Advertisement

Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 307–332 | Cite as

Understanding and describing mathematical knowledge for teaching: knowledge about proof for engaging students in the activity of proving

  • Andreas J. StylianidesEmail author
  • Deborah L. Ball
Article

Abstract

This article is situated in the research domain that investigates what mathematical knowledge is useful for, and usable in, mathematics teaching. Specifically, the article contributes to the issue of understanding and describing what knowledge about proof is likely to be important for teachers to have as they engage students in the activity of proving. We explain that existing research informs the knowledge about the logico-linguistic aspects of proof that teachers might need, and we argue that this knowledge should be complemented by what we call knowledge of situations for proving. This form of knowledge is essential as teachers mobilize proving opportunities for their students in mathematics classrooms. We identify two sub-components of the knowledge of situations for proving: knowledge of different kinds of proving tasks and knowledge of the relationship between proving tasks and proving activity. In order to promote understanding of the former type of knowledge, we develop and illustrate a classification of proving tasks based on two mathematical criteria: (1) the number of cases involved in a task (a single case, multiple but finitely many cases, or infinitely many cases), and (2) the purpose of the task (to verify or to refute statements). In order to promote understanding of the latter type of knowledge, we develop a framework for the relationship between different proving tasks and anticipated proving activity when these tasks are implemented in classrooms, and we exemplify the components of the framework using data from third grade. We also discuss possible directions for future research into teachers’ knowledge about proof.

Keywords

Mathematical reasoning Mathematics tasks Proof Proving School mathematics Teacher knowledge 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Terry Wood, Steve Galovich (†), Gabriel Stylianides, anonymous reviewers, and the participants of the fourth Nuffield Seminar on Mathematical Knowledge in Teaching (Cambridge, U.K., January 2008) for useful comments on earlier versions of the article.

References

  1. Adler, J., & Davis, Z. (2006). Opening another black box: Researching mathematics for teaching in mathematics teacher education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 37, 270–296.Google Scholar
  2. Balacheff, N. (1988). A study of students’ proving processes at the junior high school level. In I. Wirszup, & R. Streit (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second UCSMP International Conference on Mathematics Education (pp. 284–297). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  3. Balacheff, N. (1990). Towards a problématique for research on mathematics teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 258–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 373–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000a). Interweaving content and pedagogy in teaching, learning to teach: Knowing and using mathematics. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 83–104). Westport, CT: Ablex.Google Scholar
  6. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2000b). Making believe: The collective construction of public mathematical knowledge in the elementary classroom. In D. Philips (Ed.), Constructivism in education: Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp. 193–224). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003a). Making mathematics reasonable in school. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to “Principles and standards for school mathematics” (pp. 27–44). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  8. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2003b). Toward a practice-based theory of mathematical knowledge for teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Association Study Group (pp. 3–14). Edmonton, AB: CMESG/GDEDM.Google Scholar
  9. Bell, A. (1976). A study of pupils’ proof—explanations in mathematical situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 7, 23–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., & Franke, M. L. (1996). Cognitively Guided Instruction: A knowledge base for reform in primary mathematics instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 97, 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., & Levi, L. (2003). Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic & algebra in elementary school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  13. Chazan, D. (1993). High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 359–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Christiansen, B., & Walther, G. (1986). Task and activity. In B. Christiansen, A. G. Howson, & M. Otte (Eds.), Perspectives on mathematics education (pp. 243–307). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  15. Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., & McNeal, B. (1992). Characteristics of classroom mathematics traditions: An interactional analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 29, 573–604.Google Scholar
  16. Coe, R., & Ruthven, K. (1994). Proof practices and constructs of advanced mathematics students. British Educational Research Journal, 20, 41–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Davis, B., & Simmt, E. (2006). Mathematics-for-teaching: An ongoing investigation of the mathematics that teachers (need to) know. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 293–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de Villiers, M. (1999). The role and function of proof. In M. de Villiers (Ed.), Rethinking proof with the Geometer’s Sketchpad (pp. 3–10). Key Curriculum Press.Google Scholar
  19. Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23, 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dreyfus, T. (1999). Why Johnny can’t prove. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 85–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. English, L. D. (1991). Young children’s combinatoric strategies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 451–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fischbein, E., Deri, M., Nello, M. S., & Marino, M. S. (1985). The role of implicit models in solving verbal problems in multiplication and division. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 16, 3–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Galbraith, P. L. (1981). Aspects of proving: A critical investigation of process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goetting, M. (1995). The college students’ understanding of mathematical proof. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
  25. Hadas, N., Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. (2000). The role of contradiction and uncertainty in promoting the need to prove in dynamic geometry environments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 127–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hanna, G., & Jahnke, H. N. (1996). Proof and proving. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 877–908). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Harel, G. (2002). The development of mathematical induction as a proof scheme: A model for DNR-based instruction. In S. Campbell, & R. Zaskis (Eds.), Learning and teaching number theory: Research in cognition and instruction (pp. 185–212). New Jersey: Ablex.Google Scholar
  28. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education III (pp. 234–283). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  29. Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (2000). A study of proof conceptions in algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 396–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hill, H. C., Schilling, S., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Developing measures of teachers’ mathematics knowledge for teaching. Elementary School Journal, 105, 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hoyles, C., Noss, R., & Pozzi, S. (2001). Proportional reasoning in nursing practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 4–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jones, K. (1997). Student-teachers’ conceptions of mathematical proof. Mathematics Education Review, 9, 16–24.Google Scholar
  34. Knuth, E. J. (2002). Secondary school mathematics teachers’ conceptions of proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 379–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 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, 29–63.Google Scholar
  36. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graph, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1–64.Google Scholar
  37. Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (1996). The development of the idea of mathematical proof: A 5-year case study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 194–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mariotti, M. A., & Fischbein, E. (1997). Defining in classroom activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 219–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Marrades, R., & Gutiérrez, Á. (2000). Proofs produced by secondary school students learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 87–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Martin, W. G., & Harel, G. (1989). Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Mason, J., Burton, L., & Stacey, K. (1982). Thinking mathematically. London: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  42. Movshovitz-Hadar, N. (1993). The false coin problem, mathematical induction and knowledge fragility. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 12, 253–268.Google Scholar
  43. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  44. Noss, R., Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1997). The construction of mathematical meaning: Connecting the visual with the symbolic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 203–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Reid, D. A. (2002). Conjectures and refutations in grade 5 mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rowland, T. (2002). Generic proofs in number theory. In S. Campbell, & R. Zaskis (Eds.), Learning and teaching number theory: Research in cognition and instruction (pp. 157–183). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  47. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1994). What do we know about mathematics curricula? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13, 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  49. Simon, M. A., & Blume, G. W. (1996). Justification in the mathematics classroom: A study of prospective elementary teachers. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15, 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stylianides, A. J. (2007a). Introducing young children to the role of assumptions in proving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 9, 361–385.Google Scholar
  51. Stylianides, A. J. (2007b). Proof and proving in school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 289–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Stylianides, A. J. (2007c). The notion of proof in the context of elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Stylianides, G. J. (2008). An analytic framework of reasoning-and-proving. For the Learning of Mathematics, 28(1), 9–16.Google Scholar
  54. Stylianides, A. J., & Stylianides, G. J. (2008). Studying the classroom implementation of tasks: High-level mathematical tasks embedded in ‘real-life’ contexts. Teaching and Teacher Education. doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2007.11.015.
  55. Stylianides, A. J., & Stylianides, G. J. (2006a). Content knowledge for mathematics teaching: The case of reasoning and proving. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká, & N. Stehliková (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 5, pp. 201–208). Czech Republic: Charles University in Prague.Google Scholar
  56. Stylianides, G. J., & Stylianides, A. J. (2006b). Promoting teacher learning of mathematics: The use of “teaching-related mathematics tasks” in teacher education. In S. Alatorre, J. L. Cortina, M. Sáiz, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 411–417). Mérida, México: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.Google Scholar
  57. Stylianides, A. J., Stylianides, G. J., & Philippou, G. N. (2004). Undergraduate students’ understanding of the contraposition equivalence rule in symbolic and verbal contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55, 133–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stylianides, G. J., Stylianides, A. J., & Philippou, G. N. (2007). Preservice teachers’ knowledge of proof by mathematical induction. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 10, 145–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Tall, D. (1999). The cognitive development of proof: Is mathematical proof for all or for some? In Z. Usiskin (Ed.), Developments in school mathematics education around the world (Vol. 4, pp. 117–136). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  60. Vinner, S. (1991). The role of definitions in the teaching, learning of mathematics. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 65–81). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  61. Wood, T. (1999). Creating a context for argument in mathematics class. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 171–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 458–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Yackel, E., & Hanna, G. (2003). Reasoning and proof. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to “Principles and standards for school mathematics” (pp. 227–236). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  64. Zack, V. (1997). “You have to prove us wrong”: Proof at the elementary school level. In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 291–298). Lahti, Finland: University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
  65. Zaslavsky, O. (2005). Seizing the opportunity to create uncertainty in learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 297–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Zaslavsky, O., & Shir, K. (2005). Students’ conceptions of a mathematical definition. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36, 317–346.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of OxfordOxfordUK
  2. 2.University of MichiganAnn ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations