Abstract
Students’ mathematical lives are characterized not only by a set of mathematical ideas and the engagement in mathematical thinking, but also by social relations, specifically, relations of authority. Watching student actions and speaking to students, one becomes cognizant of a ‘web of authority’ ever present in mathematics classrooms. In past work, it has been shown how those relations of authority may sometimes interfere with students’ reflecting on mathematical ideas. However, “…by shifting the emphasis from domination and obedience to negotiation and consent…” (Amit & Fried, 2005, p.164) it has also been stressed that these relations are fluid and are, in fact, asine qua non in the process of students’ defining their place in a mathematical community. But can these fluid relations be operative also in the formation of specific mathematical ideas? It is my contention that they may at least coincide with students’ thinking about one significant mathematical idea, namely, the idea ofproof. In this talk, I shall discuss both the general question of authority in the mathematics classroom and its specific connection with students’ thinking about proof in the context of work done in two 8th grade classrooms.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Amit, M., & Fried, M.N. (2005). Authority and authority relations in mathematics education: A view from an 8th grade classroom.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58,145–168.
Bell, A. W. (1976). A study of pupils’ proof-explanation in mathematical situations.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 7, 23–40.
Benne, K. D. (1970). Authority in education.Harvard Educational Review, 40, 385–410.
Boaler, Jo, (2003). Studying and Capturing the Complexity of Practice-The Case of the ‘Dance of Agency’. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. T. Zilliox (Eds.),Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of PME27 and PME-NA25 (Vol. 1, pp. 3–16). Honolulu, Hawaii: CRDG, College of Education.
Chazan, D. (1993). High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24(4), 359–387.
Clarke, D., Keitel C., & Shimizu, Y. (Eds.). (2006).Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Clarke, D. (2001).Perspectives on practice and meaning in mathematics and science classrooms. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Cobb, P., & Bauersfeld, H. (1995).The emergence of mathematical meaning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Copi, I. M. (1972).Introduction to Logic (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Dowling, P. (1996). A sociological analysis of school mathematics texts.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 31, 389–415.
Dowling, P. (1998). Why the Sociology of Mathematics Education? Activity, Strategy and Dialogue. Plenary given atMathematics Education and Society: An International Conference, September 6-11, 1998, University of Nottingham. Also available at the web site:http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/csme/meas/plenaries/dowling.html
Fischbein, E. (1982). Intuition and proof.For the Learning of Mathematics, 3(2), 9–18.
Galbraith, P. L. (1981). Aspects of proving: A clinical investigation of process.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 1–28.
Ginsburg, H. P. (1997).Entering the child’s mind: The Cognitive Clinical Interview in psychological research and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Goos, M. (2004). Learning mathematics in a classroom community of inquiry.Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(4), 258–291.
Green, J. L., Camilli, G., & Elmore, P. B. (2006).Handbook of complementary methods in educational research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hanna, G. (1983).Rigorous proof in mathematics. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Hanna, G. (2000). Proof, explanation and exploration: An overview.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 5–23.
Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, and E. Dubinsky (Eds.),Research in Collegiate Mathematics III (pp. 234–282). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
Hersh, R. (1998).What is mathematics really? London: Vintage.
Hoyles, C. (1997). The curricular shaping of students’ approaches to proof.For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 7–16.
Inglis, M., & Mejia-Ramos, J. P. (2006). Is it ever appropriate to judge an argument by its author?Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning of Mathematics, 26(2), 43–48.
Kitcher, P. (1984).The nature of mathematical knowledge. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kleiner, I., & Movshovitz-Hadar, N. (1997). Proof: A many-splendored thing.The Mathematical Intelligencer, 19(3), 16–26.
Krieger, L. (1973). Authority. In Philip P. Wiener (Ed.),Dictionary of the history of ideas (vol. I, pp.141–162). New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons,.
Lakatos, I. (1976).Proofs and refutations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J., & Wenger E. (1991).Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lerman, S. (2000). The Social Turn in Mathematics Education Research. In J. Boaler (Ed)Multiple Perspectives on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp. 19–44.
Levin, J., & Shanken-Kaye, J. M. (1996).The self-control classroom. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Mellin-Olsen, S. (1987).The politics of mathematics education. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000).Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Commission on Standards for School Mathematics.
Patton, M. Q. (1990).Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (3rd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Pickering, A. (1995).The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Roth, W. M. (2005).Doing qualitative research. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons.Science Education, 90 (4), 605–631.
Selden, A., & Selden, J. (1995). Unpacking the logic of mathematical statements.Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29, 123–151.
Sherin, M. G. (2002). A balancing act: Developing a discourse community in a mathematics classroom.Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 205–233.
Spence, L. D. (2001). The case against teaching.Change: The magazine of higher learning, November/December 2001, 11–19.
Toulmin, S. (1958).The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tymoczko, T. (1985). Computers and mathematical practice: A case study. In T. Tymoczko (Ed.),New directions in the philosophy of mathematics (pp.243–266). Boston: Birkhäuser.
Vinner, S. (1983). The notion of proof — Some aspects of students’ views at the senior high level. In R. Hershkowitz (Ed.),Proc. of the 7th Conf. of the Int. Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 289–294). Rehovot, Israel: PME.
Weber, K. (2003). Students’ difficulties with proof.Research Sampler 8, MAA Online. Available at the website: http://www.maa.org/t_and_l/sampler/rs_8.html
Weber, M. (1947).The theory of social and economic organization. Henderson, A. R. & Parsons, Talcott (Trans.). London: William Hodge ad Company Limited.
Wolfe, D. M. (1959). Power and authority in the family. In Cartwright, D. (Ed.),Studies in Social Power (pp. 99–117). Ann Arbor, Michigan: The University of Michigan,
Yin, R. (1994).Case study research: Design and method (2nd ed.) Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fried, M.N., Amit, M. The co-development and interrelation of proof and authority: The case of Yana and Ronit. Math Ed Res J 20, 54–77 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217530
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217530