Advertisement

Educational Studies in Mathematics

, Volume 68, Issue 3, pp 247–261 | Cite as

Learning opportunities from group discussions: warrants become the objects of debate

  • Keith Weber
  • Carolyn Maher
  • Arthur Powell
  • Hollylynne Stohl Lee
Article

Abstract

In the mathematics education literature, there is currently a debate about the mechanisms by which group discussion can contribute to mathematical learning and under what conditions this learning is likely to occur. In this paper, we contribute to this debate by illustrating three learning opportunities that group discussions can create. In analyzing a videotaped episode of eight middle school students discussing a statistical problem, we observed that these students frequently challenged the arguments that their colleagues presented. These challenges invited students to be explicit about what mathematical principles, or warrants, they were implicitly using as a basis for their mathematical claims, in some cases recognize the modes of reasoning they were using were invalid and reject these modes of reasoning, and in other cases, attempt to provide deductive support to justify why their modes of reasoning were appropriate. We then describe what social and environmental conditions allowed the discussion analyzed in this paper to occur.

Keywords

Discussion Discourse Mathematics education Probability Statistics 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Chris Rasmussen, Matthew Inglis, and the reviewers for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript.

References

  1. Balacheff, N. (1991). Benefits and limits of social interaction: The case of mathematical proof. In A. Bishop, S. Mellin-Olsen, & J. van Dormolen (Eds.) Mathematical knowledge: Its growth through teaching. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  2. Bauersfeld, H. (1995). The structuring of structures: Development and function of mathematizing as a social practice. In L. P. Steffe, & J. Galle (Eds.) Constructivism in education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  3. Cobb, P., Boufi, A., McClain, K., & Whitenack, J. (1997). Reflective discourse and collective reflection. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 258–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Drier, H. (2000). The Probability Explorer: A research based microworld to enhance children’s intuitive understanding of chance and data. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 22, 165–178.Google Scholar
  5. Hiebert, J., & Wearne, D. (1993). Instructional tasks, classroom discourse, and students’ learning in second-grade arithmetic. American Education Research Journal, 30, 393–425.Google Scholar
  6. Inglis, M., Mejia-Ramos, J. P., & Simpson, A. (2007). Modelling mathematical argumentation: The importance of qualification. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 3–21.Google Scholar
  7. Johnson-Laird, P. (2006). How we reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Krummheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb, & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.) The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Lampert, M., & Cobb, P. (2003). Communication and language. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.) A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  10. Lampert, M., Rittenhouse, P., & Crumbaugh, C. (1998). Agreeing to disagree: Developing sociable mathematical discourse. In D. R. Olson, & N. Torrance (Eds.) Handbook of education and human development. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Lubienski, S. T. (2000). Problem solving as a means towards “mathematics for all”: An exploratory look through a class lens. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 454–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Manouchehri, A., & Enderson, M. (1999). Promoting mathematical discourse: Learning from classroom examples. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 4, 216–222.Google Scholar
  13. McCrone, S. S. (2005). The development of mathematical discussion: An investigation in a fifth grade classroom. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(2), 111–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. NCTM (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.Google Scholar
  15. Pedemonte, B. (2007). How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 23–41.Google Scholar
  16. Radu, I., Tozzi, B., & Weber, K. (2006). Developing mathematical initiative in minority students. In J. Novotna, H. Moraova, M. Kratka, & N. Stehlikova (Eds.) Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 4, 401–407. Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
  17. Rasmussen, C., & Stephan, M. (2008). A methodology for documenting collective activity. In A. E. Kelly, & R. Lesh (Eds.) Design research in education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum (in press).Google Scholar
  18. Sfard, A. (2001). There is more to discourse than meets the ears: Looking at thinking as communicating to learn more about mathematical learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46, 13–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Simon, M. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 114–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Stephan, M., & Rasmussen, C. (2002). Classroom mathematical practices in differential equations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, 459–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Stohl, H., & Tarr, J. E. (2002). Developing notions of inference with probability simulation tools. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(3), 319–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Tarr, J. E., Lee, H. S, & Rider, R. (2006). When data and chance collide: Drawing inferences from empirical data. In G. Burrill (Ed.) Thinking and reasoning with data and chance: 2006 yearbook of the NCTM (pp. TBD). Reston: VA, NCTM.Google Scholar
  23. Toulmin, S. (1969). The uses of arguments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning. Psychological Review, 90, 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Weber, K., & Alcock, L. (2005). Using warranted implications to understand and validate proofs. For the Learning of Mathematics, 25, 34–38.Google Scholar
  26. Yackel, E. (2001). Explanation, justification, and argumentation in mathematics classrooms. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.) Proceedings of the 25th Conference for the International Group of Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1, 9–24, Utrecht, the Netherlands.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keith Weber
    • 1
  • Carolyn Maher
    • 1
  • Arthur Powell
    • 1
  • Hollylynne Stohl Lee
    • 2
  1. 1.Graduate School of EducationRutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA
  2. 2.North Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations