This article presents a quantitative and qualitative study comparing how pre-service and preschool teachers perceive the relational symbols (<, > and =), perspective of numbers. The study population comprised 71 pre-service teachers participating in a course dedicated to teaching and learning early childhood mathematics and 149 in-service preschool teachers. A large proportion of the participants did not answer the questions correctly or give suitable reasons for their answers. There was a significant difference between the two groups, with the pre-service teachers giving a significantly greater number of correct answers and explanations. The conclusions arising from this study are that preschool teachers do not correctly comprehend the true significance of <, >, and =, and therefore are unlikely to teach them correctly.

The goal of the study was to understand how pre-service and preschool teachers understand and use the mathematical symbols <, >, and = when comparing figures and shapes of different sizes and thicknesses. Using both quantitative and qualitative methods, we examined a study population of 71 pre-service teachers attending a course for teaching mathematics to pre-schoolers and 149 preschool teachers. Our results show that the majority of participants did not answer the questions correctly, with a significant difference between how the two groups validated their answers, indicating that the participants do not correctly understand that mathematical symbols should (<, >, and =) only be used in the mathematical context.

Background: In recent years, there has been growing interest in the effect of maternal exposure to physiological, environmental, and also psychological factors during gestation on child development. Several independent studies link maternal stress during pregnancy to emotional and behavioral problems in the child. Objectives: This study aimed to observe the effect of maternal cognitive activity on fetal brain blood flow to determine whether systematic maternal mathematical activity during pregnancy might influence child brain development. Method: Thirty-five women in the 28th to 40th week of pregnancy engaged in mathematical activities. Fetal middle cerebral artery (MCA), pulsatility index (PI) and peak systolic velocity (PSV) were monitored before, during, and after the activity. Results: Brain activity and blood flow were shown to be intimately linked. We observed a significant decrease in fetal brain MCA resistance, as evidenced by decreased MCA PI, towards the end of the mathematical activity. This may result in increased blood flow in the arteries supplying most brain regions and, possibly, increased brain activity. Conclusions: A correlation between the mother's engagement in mathematical activities and fetal brain blood flow may lead to enhancement of the fetus's brain function and a cognitive advantage for the child.

This study followed a five-year program, entitled "Senso-Math", whose goal was to train facilitators involved in the promotion of early childhood mathematical knowledge in preschool-an important goal in preschool education today-following which the trained facilitators taught mathematics in preschool alongside the regular preschool teachers. During the program, 500 facilitators activated 10,000 three-to-six-year-old children. The program included various demographic sectors. This study examines both the program's contribution to the professional development of the mathematical education facilitators, and the facilitators' attitudes to mathematical education in the preschool. While the results indicated that, overall, the program contributed positively to the facilitators' professional development and showed a positive trend in the participants' attitude regarding mathematics education in the preschool, the findings also revealed differences among the various demographic sectors studied (Jewish Orthodox, Jewish immigrants from the Caucasus, and Druze).

A study using both quantitative and qualitative methods was conducted among pre-service teachers for preschool and pre-service teachers for grade 1 and 2 to see if they understood when and how to use the mathematical symbols "<", ">", and "=". Some had previously participated in a course on the subject. The study showed a significant difference between those who had previously studied the topic and those who had not: the majority of the latter group did not understand that these symbols may be used ONLY in a mathematical sense when comparing quantity and not when comparing graphical images (i.e., different sizes and thicknesses) nor did their use depend on context (graphical vs. numerical comparisons). This particular study was part of a more comprehensive study about the mathematical knowledge of pre-service teachers.