Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 27, Issue 1, pp 101–109 | Cite as

A structural analysis of students' epistemic views

  • Kenneth Ruthven
  • Robert Coe


Student responses to a structured questionnaire concerned with views on mathematical knowledge, activity and learning, were analysed and interpreted using factorial techniques. The constructs which emerge from the analysis may provide heuristically useful for understanding student beliefs. The findings suggest that there is no simple systematic relationship between beliefs about the nature of mathematical knowledge and activity and about the teaching and learning of mathematics.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Cockcroft, W. H. (chair): 1982,Mathematics Counts: Report of the Committee of Enquiry into the Teaching of Mathematics in Schools, HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  2. Coe, R.: 1992,Students' Understandings and Use of Mathematical Proof. Unpublished MPhil dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
  3. Coe, R. and Ruthven, K.: 1994, ‘Proof practices and constructs of advanced mathematics students’,British Educational Research Journal 20, 1, 41–53.Google Scholar
  4. Dijkstra, W. and van der Zouwen, J. (eds.): 1982,Response Behaviour in the Survey-Interview, Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  5. Ernest, P.: 1989, ‘The impact of beliefs on the teaching of mathematics’, in C. Keitel, A. Bishop, and P. Gerdes (eds.),Mathematics, Education and Society, UNESCO, Paris, 99–101.Google Scholar
  6. HMI (Her Majesty's Inspectorate): 1985,Mathematics from 5 to 16, HMSO, London.Google Scholar
  7. Lampert, M.: 1990, ‘When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching’,American Educational Research Journal 27, 1, 29–63.Google Scholar
  8. Lerman, S.: 1990, ‘Alternative perspectives of the nature of mathematics and their influence on the teaching of mathematics’,British Educational Research Journal 16, 1, 53–61.Google Scholar
  9. NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics): 1980,An Agenda for Action: Recommendations for School Mathematics of the 1980s, NCTM, Reston, Virginia.Google Scholar
  10. NCTM (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics): 1989,Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics, NCTM, Reston, Virginia.Google Scholar
  11. NRC (National Research Council): 1989,Everybody Counts: A Report to the Nation on the Future of Mathematics Education, National Academy Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
  12. Rodd, M.: 1993, ‘Students' views on the nature of mathematics’,Mathematics Teaching 143, 8–10.Google Scholar
  13. Ruthven, K.: 1989, ‘An exploratory approach to advanced mathematics’,Educational Studies in Mathematics 20, 449–467.Google Scholar
  14. Schoenfeld, A.: 1987, ‘Confessions of an accidental theorist’,For the Learning of Mathematics 7(1), 30–38.Google Scholar
  15. Schoenfeld, A.: 1992, ‘Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition and sense making in mathematics’, in D. A. Grouws (ed.),Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, Macmillan, New York, 334–370.Google Scholar
  16. Schuman, H. and Presser, S.: 1981,Questions and Answers in Attitude Surveys: Experiments on Question Form, Wording and Context, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. SPSS: 1988,Advanced Statistics Guide, SPSS, Chicago.Google Scholar
  18. Thompson, A. G.: 1992, ‘Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research’, in D. A. Grouws (ed.),Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, Macmillan, New York, 127–146.Google Scholar
  19. Winkler, J. D., Kanouse, D. E., and Ware, J. E.: 1982, ‘Controlling for acquiescence response set in scale development’,Journal of Applied Psychology 67(5), 555–561.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth Ruthven
    • 1
  • Robert Coe
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EducationUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations