Pythagoras - Journal of the Association for Mathematics Education of South Africa

ISSN: (Online) 2223-7895, (Print) 1012-2346

Page 1 of 11 Original Research

The concepts of area and perimeter: Insights and

misconceptions of Grade 10 learners

Author: This article focuses on learners’ understanding and their descriptions of the concepts of area
France M. Machaba1 and perimeter, how learners solve problems involving area and perimeter and the relationship
Affiliation: between them and misconceptions, and the causes of these misconceptions as revealed by
1
Mathematics Education learners when solving these problems. A written test was administered to 30 learners and
Department, University of clinical interviews were conducted with three of these learners, selected based on their
South Africa, South Africa responses in the test. This article shows that learners lack a conceptual understanding of area
Corresponding author: and they do not know what a perimeter is. Learners also hold misconceptions about the
France Machaba, relationship between area and perimeter. It appears that inadequate prior knowledge of area
[email protected] and perimeter is the root cause of these misconceptions. This article provides suggestions on
how to deal with the concepts of area and perimeter.
Dates:
Received: 27 May 2015
Accepted: 23 Mar. 2016
Published: 31 May 2016 Introduction
How to cite this article: Research in the field of mathematics education, locally and internationally, often reveals poor
Machaba, F.M. (2016). understanding of the concepts of area and perimeter (Gough, 2004; Helen & Monicca, 2005; Tirosh
The concepts of area and & Stavy, 1999). It was found that the concepts of area and perimeter are a continual source of
perimeter: Insights and
confusion for learners. Van de Walle, Karp and Bay-Williams (2014) suggest that it is perhaps
misconceptions of Grade 10
learners. Pythagoras, 37(1), because both area and perimeter involve measurements, or because students are taught formulae
a304. http://dx.doi. for both concepts at about the same time, that they tend to get the formulae confused. The
org/10.4102/pythagoras. confusion between these two concepts results in learners developing misconceptions.
v37i1.304

Copyright: This article is based on the study by Machaba (2005), which posed the following questions:
© 2016. The Authors. • How do Grade 10 learners describe the concepts of area and perimeter?
Licensee: AOSIS. This work
is licensed under the
• How do Grade 10 learners solve problems involving area and perimeter and the relationship
Creative Commons between them?
Attribution License. • What misconceptions are evident?
• What might be at the root of these misconceptions?

In this article, I argue that learners lack conceptual understanding of the concept of area and they
do not know what a perimeter is. It further appears that inadequate prior knowledge of area and
perimeter is the root cause of these misconceptions.

Firstly, the location of this study in the curriculum will be discussed. I will then explain and
describe the concepts of area and perimeter and the thought processes around area and perimeter,
drawing from a variety of publications. After describing the theoretical framework of the study,
the methodology used and the analysis of the data, the conclusion of the study once again focuses
on the research questions and the answers yielded by an analysis of the data. Finally, I will make
practical suggestions on how educators and textbook writers or curriculum designers can improve
learners’ ability to deal with the concepts of area and perimeter.

Location in the curriculum

The National Curriculum Statement for Mathematics, Grade 7–9, determines that learners should
be able to describe and represent the characteristics of and relationships between 2-D figures and
3-D objects in a variety of orientations and positions (Department of Education, 2003). This means
that learners should be able to apply their knowledge of area and perimeter appropriately in
Read online: various situations.
Scan this QR
code with your
smart phone or The Gauteng Institute for Curriculum Development (1999, p. 46) in their progress map argue that
mobile device learners should develop an understanding of the relationship between area and perimeter and
to read online.
use appropriate methods to solve problems involving area and perimeter. For example, learners

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 2 of 11 Original Research

should notice that all rectangles with the same perimeter will units respectively. Rectangles with the same perimeter can have
not necessarily have the same area and, where necessary, many different areas. For example, a 3 × 4 and a 2 × 5 rectangle
learners should be able to develop general formulae to both have a perimeter of 14 units, but their areas are 12 square
calculate the area and perimeter. This means that learners units and 10 square units respectively.
should develop a conceptual understanding of area and
perimeter through measuring areas and perimeters in a real- On the other hand, learners can also establish a relationship
world context. They should work concretely (fitting, cutting, between area and perimeter that rectangles with the same
folding, matching and counting) to develop an understanding area have dimensions that are factors of the fixed area. When
of the concept of area and should simultaneously develop the the difference between the dimensions of a rectangle with a
appropriate language to explain area. They should compare fixed area is the smallest, you will have the smallest perimeter.
different regular and irregular figures and explain and justify When the difference between the dimensions of a rectangle
which would be more suitable for measuring area (for with a fixed area is the largest, you will have the largest
example, it is easier to measure the area of a square than that perimeter. Given a fixed perimeter, the rectangle with the
of a circle, because no open spaces are left unmeasured when largest area will be the one with the dimensions that
measuring the area of a square). They should also devise are closest together (a square). Given a fixed perimeter,
methods to measure the areas of regular and irregular figures the rectangle with the smallest area will be the one with the
(Gauteng Institute for Curriculum Development, 1999, p. 45). dimensions farthest apart.

What are area and perimeter? The literature, as stated above, indicates that there are many
misconceptions for learners and adults about the complex
Dickson (1989, p. 79) defines area as ‘the amount of surface of relationship between area and perimeter. Learners need to
a region’, and perimeter as ‘the distance around the region’. have experiences in which they are manipulating the spaces
She argues that these definitions are not adequately covered that they are measuring, to construct deep understanding.
in the lower grades, when learners merely learn to define Because of this, it is important to use a variety of
area as the product of length and breadth (A = l × b), which is manipulatives to develop the concepts. If these are not used,
completely divorced from the idea of covering surface. learners would view the relationship between area and
Nunes, Light, Mason and Allerton (1994) concur that perimeter as the result of the application of the intuitive
children’s success in understanding area is not independent rule ‘Same A – Same B’ (Same perimeter – Same area;
of the resources they are given to represent area during Same area – Same perimeter). This kind of mysterious
problem-solving. Learners need objects or resources like connection between perimeter and area is further discussed
bricks and cuttings which they can fit, fold, match and count below.
(Gauteng Institute for Curriculum Development, 1999), so
that they can work concretely to develop a conceptual
understanding of area and perimeter. This implies that for
Misconceptions about area and
learners to understand the concept of area and perimeter, the perimeter
formula length × breadth does not suffice. Olivier (1989, p. 12) defines misconceptions as ‘errors or
wrong answers that are systematic in that they are applied
Relationship between area and regularly in the same circumstances’. He says they are

perimeter: Mysterious connection symptoms of underlying conceptual structures that are

causes of error. Smith, diSessa and Roschelle (1993, p. 1)
The mathematics education literature reports that many learners argue that misconceptions are flawed ideas that are strongly
and even adults adhere to the view that figures with the same held by a student and which interfere with learning. Clement,
perimeter must have the same area (e.g. Outhred & Mitchelmore in Confrey (1990, p. 18), defines misconception as ‘conceptual
1996; Tirosh & Stavy, 1999; Tsamir & Mandel, 2000; Kidman, stumbling blocks, inconsistent semi-autonomous schemes,
2001; Helen & Monicca, 2005; Van de Walle et al. 2014). These and cognitive processes responsible for errors in problem
studies interpreted learners’ responses as resulting from a solving’. These definitions imply that misconceptions are a
misunderstanding of the concepts of area and perimeter, that is, part of learning and that they are inevitable, but, if noticed,
figures with the same perimeter must have the same area and they can be dealt with appropriately. When learners construct
vice versa. Furthermore, Tirosh and Stavy (1999) found that for knowledge, reconstructing and reorganising their prior
a significant percentage of learners a predictable relationship knowledge and aligning it with their new knowledge,
between area and perimeter is that when the area of a figure misconceptions are likely to arise. The point here is that
decreases or increases, the perimeter will also decrease or misconceptions are not mistakes that can easily be corrected
increase. Learners may not realise that it is possible to have by telling the learners that they are wrong. Learners need
many rectangles with the same area, but different perimeters. If experiences that will enable them to reorganise their thinking.
the perimeter is the same in a set of rectangles, then the area of
those rectangles does not have to be the same. For example, Olivier (1989, p. 12) states that ‘if we want to account for
rectangles with the same area can have many different pupils’ misconceptions, we must look at pupils’ current
perimeters. For example, a 3 × 4 and a 2 × 6 rectangle have the schemas and how they interact with each other, with
area of 12 square units, but their perimeters are 14 units and 16 instruction and with experience’. This means that

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 3 of 11 Original Research

misconceptions are a function of how learners construct In my study I was interested to see if learners in South Africa
knowledge. This is also supported by Smith et al. (1993), who do the same as reported by Dickson (1989) and Tsamir and
argue that misconceptions arise from prior learning, either in Mandel (2000). Do learners in South Africa overgeneralise?
the classroom (especially for mathematics) or from learners’ Do they apply the ‘Same A – Same B’ intuitive rule? And if so,
interactions with the physical and social world. what reasons do they give for their conceptions?

Olivier (1989) believes that the source of misconceptions is Theoretical framework

mostly an overgeneralisation of previous knowledge
This study is informed by Piaget’s theory of constructivism,
(knowledge that was correct in an earlier domain) to an
which is about learners assimilating new learning into their
extended domain (where it is not valid). This means that
existing schema. Constructivism holds that learning occurs
learners who have been taught the formulae for the areas of a
efficiently and effectively when new knowledge is linked to
square and a rectangle in their early stages of learning,
existing or prior knowledge (Hatano, 1996). Kramer (1996,
overgeneralise these formulae, extending them to other
p. 6) states that one of the important contributions of Piaget’s
figures such as triangles and irregular figures. In other words,
ideas is the notion that ‘learners build or construct new
they use the formula length times breadth for all figures.
knowledge or skills based on what they know or can do’.
Dickson (1989) asserts that most children responded to the
This means that learners cannot learn mathematics effectively
word ‘area’ by saying ‘length times breadth’, irrespective of
in isolation from what they are already familiar with. This
the figure being considered.
theory is supported by Mogari (1998), when he says learners
do not enter classrooms with blank minds. Instead, they
Another common misconception has been researched by
bring with them ideas, conceptions and experiences about
Tsamir and Mandel (2000). They argue that if learners are
mathematical principles, practices and concepts. The theory
presented with a square where one side is lengthened and the
of constructivism also emphasises the fact that the
other shortened by the same amount, these learners claim
construction of knowledge is dependent not only on what the
that both the perimeter and the area of the created
child already knows, but also on what they have to know.
rectangle are equal to the perimeter and area of the original
square. They claim that learners are using a rule called
Skemp (1976, p. 20) describes this kind of understanding as
‘Same A – Same B’, a rule based on their intuition. Learners’ ‘instrumental understanding’ and contrasts it with ‘relational
justifications of their answers were based on the intuition understanding’. Instrumental understanding is manifested
that if the same number was transferred from one place to when learners know rules and formulae and have the ability to
another, there would be no change in the perimeter or the use them without reason, not knowing where those rules and
area of the figure formed. This type of reasoning has been formulae come from. For example, many learners know that
explained by Piaget’s theory about the use of compensation the formula to calculate the area of a rectangle is ‘length
to attain conservation. Kidman (2001) and Zacharos (2006) multiplied by breadth’, but they do not know why this is so.
concur that the learners intuitively had a perception of area, He argues that learners should develop a relational
where doubling the length of the sides of a rectangular region understanding of area and perimeter. In other words, learners
can be seen as doubling the area. These support research should know both ‘what’ to do and ‘why’ when dealing with
findings by Outhred and Mitchelmore (1996), who argue that problems that involve area and perimeter (Skemp, 1976, p. 20).
learners believe that when the sides of a square are doubled, This also implies that learners should be able to associate or
so is its area. I was interested to see if the result of the current relate the concepts of area and perimeter with other
research study would produce the same misconception of mathematical concepts and their everyday life experiences.
‘Same A – Same B’ as has been explained above. For example, Skemp mentions in his research that he asked his
learners the question: ‘What is the area of a field 20 cm by
Nunes et al. (1994, p. 256) indicate that the concept of area is 15 yards?’ The reply was: ‘300 square centimetres’. When
‘prone to misconceptions, is difficult to teach, and that asked why not 300 yards, his learners replied that ‘area is
misconceptions are retained even in the upper middle school always measured in square centimetres’ (p. 23).
age range’. They cite the most common misconception of the
relationship between the area and perimeter, which is that The integrated networks of connections between ideas
the area delimited by the perimeter remains the same, even referred to as cognitive schemas are the product of
though the figure and delimited surface have changed. This constructing knowledge and the tools with which additional
was evident when limiting an area with a string fixed at the new knowledge can be constructed (Skemp, 1976). Thus, Van
corner and gradually changing the surface by moving the de Walle (2007) defines understanding as the quality and
tacks that held the other three corners. They said children quantity of connections that an idea has with existing ideas.
tend to think that the area remains constant, despite the Understanding depends on the existence of appropriate
visible changes in the surface. They argue that another cause ideas and the creation of new connections.
of these misconceptions is that learners are taught or learn a
procedure or formula for the area of the rectangle, rather than Understanding at this rich and strongly interconnected end
forming a solid understanding of the relationship between of the continuum can be referred to as ‘relational
the side lengths and the area of the figure. understanding’, while that at the other end of the continuum,

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 4 of 11 Original Research

where the ideas are completely isolated, can be referred to as Question 3

‘instrumental understanding’ (Skemp, 1976; Van de Walle This question tests the learners’ ability to calculate the
et al. 2014). Knowledge learned by rote, where ideas are perimeter and area of an irregular figure when given
nearly always isolated and disconnected, is almost always measurements.
understood instrumentally. When learners come by
knowledge through self-discovery, it has more meaning Question 4
because it facilitates the process of building cognitive
This question tests learners’ understanding of the concept of
structures (constructing a network of connected ideas) and
area and whether they can measure the area of an irregular
because the recall of information (concepts and procedures)
figure.
is far easier than when knowledge is given (Van de Walle
et al. 2014). Relational understanding suggests that when a
learner solves a mathematical problem, they arrive at a
Question 5
concept which is in fact produced from a schema (a network This question tests learners’ understanding of the relationship
of connected ideas). This process produces the kind of learner between area and perimeter and whether they apply the
who is independent, able to think, able to express ideas and intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule, finding that when increasing
to solve problems, representing a shift to a learner- the length of two opposite sides of a square by a given factor
centeredness, that is, learners as knowledge developers and and reducing the length of the other two remaining sides by
users, rather than storage systems and performers. the same factor, the perimeter and the area will remain the
same.

Methodology Question 6
The research methodology used in this study was qualitative This question tests learners’ understanding of the relationship
and was organised around a written test administered to 30 between area and perimeter and their application of the
learners as well as a clinical interview carried out with a intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule, finding that when increasing
sample of six learners. The interviews were conducted after or multiplying the length of two opposite sides of a square by
all the learners had written the test of six questions (Figure 1), a given factor and reducing or dividing the length of the
which was based on previous studies such as those other two remaining sides by the same factor, the perimeter
discussed above. In the interview I probed my participants to and the area will remain the same.
explain their interpretations, experiences and insights with
regard to each of their responses to the test items and their To reiterate, the purpose of the study was to investigate the
reasoning when it comes to the concepts of area and insights and misconceptions that some Grade 10 learners in
perimeter. one school in Soshanguve have with regard to the concepts of
area and perimeter. A written test was administered to 30
Grade 10 learners were chosen from a secondary school in learners in a classroom and an interview was conducted with
Soshanguve. The reason why I chose this school was because a selected six of these learners. However, for this article I
I was not teaching in this school. This assisted to minimise report on the results of only three of the learners with whom
researcher bias that might emerge from familiarity with the the interviews were conducted, because only from them had
learners and with the school concerned. Below is the written I obtained saturated data, so I was forced to omit the data
test that was given to learners to write on the concept of area obtained from the other three learners. The results of the
and perimeter. interviews and the written test will be reported
simultaneously.
Rationale for the choice of questions
Ethical considerations
Question 1
Permission to conduct the research was granted by the
This question tests learners’ conceptual understanding,
Gauteng Department of Education, the district and the school
without using formulae, and their ability to express these
where this research was conducted. As this study was not
ideas or concepts in words.
conducted at my school, I wrote a letter to the principal of the
school, describing the required grade (Grade 10) and the
Question 2 purpose and the rationale of the study. Grade 10 learners
This question was also aimed at testing learners’ were informed of the study so that they could decide whether
understanding of the concepts of area and perimeter, without or not to participate in the study.
being given numbers or measurements. It tests whether
learners are able to count square units to determine the area Learners who agreed to participate in the study were
of a figure. It also tests whether learners know that calculating guaranteed anonymity and confidentiality. At both school
the area of a rectangle by multiplying the number of square and individual levels, participants’ anonymity and
centimetres in a row by the number of rows is the same as confidentiality were maintained by use of pseudonyms
multiplying the number of square centimetres in the length (e.g. L1, L2 and L3). Learners were informed that their real
by the number of centimetres in the breadth. names would not be used in the study and whatever they

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 5 of 11 Original Research

Question 1

Define the following concepts in your own words, without using a formula.

(a) Area
(b) Perimeter

Question 2

What is the area and perimeter of each of the diagrams below?

8 cm
(a) (b)

4 cm

Question 3

What is the area and perimeter of the figure below? Show how you calculated your answer.

10 cm

6 cm

9 cm

2 cm

Question 4

Does this leaf have an area? If yes, how will you find out what it is? Work out its area.

Source: Adapted from Dickson (1989), Outhred & Michelmore (1996) and Tsamir & Mandel (2000)
FIGURE 1: The written test on area and perimeter.

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 6 of 11 Original Research

Queson 5

Consider a square, whose sides are a cm (a > 6 cm). A rectangle is created by lengthening two opposite sides of the square by 6 cm, and shortening the
other two sides by 6 cm.

a
a+6

a−6

rectangle
square

Select the correct statement. Circle your choice and explain your answer.
(a) The perimeter of the rectangle is larger than / equal to / smaller than the perimeter of the square, or it is impossible to determine.
(Circle your choice and explain your answer.)
(b) The area of the square is larger than / equal to / smaller than the area of the rectangle, or it is impossible to determine.

Queson 6

Consider a square. A rectangle is created by mulplying the length of two opposite sides of the square by 6, and reducing the length of the other two sides by the same factor,
as described in the drawing.

a
6a

a
6

rectangle
square

Select the correct statement. Circle your choice and explain your answer.
(a) The perimeter of the rectangle is larger than / equal to / smaller than the perimeter of the square, or it is impossible to determine.
(b) The area of the rectangle is larger than / equal to / smaller than the area of the square, or it is impossible to determine.

Source: Adapted from Dickson (1989), Outhred & Michelmore (1996) and Tsamir & Mandel (2000)
FIGURE 1 (Continues...): The written test on area and perimeter.

said would be kept confidential. I developed a rapport with performance was good in the test and one who performed
them so that they would not perceive me as an evaluator or poorly.
judge, that is, as somebody who wanted to detect their
learning flaws or faults that could be used to determine their Furthermore, I presented the test at conferences and
promotion. Rather, I intended to be perceived as one who postgraduate meetings, where it underwent rigorous
was interested in how they think and reason mathematically. peer reviewing before taking its final form. Because
Participants were informed that they would be provided
I interviewed few learners, one cannot generalise the
with the report of the study.
findings beyond the studied cases. This is the nature of
case studies. However, consistent with the objective of the
Reliability and trustworthiness study, the findings could provide principles for dealing
Data were collected by me using both the instrument with learners’ misconceptions.
(test) and interviews. To ensure reliability of the
instrument I initially collected pilot data and then tested Table 1 shows the learners’ performance in each of the
an instrument to see if it would be interpreted in the same questions and the numbers and percentages of correct,
way. Since some of the questions had not yet been used in
partially correct and incorrect answers given by all 30 learners
any research before, I thought it would be imperative to
who wrote the test.
find out whether the test items were appropriate and
tested my critical questions through piloting. I involved
five Grade 10 learners in piloting. I gave test items to each Findings
and they spent 45 minutes on average answering the The findings as summarised in Table 1 reflect poor
questions. I marked their test and chose two learners for performance in almost all questions, with the exception of
an interview. The selection of the two was based on how Question 2b, which 63% of learners answered correctly. It
they had answered the test items. I selected one whose would seem that most of the learners had not yet come

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 7 of 11 Original Research

TABLE 1: Summary of findings (N = 30). L1: Mmm. … I use the formula because there was
Question Correct (%) Partially correct (%) Incorrect (%) no other way I can define the area without
1a 10 23 67
using the formula.
1b - 10 90
2a - 10 90 L1: Perimeter is the sign of showing that it is a cm,
2b 63 - 37 km or m.
3 - 17 83 Interviewer: What do you mean? Can you say more on
4 - 27 73 that?
5a - 17 83
5b - 23 77 L1: I mean like in a ruler [showing me a ruler], these
6a - 47 53 are millimetres and centimetres, these are
6b - 17 83 perimeters.

Similarly, L2 responded as follows:

across the mathematical concept of perimeter. This is
evident from the fact that none of the learners could define L2: [Perimeter] is the size of an object.
perimeter. Interviewer: Have you ever heard about the word perimeter
in your life?
It was therefore imperative to find out during the interview
L2: No.
why learners were unable to define area and perimeter
without using the formulae. It is evident from Table 1 that
67% of the learners answered Question 1a incorrectly, while Overgeneralisation
90% failed to answer Question 1b correctly. The answers to The learners overgeneralised when moving from working
the rest of the questions were also interesting, with more than with rectangles to working with non-rectangles. They
50% incorrect answers. I hoped to discover the reasons for thought that the formula A = l × b could be applied to non-
this during the interviews. rectangles. For example, the learners responded as follows
to Question 5:
Of course, the table does not show how the learners solved L1: No, the leaf does not have an area because
the problems, or how during the interviewing process some there is no length and breadth.
were able to obtain the correct solutions. The discussion that
L3: I do not think the leaf has an area, because the
follows is an analysis of the responses of the three selected
leaf is not a rectangle and does not have length
learners to each of the questions in the test and during the
and breadth.
interview.

I will refer to the three learners that were interviewed as L1, Same A – Same B
L2 and L3, without implying through the labelling the order The learners claimed that when the length of two opposite
in which they were interviewed. The researcher will be sides of a square were increased by a given number of
referred to as the ‘interviewer’ in the transcript. centimetres and the length of the other two sides were
decreased by the same number of centimetres, both the
The major finding was that the learners held the same perimeter and the area would remain the same. Similarly
misconceptions that had been identified by other researchers. so if the length of two sides is multiplied by a certain factor
This claim is based on both the test responses and the follow- and the other sides are divided by the same factor.
up interviews.
The response to Questions 6 was as follows:
Area is length multiplied by breadth Interviewer: You said your answer would be ‘equal to’ in
The learners cited the ingrained, formalised method of your solution of 6(a) and 6(b). Can you give a
multiplying length by breadth to get the area. This reason why you said so?
indicates a lack of conceptual understanding of area as a L1: Sir, I think if you lengthened these two sides of
surface and perimeter as the distance around the edge of the square, nee! … by 6 nee!! … mmm … and
the figure. The learners described both the area and shortened the other two sides by 6 again
the perimeter in terms of a formula. For example, with [talking and demonstrating with her hands and
regard to Question 1a and Question 1b, L1 responded as fingers] is like you did nothing, is like you add
follows: 6 subtract 6 is zero, so that is why I say the
answer is equal.
L1: It is the answer that you get after multiplying
both the length and the breadth. Interviewer: 
Which means, what you are saying is the
perimeter of the rectangle will be equal to the
Interviewer: Why did you define by using the formula,
perimeter of square?
when you had been forbidden to use the
formula? L1: Yes, Sir.

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 8 of 11 Original Research

Interviewer:  What about the area? understanding (doing something without understanding) of
L1: The area of the square will also be equal to the the concept of area. They were unable to build on their
area of rectangle. existing knowledge (schema) of the area as a surface which
they should have possessed to create a new knowledge of
Interviewer:  Why are you saying so? the formula of an area. This means that learners do not have
L1: Because, Sir, you add 6 and subtract 6. a conceptual understanding of area. It appears that they do
not know where the formula A = l × b comes from or why
It is clear that L1 uses the intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule A = l × b. Kilpatrick, Swafford and Findell (2001, p. 119) say
when solving the problem. L2 did likewise: that a significant indicator of conceptual understanding is
being able to represent mathematical situations in different
L2:  o, I think the perimeters of the two diagrams
N ways and knowing how different representations can be
are equal, Sir. useful for different purposes. In this study, with the
L2:  ecause the two opposite sides of the square
B exception of L2 and L3 who used the everyday notion of
are increased by 6 cm and the other two have area as a ‘place’ or a ‘space’, learners could not, apart from
been also decreased by 6 cm. the formula A = l × b, give any different representations or
use methods like the square centimetre grid. It appeared to
Interviewer:  What about the area of the two diagrams?
me that these learners do not know that the formula A = l × b
L2: I think, are also equal because of the 6 cm, generalises an arithmetic pattern (Usiskin, 1998) and is
which was added and subtracted. derived from somewhere. This was evident to me when
none of the learners mentioned the word grid or something
The application of the intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule similar. Dickson (1989) also found a lack of conceptual
confirms findings by (Tsamir & Mandel, 2000). In their understanding of area in her research, when she indicated
findings, they reported that in the same mathematical that some of her learners defined area as A = l × b, yet
problem learners correctly claimed that the perimeters of the regarded it as completely divorced from the idea of covering
square and the rectangle are equal when adding and surface.
subtracting 6 cm to opposite sides of the square. This type of
reasoning has been explained by Piaget’s theory about the
How do learners describe the concept of
use of compensation to attain conservation. Tirosh and Stavy
perimeter?
(1999) also viewed these responses as an instance of the
intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule. This rule is an instance of I found that learners do not know what the concept
overgeneralising and arriving at erroneous conclusions such ‘perimeter’ entails. None of the learners could correctly
as that if the perimeter of the original square is equal to the define perimeter. One of the learners defined perimeter as
perimeter of the created rectangle, the areas of these figures units, for example km, m, cm, while others defined perimeter
must be equal too. as ‘the length and breadth’. Dickson (1989) defines perimeter
as the distance encompassing a region. None of the learners

Discussions and conclusion defined perimeter in this way. I can only assume that the lack
of knowledge about perimeter is because it is not an everyday
In this section, I shall return to my research questions and notion as area is.
answer them on the basis of the analysis of my data. I will treat
each question as a subheading of this section when stating my How do learners solve problems involving
findings. I shall state explicitly what I have found. Lastly, I will area and perimeter and the relationship
discuss the implications of my findings and reflect on them. between them?
In this study learners were able to calculate area when given
The critical questions that guided this study were: How do
measurements, but were unable to determine the area when
Grade 10 learners describe the concepts of area and perimeter?
measurements were not given on the figure. They did not
How do Grade 10 learners solve problems involving area and
know that the area could be determined through counting
perimeter and the relationship between them? What
square centimetres. Their failure to make a connection
misconceptions are evident when learners are solving these
between the figure with square centimetres and the one with
problems? What might be the cause of these misconceptions?
measurements leads us to conclude that they also lack a
conceptual understanding of area. The lack of the integrated
How do learners describe the concept of area? network of connections between ideas (cognitive schema)
Learners had problems defining the concept of area without was the product of being unable to construct new knowledge
using the formula A = l × b. Most learners were unable to based on existing knowledge. Learners who have difficulty
define area as the amount of a surface of a region, with the translating a concept from one representation to another
exception of L2 and L3, who used the everyday notion of have difficulty solving problems and understanding
area as being a ‘place’ or a ‘space’. In terms of Skemp (1976), computation (Van de Walle et al. 2014). This is where the idea
these learners do not have relational understanding of Smith et al. (1993) comes into play, namely that making
(knowing what to do and why), but an instrumental connections between multiple representations helps to

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 9 of 11 Original Research

develop meaning. All three learners responded by saying perimeter in the multiplication and division of the lengths of
that an irregular figure (such as that of a leaf) does not have the sides).
an area, because it does not have length and breadth. This
implies that these learners only know the procedure or Tsamir and Mandel (2000) confirm that correct answers
formula for calculating area fluently, accurately and found with an intuitive rule therefore do not necessarily
efficiently when given numbers to substitute, which Skemp reflect students’ understanding of the concepts. All the
(1976) refers to as instrumental understanding. Kilpatrick learners (L1, L2 and L3) wrongly assumed that when two
et al. (2001) maintain that learning procedures without opposite sides of a square are lengthened by 6 cm and the
connections to understanding, meaning or concepts is other two sides are shortened by the same number (6 cm),
merely memorisation and at the lowest level of cognitive then the area of the given square would be equal to that of the
demand. resulting rectangle. They also wrongly assumed that when
two opposite sides of a square are multiplied by 6 cm and the
Learners were unable to calculate perimeter, which shows other two sides are divided by 6 cm, the given square and
that they do not have an understanding about the concept of the created rectangle would have the same perimeters. The
perimeter. In their research report, Kilpatrick et al. (2001) say justifications of their claims were in line with the application
that when learners have acquired conceptual understanding of the intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule.
in an area of mathematics, they see the connections among
concepts and procedure and (that) some facts are Learners also wrongly concluded that if the perimeter of the
consequences of others. This report confirms that learners original square in Question 5a is equal to the perimeter of the
lack conceptual understanding (relational understanding) of created rectangle, the perimeter of the original square in
area and perimeter and the connections between them. Question 6a would also be equal to that of created rectangle
and that if the area of the original square in Question 6b is
What misconceptions are evident when equal to the created rectangle, the area of the original square
learners are solving problems related in Question 5b would be equal to that of the created
to area and perimeter? rectangle. This erroneous conclusion is another form of
overgeneralisation which indicates a lack of knowledge of
The first misconception that these learners displayed was
the two concepts: perimeter and area. Tirosh and Starvy
overgeneralisation. They thought that the formula A = l × b,
(1999) suggest two ways in which the intuitive rule
which is used for rectangles, could be used for non-rectangles
‘Same A – Same B’ are formed; they indicate that: (1) it may
as well. This was evident when L1 multiplied 10 cm by 9 cm
be one of a small set of universal, innate primitives and (2) it
to get an area in Question 4. Dickson (1989) found that most
is an overgeneralisation from successful experiences. Often,
children responded to the word ‘area’ by saying ‘length times
both in everyday life and in school situations, the rule
breadth’, irrespective of the figures being considered
‘Same A – Same B’ is in fact applicable (e.g. ‘same heights of
(rectangles or non-rectangles). It was interesting to see that juice in two identical cups ­– same amount to drink’, ‘same
one learner showed a working knowledge of subdividing the number of candies – same price’). It is reasonable to assume
L-shape in Question 4 into rectangles to enable him to apply that children generalise such experiences into a universal
the ‘length times breadth’ formalisation. maxim: ‘Same A – Same B’.

The second misconception that was found was the application

of the intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule. Learners claimed that What might be causing these misconceptions?
when increasing the lengths or adding a certain figure to the It was evident from their incorrect definitions of area and
lengths of two opposite sides of a square and reducing the perimeter that all three of the interviewed learners lacked
lengths or subtracting the same figure from the lengths of the prior knowledge of area and perimeter and that they had no
other two remaining sides, the perimeter and the area would conceptual understanding of perimeter as a distance.
remain the same. This finding resonates with the findings of Furthermore, none of them mentioned the square centimetre
Tsamir and Mandel (2000). Learners also claimed that when grid in their discussion with the interviewer. Learners could
increasing or multiplying the size of two opposite sides of a not add new knowledge to the existing knowledge by making
square by a given factor and reducing or dividing the size of sense of what is already inside their heads. They could not
the other two remaining sides by the same factor, the organise, structure and restructure their experience in the
perimeter and the area would remain the same. All the light of available schemes of thought (Van de Walle et al.
learners (L1, L2 and L3) therefore correctly claimed that the 2014). Dickson (1989, p. 79) says that ‘the confusion between
perimeters of the square and the rectangle would be equal area (the amount of surface) and perimeter (the distance
when adding and subtracting 6 cm to opposite sides of the round a region) is nearly always due to inadequate
square (Question 5). They also correctly claimed that the area preparation in the early stages’, when the learners are given
of the rectangle remained the same when multiplying and the formulae A = l × b and P = 2(l + b) without adequate
dividing opposite sides of the square by equal factors. explanation of the concepts. This is also confirmed by Olivier
However, in each instance they extended their claims to the (1989) and Smith et al. (1993), who argue that prior knowledge
other concept as well (to the area in the addition and or existing knowledge may contribute to the development
subtraction of a certain length of the sides and to the of misconceptions in the cognitive structure of the learner.

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 10 of 11 Original Research

The misconceptions created by prior learning were evident perimeter is the size of the edge of a figure, many
when learners applied the formula A = l × b to non-rectangles. misconceptions could be avoided. The extent of such
It was further evidenced that misconceptions resulted from misconceptions was evident when L2 and L3 responded in
structures (A = l × b) that apply appropriate in one domain Question 5 that a leaf does not have an area, because there is
(a rectangle) being overgeneralised to another domain no length and breadth.
(non-rectangles).
Teachers should also be aware of the role that the intuitive
Summary of results rule plays in the concepts that learners form. In other words,
when designing problems, teachers should consider
In the light of the above findings I can say that in dealing whether they might elicit the use of an intuitive rule or
with the concepts of area and perimeter, learners have the counter it. This also implies that teachers should not be
following problems: satisfied with the correct answers alone, but probe further
• They lack conceptual understanding of area as a surface. to be certain that the learners are not just applying the
This became evident when they described area as length intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule (Olivier, 1989; Tsamir &
multiplied by breadth. Mandel 2000).
• They overgeneralise, in other words, they assume that the
formula A = l × b, as applied to rectangles, can also be Acknowledgements
applied to non-rectangles.
• They use the intuitive ‘Same A – Same B’ rule when
Competing interests
dealing with area and perimeter and therefore obtain The author declares that he does not have financial or
only partially correct (false positive) results. They personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately
believe that when the size of two opposite sides of a influenced him in writing this article.
square are increased by a given factor and then the size
of the other two remaining sides is decreased by the References
same factor, the perimeter and the area would remain
Confrey, J. (1990). A review of research on student conceptions in mathematics,
the same. science and programming. In C. Cazden (Ed.), Review of research (pp. 3–56).
Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association. http://dx.doi.
org/10.2307/1167350
Implications Department of Education. (2003). National curriculum statement Grades 7-9
(General), Mathematics. Pretoria: Department of Education.
This study, like other similar studies (e.g. Dickson, 1989; Dickson, L. (1989). Area of a rectangle. In Johnson, D. (Ed.), Children’s mathematical
Tirosh & Stavy, 1999), suggests how teachers, textbook frameworks: A study of classroom teaching (pp. 76–88). Berkshire: NFER-
Nelson.
writers and curriculum designers could improve learners’ Gauteng Institute for Curriculum Development (1999). Mathematical Literacy,
understanding of the concepts of area and perimeter. Teachers Mathematics and Mathematical Sciences draft progress map. Johannesburg:
Gauteng Department of Education.
should drastically change their approach in teaching these Gough, J. (2004). Fixing misconceptions: Length, area, and volume. Prime numbers,
concepts, by shifting the emphasis away from teaching the 19(3), 8–14.
formulae for area and perimeter to making use of activities Hatano, G. (1996). A conception of knowledge acquisition and its implications for
mathematics education. In L. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, & G. Goldin (Eds.),
that would develop learners’ conceptual understanding of Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 197–217). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
area and perimeter. They should ensure that learners develop
Helen, L., & Monicca, K. (2005). Investigating teachers’ responses to students’
a conceptual understanding of area and perimeter by using misconceptions. In H. Chick, & L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th
Conference of the International Group of Psychology of Mathematics Education
square centimetre grids and by letting the learners do fitting, (Vol. 2, pp. 249–256). Melbourne: PME.
cutting, folding and counting activities, instead of teaching Kidman, G. (2001). Testing for additivity in intuitive thinking of area. In J. Bobis, B.
Perry, B., & M. Mitchelmore (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of
them formulae like A = l × b and P = 2(l + b), procedures, rules the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 322–329). Sydney:
and principles, without explaining where they come from MERGA. Available from http://www.merga.net.au/publications/counter.php?​
pub=pub_conf&id=989
and why they are that way. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn
mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Teachers should distinguish between the concepts of area Kramer, D. (1996). OBE strategies, tools and techniques for implementing Curriculum
2000. Florida Hills: Vivlia.
and perimeter, yet emphasise the relationship between
Machaba, F. (2005). Insights and misconceptions that Grade 10 learners in one school
them, so that learners will not see them as isolated in Soshanguve have with the concepts of area and perimeter. Unpublished BEd
Honours project. Faculty of Education, University of the Witwatersrand,
concepts. In their progress map, the Gauteng Institute for Johannesburg, South Africa.
Curriculum Development (1999) indicate that learners Mogari, D. (1998) Geometrical constructs and pupils’ construction of miniature wire
cars. Pythagoras, 46, 52–56.
should develop an understanding of the relationship
Nunes, T., Light, P., Mason, J., & Allerton, M. (1994). The role of symbols in structuring
between area and perimeter and use efficient methods reasoning: Studies about the concept area. In J. da Ponte, & J. Matos (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology
appropriately to calculate and solve problems that involve of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 255–262). Lisbon: PME.
area and perimeter. Olivier, A. (1989). Handling pupils’ misconceptions. Pythagoras, 21, 10–19.
Outhred, L., & Mitchelmore, M. (1996). Children’s intuitive understanding of area
If teachers and textbook authors could, in the lower grades, measurement. In L. Puig, & A. Gutierrez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Conference
of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4,
emphasise the fact that the area is the size of a surface and the pp. 91–98). Valencia: PME.

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access

 Page 11 of 11 Original Research

Skemp, R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Usiskin, Z. (1998). Conception of school algebra and uses of variables. In A. Coxford, &
Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20–26. A. Shulte (Eds.), The ideas of Algebra, K-12 (pp. 8–19). Reston, VA, National
Smith, J.P., diSessa, A.A., & Roschelle, J. (1993) Misconceptions reconceived: A Council of Mathematics Teachers.
constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, Van de Walle, J. (Ed.). (2007). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching
3(2), 115–163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1 developmentally. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Tirosh, D., & Stavy, S. (1999). Intuitive rules: A way to explain and predict students
reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 51–61. http://dx.doi. Van de Walle, J.A., Karp, K.S., & Bay-Williams, J.M. (Eds.). (2014). Elementary and
org/10.1023/A:1003436313032 middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. Boston, MA: Pearson
Education.
Tsamir, P., & Mandel, N. (2000). The intuitive rule same A - same B: The case of area
and perimeter. In T. Nakahara, & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Zacharos, K. (2006). Prevailing educational practices for area measuring and student
Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics failure in measuring areas. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25, 224–339.
Education (Vol. 4, pp. 225–232). Hiroshima: PME. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2006.09.003

http://www.pythagoras.org.za Open Access