Background. Studies on rewording word problems can be grouped into two main groups: situational rewording, in which the situation denoted by the text is described more richly, and conceptual rewording, in which the underlying semantic relations are highlighted. Aims. Our aims are to define and distinguish these two kinds of rewording and to test empirically their relative effectiveness in two different studies. Sample. In the first study, 79 third graders, 64 fourth graders and 65 fifth graders took part; the sample for Study 2 was similar. Method. In Study 1, children were asked to solve both easy and difficult two‐step change problems in three different versions: standard, situational and conceptual rewording. In Study 2, three different versions of the situational version were compared: one with only temporal elaborations, one with only causal elaborations and a ‘complete’ version combining both elaborations. Results. In Study 1, conceptually reworded problems elicited the best results, especially among younger children and for difficult two‐step problems. Neither in Study 1 nor in Study 2 did the situationally reworded problems yield better performance than standard items. Conclusion. Only conceptual rewording has proved to be useful for improving children's performance, especially among younger children and for difficult problems. The lack of impact of situational rewording cannot be explained in terms of the length of the resulting text.

The success or failure of education systems in promoting student problem-solving skills depends on attitudinal, political, and pedagogical variables. Among these variables, the design of mathematics textbooks is thought to partially explain why students from high-achieving countries show better problem-solving ability in international assessments. In the current study, we delved into this question and compared the frequency and characteristics of arithmetic word problems (AWPs) contained in primary school math textbooks in two countries with different levels of performance in international assessments—Singapore and Spain. In our analyses, we focused on (1) the quantity of arithmetic word problems, (2) the variety of problems in terms of their additive or multiplicative structures and semantic-mathematical substructures, and (3) the quantity and nature of illustrations that were presented together with arithmetic word problems. Although a larger proportion of AWP activities was found in Singaporean textbooks, the results showed a similar variety of AWPs in both Singaporean and Spanish math textbooks. Furthermore, in both countries, math textbooks emphasized the structures classified as (additive) combine 1 and (multiplication) simple rate in AWPs. Notably, the Singaporean textbook contained a larger percentage of illustrations that reflected the semantic-mathematical structures of the problems and helped students learn how to solve AWPs (e.g., bar models). The findings are discussed in light of theories that posit that textbooks constitute a fundamental part of the teaching–learning process in the classroom.

This study analyses whether the primary school mathematics textbooks from two Spanish publishers show a varied instructional diet of addition and multiplication problems at different levels of complexity. To do so, it analyses the problems in all the primary grades by the publishers Santillana and SM according to two levels of complexity: (a) procedural (number of steps needed to solve the problem); and (b) semantic/mathematical (addition or multiplication structures, with their different subtypes). The results show that: (a) these problems are so simple that the books themselves cannot be regarded as a sufficient tool to teach students to solve the more complex problems; and (b) if we compare them with previous studies, the design of the problems has hardly changed in 10 years. These results show that the variety of problems in books should be expanded both procedurally and semantically/mathematically, and teachers should be given assistance to compensate for these shortcomings when using these textbooks in class.