Advertisement

Mathematics Education Research Journal

, Volume 26, Issue 1, pp 1–23 | Cite as

Detecting distortion: bridging visual and quantitative reasoning on similarity tasks

  • Dana C. Cox
  • Jane-Jane Lo
Original Article
  • 297 Downloads

Abstract

This study is focused on identifying and describing the reasoning patterns of middle grade students when examining potentially similar figures. Described here is a framework that includes 11 strategies that students used during clinical interview to differentiate similar and non-similar figures. Two factors were found to influence the strategies students selected: the complexity of the figures being compared and the type of distortion present in nonsimilar pairings. Data from this study support the theory that distortions are identified as a dominant property of figures and that students use the presence and absence of distortion to visually decide if two figures are similar. Furthermore, this study shows that visual reasoning is not as primitive or nonconstructive as represented in earlier literature and supports students who are developing numeric reasoning strategies. This illuminates possible pathways students may take when advancing from using visual and additive reasoning strategies to using multiplicative proportional reasoning on similarity tasks. In particular, distortion detection is a visual activity that enables students to reflect upon and evaluate the validity and accuracy of differentiation and quantify perceived relationships leading to ratio. This study has implications for curriculum developers as well as future research.

Keywords

Proportional reasoning Similarity Visualization Curriculum Middle grades 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Center for the Study of Mathematics Curriculum under NSF award #ESI-0333879. The authors would like to acknowledge the teachers and students at Cityscape Middle School for their willingness to share their classrooms and ideas. Portions of this work were presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education.

References

  1. Chazan, D. I. (1987). Similarity: Unraveling a conceptual knot with the aid of technology. In Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 39). Montreal: PMEGoogle Scholar
  2. Cox, D. C. (2008). Understanding similarity: bridging numeric and geometric contexts for proportional reasoning.Unpublished Dissertation, Kalamazoo, Michigan: Western Michigan University.Google Scholar
  3. Cox, D. C. (2013). Similarity in middle school mathematics: at the crossroads of geometry and number. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 15(1), 3–23.Google Scholar
  4. Cox, D. C., Lo, J.-J., & Mingus, T. (2007). Low achieving middle school students' conceptions of same shape. In Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 130–132). Stateline: University of Nevada, Reno.Google Scholar
  5. Cramer, K. A., & Post, T. (1993). Making connections: A case for proportionality. Arithmetic Teacher, 40(6), 342–346.Google Scholar
  6. Fassnacht, C., & Woods, D. (2005). Transana v2.0x. Madison: The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.Google Scholar
  7. Geeslin, W. E., & Shar, A. O. (1979). An alternative model describing children's spatial preferences. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 10(1), 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hart, K. M. (1988). Ratio and proportion. In J. Hiebert & M. J. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 198–219). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics & Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  10. Kaput, J. J., & West, M. (1994). Missing-value proportional reasoning problems: Factors affecting informal reasoning patterns. The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 235–287). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  11. Lamon, S. J. (1993). Ratio and proportion: Connecting content and children's thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(1), 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lamon, S. J. (2007). Rational numbers and proportional reasoning: Toward a theoretical framework for research. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, 1 (pp. 629–667). Charlotte: Information Age.Google Scholar
  13. Lehrer, R., Strom, D., & Confrey, J. (2002). Grounding metaphors and inscriptional resonance: Children's emerging understanding of mathematical similarity. Cognition and Instruction, 20(3), 359–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Piaget, J. (1966). The child's conception of space. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Piaget, J., Inhelder, B., & Szeminska, A. (1960). Child's conception of geometry. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  16. Swoboda, E., & Tocki, J. (2002). How to prepare prospective teachers to teach mathematics—Some remarks. Second International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics (at the Undergraduate Level), Crete, Greece.Google Scholar
  17. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Van den Brink, J., & Streefland, L. (1979). Young children (6–8)—Ratio and proportion. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 10(4), 403–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and insight: A theory of mathematics education. Orlando: Academic.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Inc. 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsMiami UniversityOxfordUSA
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsWestern Michigan UniversityKalamazooUSA

Personalised recommendations