This space is for all P1–P4 LSM teachers to share and learn from one another as we explore key concepts and misconceptions in our classrooms.

🧠 What to share:

• A concept you’re focusing on (e.g., place value, multiplication)

• Common student misconceptions

• Task ideas or visuals you’ve used

• Reflections on what worked and what didn’t

• Photos of student work or thinking

👣 How to post:

• Click on the “+” under the relevant column

• Add a title (e.g., “Place Value task – P2”)

• Feel free to upload pictures, videos, or links

Let’s grow our practice together — one small idea at a time 🌱

Please use the structure below when posting your idea:

1. Concept/Topic:
   E.g. P2 – Addition with regrouping

2. What is the key idea you want students to understand?
   E.g. When regrouping 10 ones, they become 1 ten and move to the tens column.

3. Misconception

   What are the common misconception that student might have?

4. Task/Tool Used:
   Briefly describe the activity or visual tool
   E.g. I used base-10 blocks and a place value chart. Students built the numbers physically, then transferred the regrouping step onto the chart.

5. Why it helps:
   Explain how this supports conceptual understanding
   E.g. It made regrouping visible and allowed students to ‘see’ why the ten is carried over.

What is the key idea you want students to understand?

• Fractions can be compared by using ½ as a reference point.

• Some fractions are less than, equal to, or greater than ½.

  
  

What are the common misconceptions that students might have?

• Thinking that a bigger denominator means a bigger fraction (e.g. thinking 1/6 is bigger than 1/2 because 6 > 2).

• Believing fractions with a larger numerator are always greater (e.g. thinking 3/6 is greater than 1/2 because 3 > 1).

• Relying only on numbers rather than visual understanding.

• Confusing equivalent fractions like 2/4 or 4/8 with being less than ½ because they don't see them as equal.

Task/Tool Used

Tool: Fraction Disc
Activity:

• Students use Fraction Disc and bar to compare fraction (Hands on activity)

  
  

Why it helps:

• It made the size of fractions visible.

• It reduced reliance on numerical tricks.

• It encouraged reasoning.

(b) What is the key idea you want students to understand?

Associate X more/ less with multiplication tables of X (Concrete)

(c)Misconception

• Uncertainty about which multiplication table to use in stand-alone expressions like 3 × 4 — they may not recognize the interchangeability due to commutativity.

• Students may over-count or under-count:

  • For example, for 3 × 4, they might count:
    4, 8, 12, 16 (incorrectly stopping at 4 × 4 instead of 3 × 4).

  • Or for 4 × 3, count only up to 3 × 3.

(d) Task/Tool Used:

(1) Use of rectangular post-its with dot stickers for them to build the timestable.

(2) Use of current songs. Not kiddy lullabies! (Tuning in activity!)

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlAXwhIRUDc (4 times table APT)

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BNUgRvM_xk ( 3 times table Azizam)

(3) Stretch: Instead of using post-its and dots…give students to build 4 times table counting the number of sides a rectangle has.

• Use of rectangle or squares to build 4 times table!

(e) Why it helps:
Students can visualize 3 more as adding 1 group of 3 and 3 less as taking away 1 group of 3.

Important to build this concept as this is something they can fall back on if they have forgotten their 3 or 4 times table.

Use of rectangle and squares --> a different visual representation of concept of multiplication (something that students are that familiar with)

1. Concept/Topic:
   P1 – Addition with renaming

2. What is the key idea you want students to understand?
   When regrouping 10 ones, they become 1 ten and move to the tens column.

3. Misconception

   While working on algorithm, (without manipulatives) students forgot to rename the 1 tens to the tens column.

4. Task/Tool Used:
   Base ten set and button magnets. Students add the magnets in the ones column. When they complete a set of ten, they were taught to flip the base ten block to the tens column. It is stressed upon them that this process is renaming. From 10 ones to 1 ten.

5. Why it helps:
   It made regrouping visible and allowed students to ‘see’ why the ten is carried over.

After the lesson outcomes on addition without and with renaming have been carried out, here is my reflection:

• reduced the number of items that required students to collect to make the pies (from having to collect seeds, nuts and fruits to just collecting fruits). this is because I found myself going around the change the picture of the items often and feel that it is not necessary. it is all right to keep it simple here.

• in the TRP appendix for students to place the ten-frames, there is no circle on the template for students to fill in the operation. I have included the circle in the template as I feel it is important for students to see the operation of adding or subtracting.

• having to manipulate an A3 template to place the magnetic ten-frames, printed full ten-frame cards, the round black magnets, and writing the algorithms on an A4 algorithm template is a handful for many students. teachers need to go through this activity patiently and slowly. the outcome is worth it as the nature of adding / subtracting with concrete items can efficiently helped most students to understand the abstract form later, especially when they learnt subtraction without and with renaming.

I carried out this lesson with Salina providing assistance to students who might have technical issues using an iPad.

The game was interactive and fun. The main issue was in the difficulty of 'drag-and-drop'. Students had to press long on a candy in order to move it.

Overall, students completed the 3 questions quickly. Some asked if they could play the game again, and their request was granted.

An 'Exit Ticket' was carried out after the iPad activity. Out of 8 students, 5 students answered the question correctly.

The development process, despite leveraging AI, was an iterative one that required significant pedagogical oversight. Initial AI-generated versions for fraction addition, for example, contained visuals that were pedagogically unsound and could have promoted significant student misconceptions. This necessitated careful curation and refinement.

Following the successful revision of the fraction addition modules, I expanded this methodology to create content for fraction subtraction and two-step word problems. These subsequent modules were intentionally designed to scaffold the problem-solving process by guiding students with visual models. Furthermore, to enhance accessibility and support

diverse learning needs, a read-aloud feature was integrated to assist students who face reading challenges.

From a practical standpoint, implementation was seamless. The use of QR codes streamlined the login process, providing students with efficient and immediate access to the learning tools. My next planned iteration is to revise the subtraction game to provide targeted intervention for a specific, high-need area: subtracting a fraction from a whole number. The primary development goal is to create a seamless and conceptually accurate visual model. This visual will be designed to explicitly demonstrate the mathematical reasoning why a whole number must be regrouped into an equivalent fraction (e.g., converting the '1' into 4/4 to solve 1 - 1/4 before the operation can be completed. This will help solidify the abstract concept by providing a clear, concrete representation.

Exploring ICT tools, such as using Gemini to design meaningful learning games, has been particularly valuable and worth sustaining next year. The focus on Communicative, Innovative, and Adaptive Thinking has also guided me in structuring lessons more effectively. Overall, TTT has been a rich platform for growth and collaboration, and I hope it continues in the coming year.