Abstract
Our aim here was to explore, via a specific instance, the potential for learners to develop mathematically as a consequence of the interplay between intuition and indirect classroom experience rather than through explicit tuition. A significant aspect of this study is the recognition of the possibility for learners to be able to thematize schemata associated with the fundamental theorem of arithmetic without formal knowledge of either the theorem or its consequences. Our findings would suggest that some learners, by way of a series of key intuitive episodes or concrete classroom experiences, do indeed possess the capacity to create meaningful mathematical structures that, though perhaps imperfectly formed, may in some sense mirror schemata.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Apostol, T. (1976). Introduction to analytic number theory. New York: Springer.
Baturo, A. (1997). The implication of multiplicative structure for students’ understanding of decimal-number numeration. Proceedings of People in Mathematics Education: 20th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia 1 (pp. 88–95), Rotorua.
Behr, M., & Harel, G. (1990). Understanding the multiplicative structure. In G. Booker, P. Cobb, & T. Mendicuti (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1, 27–34.
Ben-Zeez, T., & Star, J. (2001). Intuitive mathematics: Theoretical and educational implications. In B. Torff & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Understanding and teaching the intuitive mind: Student and teacher learning (pp. 29–56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bhattacharya, P., Jain, S., & Nagpaul, S. (1994). Basic abstract algebra. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Burton, D. (1998). Elementary number theory. Singapore: McGraw-Hill.
Campbell, S., & Zazkis, R. (2001). Toward number theory as a conceptual field. In S. Campbell & R. Zazkis (Eds.), Learning and teaching number theory: Research in cognition and instruction (pp. 1–14). Westport, CT: Ablex.
Dehaene, S. (1997). Number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeVries, D. & Arnon, I. (2004). Solution—What does it mean? Helping linear algebra students develop the concept while improving research tools. In M.H. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 55–62.
Dreyfus, T., & Eisenberg, T. (1982). Intuitive functional concepts: A baseline study in intuitions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13(5), 360–380.
Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 95–123). Dordrecht: Springer.
Dubinsky, E., & McDonald, M. (2001). APOS: A constructivist theory of learning. In D. Holton (Ed.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: An ICMI study (pp. 275–282). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Fischbein, E. (1973). Intuition, structure and heuristic methods in the teaching of mathematics. In A. G. Howson (Ed.), Developments in mathematics education (pp. 222–232). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Freudenthal, H. (1983). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Dordrecht: Reidel.
Gillard, E., Van Dooren, W., Schaeken, W., & Verschaffel, L. (2009). Dual processes in the psychology of mathematics education and cognitive psychology. Human Development, 52, 95–108.
Ginsburg, H. (1997). Entering the child’s mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gray, E., & Tall, D. (1994). Duality, ambiguity and flexibility: A proceptual view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(2), 115–141.
Griffiths, M. (2010a). Mathematics suggested by a logo: Both rich and beautiful? Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 29(4), 216–229.
Griffiths, M. (2010b). Thematic mathematics: The combinatorics of prime factorizations. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 29(1), 25–40.
Hardy, G., & Wright, E. (2008). An introduction to the theory of numbers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Harries, A., & Barmby, P. (2007). Representing and understanding multiplication. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 33–46.
Huber, R. (2006). Intuitive cognition and the formation of theories. In E. Carson & R. Huber (Eds.), Intuition and the axiomatic method (pp. 293–324). Dordrecht: Springer.
Lave, J. (1998). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leron, U., & Hazzan, O. (2009). Intuitive vs analytical thinking: Four perspectives. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71, 263–278.
Mack, N. (1990). Learning fractions with understanding: Building on informal knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 16–32.
Murphy, C. (2010). Analysing children’s calculations: The role of process and object. Proceedings of British Congress of Mathematics Education 7 (1, pp. 145–150), Manchester.
Rayner, D. (2001). Essential mathematics: Book 8. Welwyn Garden City: Elmwood.
Resnick, L. (1995). Inventing arithmetic: Making children’s intuition work in school. In C. Nelson (Ed.), Basic and applied perspectives on learning, cognition and development: The Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 75–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rose, H. (1994). A course in number theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Russell, B. (1988). Mysticism and logic. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Semadeni, Z. (2004). The triple nature of mathematics: Deep ideas, surface representations, formal models. Proceedings of the 10th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Copenhagen.
Semadeni, Z. (2008). Deep intuition as a level in the in the development of the concept image. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68, 1–17.
Sinclair, N. (2004). The roles of the aesthetic in mathematical enquiry. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(3), 261–284.
Sinclair, N., Zazkis, R., & Liljedahl, P. (2003). Number worlds: Visual and experimental access to elementary number theory concepts. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8(3), 235–263.
Sowder, J., Armstrong, B., Lamon, S., Simon, M., Sowder, L., & Thompson, A. (1998). Educating teachers to teach multiplicative structures in the middle grades. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1, 127–155.
Spencer-Brown, G. (1969). Laws of form. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Tall, D., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(2), 151–169.
Tall, D., Thomas, M., Davis, G., Gray, E., & Simpson, A. (2000). What is the object of the encapsulation of a process? The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(2), 223–241.
Vergnaud, G. (1990). Epistemology and psychology in mathematics education. In P. Nesher & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition: A research synthesis by the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 14–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vergnaud, G. (1994). Multiplicative conceptual field: What and why? In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 41–59). Albany: State University of New York Press.
Vergnaud, G. (1997). The nature of mathematical concepts. In T. Nunes & P. Bryant (Eds.), Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective (pp. 5–28). Hove: Psychology Press.
Vergnaud, G. (2009). The theory of conceptual fields. Human Development, 52, 83–94.
Wagner, D., & Davis, B. (2010). Feeling number: Grounding number in a sense of quantity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 39–51.
Wittmann, E. (1981). The complementary roles of intuitive and reflective thinking in mathematics teaching. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 389–397.
Wittrock, M. (1974a). A generative model of mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 5(4), 181–196.
Wittrock, M. (1974b). Learning as a generative process. Educational Psychologist, 11(2), 87–95.
Zaslavsky, O., & Zodik, I. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ choice of examples that potentially support or impede learning. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 143–155.
Zazkis, R., & Campbell, S. (1996a). Divisibility and multiplicative structure of natural numbers: Preservice teachers’ understanding. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(5), 540–563.
Zazkis, R., & Campbell, S. (1996b). Prime decomposition: Understanding uniqueness. Journal of Mathematics Behaviour, 15, 207–218.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendices
Appendix 1
Questions from questionnaire X
Appendix 2
Questions from questionnaire Y
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Griffiths, M. Intuiting the fundamental theorem of arithmetic. Educ Stud Math 82, 75–96 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9410-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9410-1