Aspect6 FractionUnits

The Numeracy Continuum
Aspect 6: Fraction units

This is an interactive Adobe Acrobat PDF 9 document. It is best viewed on screen as it contains embedded video and an interactive menu.
Introduction
Children initially learn the sequence of counting numbers. Then as these sequences come to be treated as being nested inside numbers, they use counting as a procedure to solve addition and subtraction tasks. Even initial understanding of multiplication and division is frequently built around this additive sense of grouping, rst by counting to form groups and then counting multiple groups. In stark contrast, knowledge of fractions is not built directly on an additive structure like counting. Fractions depend on students developing an understanding of the multiplicative relationship between quantities and this understanding is not easily gained from traditional lessons about fractions. Fractions describe a multiplicative relationship between quantities that is so difcult to see that it is referred to as an intensive property. That is, a fraction such as 1/3 is not the quantity 1 or the quantity 3 but is the relationship between the two quantities. The multiplicative relationship between quantities is also involved in coordinating units in area measurement. As regional models are frequently used to introduce fractions this dual use of multiplicative relationships is particularly important. To effectively use regional models in developing a multiplicative understanding of fractions, students must rst have a multiplicative understanding of area. In moving from whole numbers to fractions, students experience substantial conceptual leaps in symbolic representation, the intrinsic meaning of a number, identication of a unit, and modes of computation with relational quantities (particularly those associated with equivalent fractions). Any one of these leaps can fall short, inhibiting the development of students understanding fractions as numbers.

Introduction Understanding fractions as representing multiplicative relationships Interpreting notation Avoiding common pitfalls Introducing the fraction notation Comparing different types of units The idea of the xed unit whole Fraction models The concentration model Coordinating units at different levels The fraction units framework Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Looking back References
>
Understanding fractions as representing multiplicative relationships

What happens when students do not grasp the idea that fractions represent multiplicative relationships? Suppose a student is asked to explain which fraction is larger, 9/10 or 12/13. This could result in drawing two rectangles, one made up of ten equal parts and the other composed of thirteen equal parts. If the student forms the rectangles drawn to represent each whole by adding on small rectangular pieces, the equality of the wholes is lost, as is the multiplicative relationship.

An example of an additive approach to representing larger denominators An additive interpretation of area typically results in counting units of area rather than subdividing a xed unit. Adding units of area will result in the whole growing, as above. Adding three parts to ten parts results in an additive part-whole relationship (three plus ten is thirteen). Multiplicative part-whole relationships rely on subdividing a xed unit (thirteen times the part makes the whole). The idea that fractional parts, as mathematical objects, must refer to same-sized wholes is central to the development of fractions as multiplicative quantities, the comparison of fractions and in particular equivalent fractions.
>
Interpreting notation
Alternatively, when determining which fraction is larger, 9/10 or 12/13, a student could argue that the two fractions are the same size because you could go from 9/10 to 12/13 by adding 3 to the top and the bottom. This error is due to an additive interpretation of the fraction notation rather than a multiplicative interpretation, which underpins forming a common denominator.

Which is larger, 7/8 or 11/12?
An additive interpretation of the fraction notation is quite common. When 52 808 students in Year 7 were asked to approximate 4/5 + 11/12, 58.4% selected answers of 15 or 17. Of the 50,882 Year 8 students who were asked the same question, 51.2% also selected answers of 15 or 17. Approximately half of all students in the middle years of schooling appear to have an additive interpretation of fractions. When the fraction notation is introduced as a way of recording the result of two counts (the number of parts for the numerator and the total number of parts for the denominator) it is readily interpreted as an additive notation.
>
Avoiding common pitfalls

Teaching fractions usually starts with determining halves by halving1, using examples such as cutting apples or sandwiches into halves aligned to the idea of fair shares. Halves are followed by quarters (or fourths) as well as linking parts-of-a-whole descriptions to fraction notation. Colouring in pre-partitioned shapes such as circles, rectangles or hexagons is then commonly used to monitor students part-whole knowledge of fractions. Unfortunately, this form of monitoring of students understanding of fractions is illusionary, as students can correctly answer questions such as the following, without displaying any real knowledge of fractions.

Colour the correct number of equal parts Colour 3/8
Counting parts in pre-partitioned shapes is a counting activity, not a fractioning activity. Counting is an additive process: one and one more makes two, two and one more makes three, and so on. Using additive processes with fractions is frequently not helpful as additive part-whole (part + part = whole) is not the same as multiplicative part-whole (comparison of part to whole: part x n = whole). In multiplicative part-whole, the whole is a multiple of the one part. Eight is two plus six is an example of additive part-whole whereas, four times one unit of two to form a whole is an example of multiplicative part-whole. Another common pitfall is attempting to link the fraction notation a/b to partitioned fractions (i.e. fractions in context). Fraction notation is currently introduced and used as if there were only one type of fraction, abstract. In particular, abstract quantity fraction notation is often used to describe partitioned fractions without appreciating what it is that the notation is referring to. That is, a diagram showing a number of shaded equal parts of a shape is linked to the a/b notation, as if the shaded parts were the abstract number a/b.
1. The term halving doesnt distinguish between nding halfway (a position), and dividing a volume or area into two equal volumes or areas.
>

= 3/4
Three-quarters of the area of a square is not the number 3/4. We would not attempt to add three-quarters of a square to three-quarters of a circle without being conscious of the units of area involved. Yet three-quarters of a square and three-quarters of a circle are both typically identied with the number 3/4. Without careful attention to the feature of the representation used in comparisons, students can readily overgeneralise fractions represented as parts of things, to fractions represented as abstract numbers.
>
Introducing the fraction notation

It is not uncommon to see fraction notation introduced it as a way of recording a double count. First we count the number of parts shaded, next we count the total number of parts and then record the rst count over the second count as a description of a fraction, as in the following gure.

Two-thirds resulting from a double count Developing fraction notation from two counts relies upon an additive interpretation as the xed nature of the whole is ignored. If the whole is ignored in naming fractions, the logical errors associated with fraction operations are reinforced.
An additive interpretation of fractions due to lack of reference to the whole The emphasis in teaching fractions on counting the number of parts has meant that some students have developed concept images for fractions that are solely dependent on the number of parts represented. In the following example, the student has made three equal parts to represent one-third and six equal parts to represent one-sixth. That is, the number of parts corresponding to the denominator appears to represent the fraction.
>
13. Shade one-third of this circle
14. Shade one-sixth of this circle

Introduction Understanding fractions as representing multiplicative relationships Interpreting notation Avoiding common pitfalls Introducing the fraction notation Comparing different types of units The idea of the xed unit whole Fraction models The concentration model Coordinating units at different levels The fraction units framework Level 0 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Looking back References 12. Shade one-half of this circle 13. Shade one-third of this circle 14. Shade one-sixth of this circle
For some students, fractions are dened solely by the number of parts without attention to the equality of all of the parts. In the following example, the student has represented fractional quantities as the number of parts out of the total number of parts. This is not a comparison of areas but rather a comparison of the number of parts.
Incomplete fraction concepts can be formed from activities associated with common parts-of-a-whole models. In the above examples the number of parts formed is the dening characteristic of the fraction representations rather than the area of the parts. A similar focus appears when students use equidistant parallel partitioning to form sub-units.
>
The circle below, shaded by a student to represent one-sixth of the circle, appears to have been subdivided by equidistant parallel partitioning.
14. Shade one-sixth of this circle

Equidistant partitioning As using vertical parallel lines works in creating fractions of a rectangular region, some students also attempt to use them in a circular region to produce thirds, fourths or fths. Parallel partitioning can result in a number of parts that are treated additively, rather than a relationship between areas. The dominance of the vertical and horizontal directions when forming parts of shapes suggests that some students may only attend to linear distance when dividing regional models, even circles. Equidistant parallel partitioning can also be described as linear partitioning, as attending to length rather than area forms the parts. Linear partitioning is also associated with students using half-way points for one-half. The use of linear partitioning can persist well into high school with one major study in New South Wales (Gould, 2008, p. 145) reporting approximately 10% of students in Years 48 using parallel partitioning to attempt to represent one-third of a circle. Instead of seeing the relationship between the parts and the whole, some students see: parts from parallel partitions, a number of parts (not equal parts), and a number of equal parts (not a fraction of the whole). Although it is a common practice, introducing the standard fraction notation a/b as a count interpretation of the regional parts of a whole model is very limiting. A more useful introduction of the fraction notation arises from the idea of accumulation of length.
>

That is, instead of introducing the notation 3/4 as 3 parts out of 4 parts, it is better introduced as adding related units of length: 3/4 of the length is 1/4 of the length and 1/4 of the length and 1/4 of the length. This also addresses the limitation of the parts of a whole interpretation of fractions; namely, how can you have 5 parts out of 4 parts? Developing a multiplicative interpretation of fractions and their notation is important to understanding why we form common denominators to add or subtract fractions.
>
10
Comparing different types of units

Fractions typically arise from two types of activities. The rst involves measurement: if you want to represent a quantity by means of a number and the quantity is smaller than the unit of measurement you need a fraction. The second involves division: if the dividend is smaller than the divisor, the result of the division is represented by a fraction (Nunes & Bryant, 2009). For example, when you share 3 pikelets among 4 children, each child receives 3/4. However, some students may represent two of the pikelets as being cut into two parts and the other pikelet into four parts before distributing the pieces. This type of sharing suggests a twopart interpretation, where the partitioning actions and the results of partitioning are separate entities.

What would happen if we had 3 pikelets to share among 4 people? Draw your answer. The coordination of the number of people sharing and the number of things being shared may not result in a uniform distribution across the objects being shared. Rather than showing three-quarters of each pikelet, these responses make use of halving and repeated halving to create the desired number of equal pieces. Halves and quarters are the easiest partitions to make and can be progressively distributed in this problem.
>
11

Practical sharing contexts need not result in the standard fraction representation of 3/4 as an indicated division. In the right hand image, sharing 3 pikelets among 4 children results in one-quarter and one-half each. As students can have terms for fractional parts that are linked to inappropriate part-whole fraction images (see the video Counting by quarters) it is important to recognise that fraction words as well as fraction notation may not relate to standard regional models.
Counting by quarters
>
12

In a measurement comparison of lengths (Figure a), the part and the unit whole being measured are separate entities. The fraction is constructed from the relationship between the explicit whole and the part (Watanabe, 2002; Wong & Evans, 2008). When dealing with a partitioned rectangle (Figure b) the part is embedded within the whole and the whole needs to be identied.
(a) Comparison representation for 3/4
(b) Parts of the whole representation for 3/4
Students typically encounter representations of fractions similar to Figure b, with the parts embedded within the whole. Many students focus on counting parts rather than comparing the relationship between two areas. Counting units are more familiar than units of area and are less challenging. Although it is possible that some students may separate out three of the parts while leaving the whole intact (disembed) it is more likely that they will do this by treating the parts as countable units rather than area units (Kamii & Kysh, 2006).
>
13
The idea of the xed unit whole

Irrespective of whether the units a student is dealing with are units of length or area or discrete units, when 3/4 is a number rather than 3 equal parts out of 4 equal parts of something, a dimensionless abstract unit has been formed. Statements such as 3/4 > 1/2 are meaningful because they refer to numbers that are located with respect to the number one (a xed unit whole). When students have not recognized the need for an abstract unit whole, the representations that they make to compare fractions can be inappropriate.

Comparing 1/5 and 1/6 Developing an appreciation of an abstract unit whole used when we treat fractions as numbers requires a careful introduction of the fraction notation a/b. The relational number a/b relies on the (multiplicative) comparison of like units to create a unit-less quantity.
>
14
Fraction models
We use models to represent and illustrate the mathematical idea of a fraction. When the term fraction model is used it refers to the instructional materials used in teaching fractions. The three most commonly used fraction models are: 1. Linear model

2.
Area model
3.
Discrete model
Of the three models used to illustrate the idea of a fraction, the area model is by far the most commonly used model. However, each of the three models has a number of preliminary understandings that need to be developed before students can effectively use the models. For example, to use the area model of fractions students must first know what area is, identify the area of the part, identify the area of the whole and be able to compare the two areas by direct or indirect measurement. Comparing the areas of two pieces that form a whole starts with superposing one piece on the other, typically through folding, to directly compare the parts (see Show me one-half). This can lead to recognising that two congruent pieces forming a whole are each half of the area of the whole shape. However, comparing the areas of parts of a shape requires an understanding of area as covering.
>
15

Incomplete understanding of area When students are able to measure the areas of shapes using uniform informal units they have the background knowledge necessary to interpret an area fraction model.
The concentration model

As well as the three common fraction models, there is a fourth model, the concentration model, which can be useful in addressing the intensive nature of fractions. Fractions can be described as intensive quantities because they represent the relationship between quantities rather than the quantities themselves. Mixing one cup of soda water with two cups of orange juice produces three cups of drink in total, with orange juice two-thirds of the mix. However, if you mix two cups of soda water with four cups of orange juice you will have six cups of drink in total although the fraction of orange juice in the mix (an intensive quantity) remains the same.
>
16
The concentration model

Thinking about fractions using the concentration model helps to appreciate their nature as intensive quantities. The concentration model can also provide simple answers to what otherwise might appear to be difcult fraction questions. In particular, if you add 1 to both the numerator and denominator of a fraction does it become, larger, smaller or stay the same? As a specic example using fraction notation, we may ask is 131/250 larger, smaller or the same as 132/251? An analogy (the concentration model) will help solve this problem. Suppose you added 131 millilitres of orange juice to 119 millilitres of soda water. What fraction of the mixture is orange juice? If I add another millilitre of orange juice, the mixture clearly has more orange juice. What fraction of the new mixture is orange juice? Remember that the total orange soda mixture is now 251 millilitres. It now is much easier to determine which is larger (or stronger), 131/250 or 132/251? More generally, using the concentration model, adding the same number to both the top and bottom of a fraction makes the fraction larger. Adding change the concentration, multiplying the top and bottom is needed to keep the concentration the same. This is another way of showing what it means to say that fractions represent a multiplicative structure not an additive structure.
>
17
Coordinating units at different levels

Coordinating units is an important activity in multiplication and in dealing with fractions. Initially students can only deal with one level of units. They may identify the number of parts in a group or the number of groups but they cannot simultaneously coordinate both units. When students have units at only one level these units are in effect parts rather than parts related multiplicatively to the whole. Students who can multiplicatively coordinate units at two levels with fractions recognise how to iterate or repeatedly create unit fractions, such as one-third, to form a whole. In anticipating that they can do this they are effectively simultaneously coordinating units at the level of the part (one-third) and at the level of the whole (three-thirds). Coordinating three levels of units is involved in understanding the construction of improper fractions. A student who conceives of ve-quarters as an improper fraction appreciates the quantity is made up of ve units, any one of which can be repeatedly be produced. Moreover, he or she recognises that four quarters make one whole and the fth quarter goes beyond one whole. Students who have only two levels of units may operate with fractions greater than one, but they dont produce improper fractions. Typically, if they produce ve quarters they will re-label them as ve fths.

One from one-and-a-half

This student condently recognises that one-eighth is one-third of three-eights and folds the rst strip of paper into thirds. Although she clearly knows how to nd one-third of a strip of paper she does not attempt to do this in trying to create one whole from one-and-a-half. She does not appear to treat one-and-ahalf as three halves.
>
18
The fraction units framework

The following framework of levels of using fractions quantitatively is based on the analysis of thousands of students responses to questions designed to elicit their understanding of fractions as well as a synthesis of the research literature.
L0 Emergent partitioning
Attempts to halve by splitting without attention to equality of the parts.

L1 Halving
Forms halves, quarters and eighths by repeated halving. Can use distributive dealing to share.
L2 Equal partitions
Verifies continuous and discrete linear arrangements have been partitioned into thirds or fifths by iterating one part to form the whole or checking the equality and number of parts forming the whole2. Coordinates units at two levels.
L3 Re-forms the whole

When iterating a fraction part such as one-third beyond the whole, re-forms the whole.
L4 Multiplicative partitioning
Coordinates composition of partitioning (i.e. can find one-third of one-half to create one-sixth). Creates equivalent fractions using equivalent equal wholes. Coordinates units at three levels to move between equivalent fraction forms.
L5 Fractions as numbers
Identifies the need to have uniform equal wholes to compare fractional parts. Uses fractions as numbers, i.e. 1/3 > 1/4 including improper fractions.
Level 0
Emergent partitioning involves breaking things into parts and allocating the pieces. No attention is given to the specic size of the pieces. At this level, when a student uses the term half it generally means a piece, which may or may not be one of two equal pieces.
Level 1
Halving to form two equal pieces is an early fractioning process. The term equal is emphasised here to draw attention to the need to be aware of the basis of determining equality. At Level 1, nding half way is typically used to halve. That is, the basis of determining half of a rectangular piece of paper relies on length rather than area. In a similar way, repeated halving with respect to length can form quarters or eighths.
2. Partitioning continuous quantities into specied numbers of equal parts is very difcult for those partitions not based on repeated halving (i.e. other than halves, quarters, eighths, sixteenths, etc). Instead of partitioning to create odd numbers of parts such as fths, verifying partitions is recommended. Verifying partitioned fractions helps to establish the relationship between the part and the whole and links to Levels 3 and 4 in measurement.
>
19
Show me one-half

The methods used to form halves or quarters or eighths (such as stacking and repeated halving) cannot be readily applied to nding one-third.
One-quarter but not one-third
>
20
Level 2
Constructing thirds and fths by partitioning a continuous quantity is difcult. Although fths are introduced in some syllabus documents before thirds, partitioning to create thirds is clearly easier than partitioning to create fths. The emphasis at Level 2 is not on the student being able to partition into fths and thirds but rather being able to verify that particular partitions represent fths and thirds. Students can be provided with strips of paper partitioned as follows and asked to determine the indicated partitions as fractions of the whole.

What fraction is shaded? Students at Level 2 verify continuous (and discrete) linear arrangements have been partitioned into thirds or fths by checking the equality and number of parts forming the whole. Similarly, students could be given a short strip of paper (e.g. 1/3 of a longer strip of paper) and asked what fraction of the longer un-partitioned strip they have. This form of learning opportunity provides a way of moving beyond a focus solely on partitioning to teaching strategies that support students development of measurement iterating operations.
Level 3
When iterating a fraction part such as one-third beyond the whole, the student re-forms the equal whole. Some students consistently regard an improper fraction produced via iteration of a unit fraction as a new whole (Tzur, 1999). That is, they think of 1/4 iterated ve times as 5/5 and each part is considered as being transformed into 1/5. This belief could be attributed to students failing to reform the iterated four-fourths into the equivalent unit whole.
1.This drawing represents a piece of chocolate Draw a piece of chocolate that is ve-quarters the size of this piece of chocolate
>
Five-quarters recast as ve-fths
21

Even when successfully creating seven-fths of a drawing of a chocolate bar, some students view the resulting pieces as not being fths but rather sevenths they turned into seven pieces instead of ve pieces (Hackenberg, 2007, p. 33). This reorganisation of iterated fraction units, recognising when the whole has been formed, is necessary to make the transition from an additive iteration of units to a multiplicative association between parts of an equal-whole.
Level 4
At level 4 the student can coordinate composition of partitioning. For example, given one-half and asked to create one-sixth of a whole, the student nds one-third of one-half. This requires coordinating units at three levels to move between equivalent fraction forms.
Coordinating units at three levels with proper fractions Moving between equivalent fraction forms can also include improper fractions (Hackenberg, 2007). For example, conceiving of 4/3 as an improper fraction means conceiving of it as a unit of 4 units, any of which can be iterated 3 times to produce another unit (the whole), a threelevels-of-units structure. One level is 4/3 as a unit, another level is the whole and the nal level of units is one-third. Dealing with equivalent proper fractions also requires operating across three levels of units.
>
22
The following drawing shows the use of units at three levels: the four-thirds, the one-whole and the thirds.
2. This drawing represents a piece of chocolate

Draw a piece of chocolate that is four-thirds the size of this piece of chocolate
What is the fraction name of each of the parts in your drawing?
Drawing four-thirds and showing coordination of units at three levels Coordinating units at three levels is also used with composition of partitioning in the students answer to the following problem. Sue and Michele share a two-nger Kit Kat. Just after Sue breaks her Kit Kat nger in half Alice comes along. How can Alice be given a fair share of the two Kit Kat ngers? Explain your answer.
>
Coordinating composition of partitioning and units at 3 levels
23

The explanation shows an understanding of the multiplicative relationship between the fractional value 1/3, the number of pieces and the whole. Further, each of the halves of the broken Kit Kat nger is divided into thirds to produce sixths (composition of partitioning). The coordination of units at three levels is evident in the drawings (halves, sixths and thirds of the equal wholes). Unit coordination at different levels can also be seen in working with equivalent fractions displayed in regional models using the same equal whole.
Equivalent regional models
>
24
Level 5
At this level, the student identies the need to have equal wholes to compare fractional parts. They can also use fractions as numbers (unit-less quantities), i.e. 1/3 > 1/4. For example, in determining the relative size of fractions such as 1/3 and 1/6, care is taken in representing the two fractions with equal wholes (unlike the following response).

Comparing the size of 1/3 and 1/6 without referencing equal wholes. In this students response, no attempt has been made to use equal wholes when comparing 1/3 and 1/6. It is also clear that for this student the fraction notation does not link to regional models of fractions. At this level the student is aware of the need for the xed unit whole to compare quantity fractions. Coordinating units linked with the idea of a universal equal whole, is also important in addressing the distinct problem of fractions having multiple representations of the one quantity (1/3 = 2/6 = 3/9) within the same representational system. As Lamon (1999, p. 22) has suggested, the hardest part for some students is understanding that what looks like the same amount might actually be represented by different numbers. The notational equivalence of fractions is implicitly dependent on the existence of a universal one, a whole that is always the same size.
>
25
Looking back
Although teachers might use regional models to introduce fractions, some students attend to the discrete, countable features of the area models. This can lead to the intended continuous parts of a whole fraction embodiment being interpreted as countable objects. Moreover, the underpinning idea of area as a quantiable attribute is frequently not taught before students are expected to make area comparisons through the interpretation of regional models. The standard fraction notation itself encourages a count interpretation of the regional parts of a whole model. Fractions need to be taught in a way that enables students to be aware of the nature of the unit whole and the relationship between sub-units and the whole. The use of a continuous embodiment of fractions to introduce the fraction concept must emphasise the measurement property as distinct from discrete counts. Focusing on subdividing length rather than area is necessary until students have developed a multiplicative sense of area. Students also need opportunities to move beyond the unit-whole to reorganise fractional units in a way that supports working with related units at three levels. Students tend to work through a number of levels in developing an understanding of fractions as numbers. At the foundation of fraction knowledge is the process of partitioning. However, not all partitions are equally easy (e.g. thirds, fths and sevenths) and verifying the multiplicative relationship between the partition and the whole becomes more important in learning about fractions than being able to create the partition. Having established the multiplicative relationship between the partitioned part and the xed unit whole, the next challenge is to understand what happens to our measure of quantity when the whole is exceeded. That is, students come to understand fractions as representing quantity by increasing fractional parts of length until the whole is exceeded, creating a need to reform the whole. To appreciate fractions as numbers rather than parts of objects or collections students need to recognise that fractions are parts of the number one, not parts of pizzas. Finally, to be able to operate with fractions students need to be able to move uently between different ways of representing the same quantity with equivalent fractions and regrouping sub-units.

>
26
References
Carpenter, T. P., Corbitt, M. K., Kepner, H. S., Lindquist, M. M., & Reys, R. E. (1981). Results from the Second Mathematics Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational progress. Washington, D.C.: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Gould, P. (2008). Childrens quantitative sense of fractions. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Macquarie University, Sydney. Hackenberg, A. (2007). Units coordination and the construction of improper fractions: A revision of the splitting hypothesis. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26(1), 27-47. Kamii, C., & Kysh, J. (2006). The difculty of length x width: Is a square the unit of measurement? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25, 105-115. Lamon, S. J. (1999). Teaching fractions and ratios for understanding. Mahwah, N. J. : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (2009). Paper 3: Understanding rational numbers and intensive quantities. London: Nufeld Foundation.

Acknowledgements
This aspect of the numeracy continuum was developed for the NSW Department of Education and Training by Peter Gould and is based on his doctoral dissertation and related research. 2012
>
27

Aspect6 FractionUnits

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Aspect6 FractionUnits

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

The Numeracy Continuum