Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An examination of reasoning and proof opportunities in three differently organized secondary mathematics textbook units

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Students’ struggles in learning reasoning and proof (RP) in mathematics are well known. Despite the instantiation of RP opportunities in mathematics textbooks in the USA and the important role that textbooks play in teachers’ instructional decisions, little research has been conducted on analyzing student textbook tasks and narrative sections of mathematics textbooks in the USA. One polynomial functions unit located within a reform-oriented, conventional, and hybrid secondary mathematics textbook was examined for RP instances. RP tasks comprised 4, 9, and 22 % of the student tasks in the conventional, hybrid, and reform-oriented textbook units, respectively. The textbook exposition of all three textbook units promoted the presentation of proof building blocks (e.g., definitions) with no occurrences of conjecture development or testing. Overall, only 19 % of the learning objectives across the three textbook units were validated. The conventional and hybrid textbook units had the potential to promote an authoritative proof scheme in students while the reform-oriented textbook unit had the potential to promote an empirical proof scheme in students.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Although this individual was an undergraduate prospective teacher I use the word “advanced” here to denote that she already possessed a master’s degree in economics.

  2. Plausible patterns were not included here since there were no instances of these within PH and DA student tasks.

References

  • Balacheff, N. (1988). Aspects of proof in pupils’ practice of school mathematics. In D. Pimm (Ed.), Mathematics, teachers, and children (pp. 216–238). London: Hodder and Stoughton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bellman, A. E., Bragg, S. C., Charles, R. I., Hall, B., Handlin, W. G., & Kennedy, D. (2009). Prentice Hall mathematics: Algebra 2. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bieda, K. (2010). Enacting proof-related tasks in middle school mathematics: challenges and opportunities. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(4), 351–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchberger, B. (1990). Should students learn integration rules? ACM SIGSAM Bulletin, 24(1), 10–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chazan, D. (1993). High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24(4), 359–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Available from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf. Accessed 6 December 2011

  • Education Development Center. (2009). Algebra 2. Boston: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, T. G., & Ozgun-Koca, A. (2009). Creating a mathematics “b” movie: the effect of b on the graph of a quadratic. Mathematics Teacher, 103(3), 214–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fey, J. T., & Hirsch, C. R. (2007). The case of core-plus mathematics. In C. R. Hirsch (Ed.), Perspectives on the design and development of school mathematics curricula (pp. 129–142). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fey, J. T., Hirsch, C. R., Hart, E. W., Schoen, H. L., Watkins, A. E., Ritsema, B. E., et al. (2009). Core-plus mathematics: contemporary mathematics in context: course 3 (2nd ed.). New York: Glencoe/McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garry, T. (2003). Computing, conjecturing, and confirming with a CAS tool. In J. T. Fey, A. Cuoco, C. Kieran, L. McMullin, & R. M. Zbiek (Eds.), Computer algebra systems in secondary school mathematics education (pp. 137–150). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, K., Cuoco, A., & Zimmerman, G. (2010). Focus in high school mathematics: reasoning and sense making in algebra. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grouws, D. A., & Smith, M. S. (2000). Findings from NAEP on the preparation and practices of mathematics teachers. In E. A. Silver & P. A. Kenney (Eds.), Results from the seventh mathematics assessment of the national assessment of education progress (pp. 107–141). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halmos, P. R. (1980). The heart of mathematics. The American Mathematical Monthly, 87(7), 519–524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, G., & de Bruyn, Y. (1999). Opportunity to learn proof in Ontario grade twelve mathematics texts. Ontario Mathematics Gazette, 37(4), 23–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Rabin, J. M. (2010). Teaching practices associated with the authoritative proof scheme. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: results from exploratory studies. CBMS Issues in Mathematics Education, 7, 234–283.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (2000). A study of proof conceptions in algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 396–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heid, M. K., & Edwards, M. T. (2001). Computer algebra systems: revolution or retrofit for today’s mathematics classrooms? Theory Into Practice, 40, 128–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, P. (2002). Establishing a custom of proving in American school geometry: evolution of the two-column proof in the early twentieth century. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49(3), 283–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., et al. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, G. J., Thompson, D. R., & Senk, S. L. (2010). Proof-related reasoning in high school textbooks. Mathematics Teacher, 103(6), 410–418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knuth, E. J., Slaughter, M., Choppin, J., & Sutherland, J. (2002). Mapping the conceptual terrain of middle school students’ competencies in justifying and proving. In S. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, D. Y. White, H. G. Wiegel, R. L. Bryant, & K. Nooney (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (vol. 4, pp. 1693–1700). Athens, GA.

  • Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lappan, G., Fey, J. T., Fitzgerald, W. M., Friel, S. N., Phillips, E. D. (1998/2004). Connected mathematics project. Menlo Park: Dale Seymour Publications.

  • Lindquist, M. M. (1997). NAEP findings regarding the preparation and classroom practices of mathematics teachers. In P. Kenney & E. A. Silver (Eds.), Results from the Sixth Mathematics Assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 61–86). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, W. G., & Harel, G. (1989). Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(1), 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, J., Kamischke, E., & Kamischke, E. (2002). Discovering algebra: an investigative approach. Emeryville: Key Curriculum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murdock, J., Kamischke, E., & Kamischke, E. (2004). Discovering advanced algebra: an investigative approach. Emeryville: Key Curriculum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Keeffe, L. (2007). An analysis of the junior cycle mathematics textbooks. Unpublished dissertation, University of Limerick.

  • Researchware. (2009). Hyperresearch 2.8.3. [Computer Software.]. Randolph: ResearchWare, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reys, B. J., & Reys, R. E. (2006). The development and publication of elementary mathematics textbooks: let the buyer beware! Phi Delta Kappan, 87(5), 377–383.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: an investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Hingham: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (2009). Series editor’s foreword. In D. A. Stylianou, M. L. Blanton, & E. J. Knuth (Eds.), Teaching and learning proof across the grades: A K-16 perspective (pp. xii–xvi). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senk, S. L. (1985). How well do students write geometry proofs? Mathematics Teacher, 78(6), 448–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senk, S. L., & Thompson, D. R. (Eds.). (2003). Standards-based school mathematics curricula: what are they? What do students learn? Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silver, E. A., & Carpenter, T. P. (1989). Mathematical methods. In M. M. Lindquist (Ed.), Results from the fourth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 10–18). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, K., & Vincent, J. (2009). Modes of reasoning in explanations in Australian eighth-grade mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72, 271–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. K. Lester Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 1, pp. 319–370). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, A. (2007). Proof and proving in school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 289–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, G. J. (2005). Investigating students’ opportunities to develop proficiency in reasoning and proving: A curricular perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.

  • Stylianides, G. J. (2009). Reasoning-and-proving in school mathematics textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11(4), 258–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tarr, J. E., Reys, R. E., Reys, B. J., Chavez, O., Shih, J., & Osterlind, S. J. (2008). The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(3), 247–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tinto, P. (1988). Students’ views on learning proof in high school geometry. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.

  • Usiskin, Z., & Dossey, J. (2004). Mathematics education in the United States 2004: a capsule summary fact book written for the Tenth International Congress on Mathematics Education (ICME-10), Copenhagen, Denmark. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E., McMahon, K., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill: Horizon Research.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Western Michigan University, 1903 W. Michigan Avenue, Kalamazoo, MI, 49008-5248, USA

    Jon D. Davis

Authors
  1. Jon D. Davis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon D. Davis.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Davis, J.D. An examination of reasoning and proof opportunities in three differently organized secondary mathematics textbook units. Math Ed Res J 24, 467–491 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-012-0047-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-012-0047-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation