correct.
The transformation from percentage to the decimal had a clear preference in this
sample (average 2.33, see Table 1). The next four transformations from percentage to
fraction (3.11), from decimal to fraction (3.22), from decimal to percentage (3.56)
and from fraction to decimal (3.78) were in medium and quite close-set, while
transformation from fraction to percentage (5) seems considerably unpopular.
Table 2. Pupils skills of transformations: right (italic) and wrong (bold) answers.
transformation
pupil

%
decimals

decimals
%

decimals
fractions

1. Emilia

35% = 3.5

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 35/10

2. Harry

35% = 3.5

0.35 = 3.5%

0.35 = 35/100

3/5 = 0.6

35% = 35/100

3/5 = 60%

3. Richard

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 3/5

3/5 = 0.35

35% = 3/5

3/5 = 35%

4. Harold

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 3/5

3/5 = 0.6

35% = 3/5

3/5 = 60%

5. Rebecca

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

6. Pamela

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 35/10

3/5 = 0.35

35% = 3/5

3/5 = 35%

7. Karen

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 35/100

3/5 = 0.6

35% = 35/100

3/5 = 60%

8. Ken

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 35/100

3/5 = 0.6

35% = 35/100

3/5 = 3.5%

9. Norma

35% = 0.35

0.35 = 35%

0.35 = 35/100

3/5 = 0.6

35% = 35/100

3/5 = 0.06%

7/2

8/1

5/4

7/2

5/4

4/5

Average
(right / wrong)

15/3

fractions
decimals

%
fractions

fractions
%

3/5 = 3 : 5 =
0.6

0.35 = 35/100
= 7/20

12/6

3/5 = 0.6

3/5 = 3 : 5 =

35% = 35/10

0.6%

35% = 35/100

3/5 = 60%

= 7/20

9/9

From Table 2 it can be seen that the easier transformations are percentage decimal
(15 correct and 3 wrong answers in all), moderately difficult are transformations
decimal fraction (12/6), and the most difficult transformations are fraction
percentage (9/9). The last of these is quite understandable because transformation
fraction percentage needs in fact a mid-transformation fraction decimal
percentage, and is therefore more difficult. The strength of the skills in
transformations is seen on the Figure 3 in FDP.

THE EXAMPLES FROM REAL LIFE

Many authors (e.g. Adjiage & Pluvinage, 2007; De Corte et al., 2005; Moss, 2005)
point out a necessity to bring into mathematics learning the examples and exercises
from the real life. De Corte et al. (2005, p. 2) write:
Powerful models have at least two important characteristics. First, they are rooted in
realistic and imaginable contexts. Second, they are sufficiently flexible to be applied on a
more advanced and general level. If models meet those requirements, they can bridge the
gap between the informal understanding connected to the real and imagined reality, on
the one hand, and the understanding of formal systems, on the other hand.

Real world

Mathematical world

Number line
FDL
Rational numbers
Fractions

Decimals
FDP
Ratio. Proportion
Percentages

Figure 3. The real world and the mathematical world.

In the Figure 3 it can be seen that in the mathematical world of the WS there are four
axes: number line decimals, decimals percentages, number line fractions, and

fractions percentages. Below I will investigate briefly each of them separately, and
exposit the examples from the real world which would be linked with the WS.
Number line decimals
On this axis appears the additive side of decimals. Here belong all these examples in
which we see various scales: the rulers, the thermometers, the kitchen-scales, the
digital scales, the (imaginary) sea level scale, and units of money. On this axis these
quantities can above all to add or to subtract between themselves, and when we have
two of the same kind quantities, we can them to compare in additive way
(subtracting).
Decimals percentages
On this axis the decimals take form of ratio. Here belong all the prior examples, when
we compare two of the same kind quantities in multiplicative way (part-whole). In
addition to them I found some examples from real world where the decimals are
ratios in their natural representation. The best example is cash receipts. For example,
when there are bought 0.370 kg piece of cheese, on the receipt it is seen as 0.370
times kilogram price of cheese. The second example is money exchange rate. Closer
to percentages are increases and falls in price or in salary. Whilst the habitual
examples from statistics are usually related with big amounts, then by calculating is
necessary to use the calculators, and therefore I guess these are not good examples in
the 6th grade (Reinup, 2009).
Number line - fractions
On this axis appears the fractions additive side. I sought again examples which were
ready in real life, not these where it must the fractions artificially to create. I found
just few examples from real life. The best example was a calendar with 12 months in
a year, with 30 days in a month, and with 7 days in a week. Second example was a
clock with 24 hours in a day, with a quarter after or past, and half past a full hour. A
pizza or a chocolate bar with equal pieces belong here as well, although in my
opinion it is a little artificially created situation.
Fractions percentages
Here the fractions have got the classical part-whole sense, the sense of quotient. Very
many of examples found here: the concentration, the zooming and minimizing,
increase and fall in price (in cases using the fractions), and all sorts of probabilities.
THE CONCLUSIONS AND PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING OF EXERCISES
From the theory it is known that the calculating with the fractions and decimals is
difficult to the pupils (Moss, 2005; De Corte, Depaepe, Op t Eynde & Verschaffel
2005; Adjiage & Pluvinage, 2007). The difficulties are caused on one hand (1) from
ambiguousness of fractions and decimals (Charalambos & Pitta-Pantazi, 2007) and

necessity to change from one semiotic system to other (Duval, 2006), and (2) from
the low level of the skills in transformations of FDP (Hallett, 2008; Moss 2005).
The pupils interviewed by me prefer transformation in succession first from the
percentage to the decimal and fraction, second from the decimal to the fraction and
percentage, and last from the fraction to the decimal and percentage (Table 1). Their
skills of transformations were the best in percentage decimal, medium in decimal
fraction, and the worst in fraction percentage (Table 2). The typical mistakes
were the mechanical moving of the decimal point, and combination of numbers.
Alarming in these results is the fact that in transformations fraction percentage
where the fractions are used in their classical part-whole sense, the pupils skills of
transformations are the worst.
The adults divide the problems of ratio into many different subtypes (Charalambos &
Pitta-Pantazi, 2007; Adjiage & Pluvinage, 2007). In my opinion instead this in the 6th
grade, when the pupils are first time learning the ratio, it is important to show only
two ways in principle: the additive and the multiplicative way. As a Big Idea,
Brigham, Wilson, Jones & Moisio (1996) suggest in teaching of fractions, decimals
and percentages to use ratio or, in simpler terms, division as well.
Knowing the theoretical base, the pupils skills in transformations, and the examples
from real life, linked with the WS (Figure 3) one can design suitable exercises for
teaching of the WS. These exercises:
are desirably exciting or humorous situations (from real life);
afford to ask many questions related to this situation, which include both
additive and multiplicative ways of thinking.
Exciting or humorous situation calls forth interest to find the solutions (Schweinle,
Meyer, & Turner, 2006). Asking consecutively questions, involve both ways of
thinking, shows to the pupils better the ambiguousness of fractions and decimals,
which is actually quite normal in real life. For expressing of ratio it can suggest using
fractions rather than decimals, because it improves the pupils skills of
transformations on axis fractions percentages (see Table 2; Figure 3).
Next, concrete exercises for the teaching of the WS must be designed. Through an
empirical study we will investigate, if these kind exercises have an effect in the
teaching of WS, and are they helping pupils to understand better the choice of right
solving-strategy.
REFERENCES
Adjiage, R. & Pluvinage, F. (2007). An Experiment in Teaching Ratio and
Proportion. Ed. Stud. In Math. 65 (2), 149-175.

Brigham, F.J., Wilson, R., Jones, E. & Moisio, M. (1996). Best practices: Teaching
Decimals,, Fractions, and Percents to Students with Learning Disabilities. LD
Forum, 21 (3),10 - 15.
Charalambos, Y. C. & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2007). Drawing on a Theoretical Model to
study Students Understandings of Fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics
64, 293-316.
De Corte, E., Depaepe, F., Op t Eynde, P. & Verschaffel, L. (2005). Comparing
mathematics education traditions in four European countries: The case of the
teaching of percentages in the primary school. A paper presented in the conference
The Mathematics Education into the 21st Century Project Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia; Reform, Revolution and Paradigm Shifts in Mathematics Education.
Johor Bahru, Malaysia, Nov 25th Dec 1st 2005.
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/21_project/21_malasya_DeCorte1-11_05.pdf

Duval, R. (2006). A Cognitive Analysis of Problems of Comprehension in a Learning

of Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 61, 103-131.
Hallett, D. (2008) Effects of Fraction Situations and Individual Differences. A review
of recent research regarding childrens understanding of fractions. Report of the
11th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Topic Study Group 10.
Monterrey, Mexico, July 6 - 13, 2008.
http://tsg.icme11.org/document/get/877
Moss, J. (2005). Pipes, Tubes, and Beakers: New Approaches to Teaching the
Rational-Number System. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.) How
Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom, pp. 309350. National Academies Press, Washington, D. C.
Pehkonen, E. & Pietil, A. (2003). On relationships between beliefs and knowledge
in mathematics education. Proceedings of the 3rd conference by the European
Society for Research in Mathematics Education. Bellaria, Italy: CERME.
Reinup, R. (2009). Emotional Teaching Methods in the Elementary Stage of
Percentage Learning. In J. Maa & W.Schlglmann Beliefs and Attitudes in
Mathematics Education. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.
Roche, A. (2005) Longer is Larger Or is it? Australian Primary Mathematics
Classroom 10 (3), 11 16.
Schweinle, A., Meyer, D. K. & Turner, J. C. (2006) Striking the Right Balance:
Students' Motivation and Affect in Elementary Mathematics. The Journal of
Educational Research 99 (5), 271 294.
White, P., Wilson, S., Faragher, R. & Mitchelmore, M (2007). Percentages as Part of
Whole Relationships. In J.Watson & K. Beswick (Eds.) Proceedings of the 30th
annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia,
pp. 805-814. MERGA.