Advertisement

Mathematics Education Research Journal

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 443–470 | Cite as

Visual and analytical strategies in spatial visualisation: perspectives from bilateral symmetry and reflection

  • Ajay Ramful
  • Siew Yin Ho
  • Tom Lowrie
Original Article
First Online:

Abstract

This inquiry presents two fine-grained case studies of students demonstrating different levels of cognitive functioning in relation to bilateral symmetry and reflection. The two students were asked to solve four sets of tasks and articulate their reasoning in task-based interviews. The first participant, Brittany, focused essentially on three criteria, namely (1) equidistance, (2) congruence of sides and (3) ‘exactly opposite’ as the intuitive counterpart of perpendicularity for performing reflection. On the other hand, the second participant, Sara, focused on perpendicularity and equidistance, as is the normative procedure. Brittany’s inadequate knowledge of reflection shaped her actions and served as a validation for her solutions. Intuitively, her visual strategies took over as a fallback measure to maintain congruence of sides in the absence of a formal notion of perpendicularity. In this paper, we address some of the well-known constraints that students encounter in dealing with bilateral symmetry and reflection, particularly situations involving inclined line of symmetry. Importantly, we make an attempt to show how visual and analytical strategies interact in the production of a reflected image. Our findings highlight the necessity to give more explicit attention to the notion of perpendicularity in bilateral symmetry and reflection tasks.

Keywords

Spatial visualisation Bilateral symmetry Reflection Perpendicularity Visual strategies Analytical strategies 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Arcavi, A. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52, 215–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority (2014). Foundation to year 10 curriculum (mathematics). Retrieved December 23, 2014, from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/mathematics/curriculum/f-10.
  3. Ben-Chaim, D., Lappan, G., & Houang, R. T. (1988). The effect of instruction on spatial visualization skills of middle school boys and girls. American Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bulf, C. (2010). The effects of the concept of symmetry on learning geometry at French secondary school. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6 th conference of European research in mathematics education (pp. 726–735). Lyon: CERME.Google Scholar
  5. Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities—a survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 420–464). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  7. Denys, B. (1985). The teaching of reflection in France and Japan. In L. Streefland (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 1 (pp. 165–170). Noordwijkerhout: PME.Google Scholar
  8. Edwards, L., & Zazkis, R. (1993). Transformation geometry: naïve ideas and formal embodiments. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 12(2), 121–145.Google Scholar
  9. Ekstrom, R. B., French, J. W., & Harman, H. H. (1976). Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
  10. Enns, J. T., & Kingstone, A. (1995). Access to global and local properties in visual search for compound stimuli. Psychological Science, 6(5), 283–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gal, H., & Linchevski, L. (2010). To see or not to see: analyzing difficulties in geometry from the perspective of visual perception. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 163–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Giannouli, V. (2013). Visual symmetry perception. Encephalos, 50, 31–42.Google Scholar
  13. Grenier, D. (1985). Middle school pupils’ conceptions about reflections according to a task of construction. In L. Streefland (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education, vol. 1 (pp. 183–188). Noordwijkerhout: PME.Google Scholar
  14. Gutiérrez, A. (1996). Visualization in 3-dimensional geometry: in search of a framework. In L. Puig & A. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Proc. 20th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 1, pp. 3–19). Valencia: PME.Google Scholar
  15. Guven, B. (2012). Using dynamic geometry software to improve eight grade students’ understanding of transformation geometry. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 364–382.Google Scholar
  16. Hall, R. (2000). Videorecording as theory. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 647–664). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Hegarty, M., & Kozhevnikov, M. (1999). Types of visual-spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 684–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hershkowitz, R., Arcavi, A., & Bruckheimer, M. (2001). Reflections on the status and nature of visual reasoning—the case of matches. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 32(2), 255–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hollebrands, K. F. (2003). High school students’ understandings of geometric transformations in the context of a technological environment. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoyles, C., & Healy, L. (1997). Unfolding meanings for reflective symmetry. International Journal of Computers in Mathematical Learning, 2, 27–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kosslyn, S. M. (1990). Mental imagery. In D. N. Osherson, S. M. Kosslyn, & J. M. Hollerbach (Eds.), An invitation to cognitive science (pp. 73–97). Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kozhevnikov, M., Hegarty, M. & Mayer, R. (1999). Students’ use of imagery in solving qualitative problems in kinematics. Washington DC: US Department of Education (ERIC Document Reproduction, 433 239).Google Scholar
  23. Küchemann, D. K. (1981). Reflections and rotations. In K. Hart (Ed.), Children’s understanding of mathematics 11-16 (pp. 137–157). London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  24. Leikin, R., Berman, A., & Zaslavsky, O. (2000). Learning through teaching: the case of symmetry. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 12(1), 18–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McGee, M. G. (1979). Human spatial abilities: psychometric studies and environmental, genetic, hormonal, and neurological influences. Psychological Bulletin, 86(5), 889–918.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1956). The child’s conception of space. London: Routledge & K. Paul.Google Scholar
  27. Presmeg, N. C. (1986a). Visualisation in high school mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 6(3), 42–46.Google Scholar
  28. Presmeg, N. C. (1986b). Visualisation and mathematical giftedness. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(3), 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Yakimanskaya, I. S. (1991). The development of spatial thinking in school children. Soviet studies in mathematics education (Vol. 3). Reston: NCTM.Google Scholar
  30. Yilmaz, H. B. (2009). On the development and measurement of spatial ability. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 1(2), 83–96.Google Scholar
  31. Zazkis, R., Dubinsky, E., & Dautermann, J. (1996). Coordinating visual and analytical strategies: a study of students’ understanding of the group D4. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Zimmerman, W., & Cunningham, S. (1991). Editors introduction: what is mathematical visualization? In W. Zimmerman & S. Cunningham (Eds.), Visualization in teaching and learning mathematics (pp. 1–7). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Inc. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CanberraCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options