# A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning

Article

First Online:

- 3.1k Downloads
- 110 Citations

## Abstract

This conceptual research framework addresses the problem of rote learning by characterising key aspects of the dominating imitative reasoning and the lack of creative mathematical reasoning found in empirical data. By relating reasoning to thinking processes, student competencies, and the learning milieu it explains origins and consequences of different reasoning types.

## Keywords

Mathematical reasoning Creativity Rote learning## References

- Asiala, M., Brown, A., DeVries, D., Dubinsky, E., Mathews, D., & Thomas, K. (1996). A framework for research and curriculum development in undergratduate mathematics education. In A. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.),
*Research in collegiate mathematics education II, CBMS issues in mathematics education*(pp. 1–32). American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar - Balacheff, N. (1988). Aspects of proof in pupils practice of school mathematics. In D. Pimm (Ed.),
*Mathematics, teachers and children*(pp. 216–235). London: Hodder and Stoughton.Google Scholar - Balacheff, N. (1990). Towards a problematique for research on mathematics teaching.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education*,*21*(4), 258–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Ball, D., & Bass, H. (2003). Making mathematics reasonable in school. In J. Kilpatrick, 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 - Bergqvist, T., & Lithner, J. (2005).
*Simulating creative reasoning in mathematics teaching.*Research Reports in Mathematics Education 2, Dept. of Mathematics, Umeå University.Google Scholar - Bergqvist, T., Lithner, J., & Sumpter, L. (2007). Upper secondary students task reasoning.
*International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology*(in press).Google Scholar - Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (1956).
*Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Part 1: The Cognitive Domain*. New York: David McKay.Google Scholar - Boesen, J., Lithner, J., & Palm, T. (2005).
*The mathematical reasoning required by national tests and the reasoning actually used by students.*Research Reports in Mathematics Education 4, Dept. of Mathematics, Umeå University.Google Scholar - Brousseau, G. (1997).
*Theory of didactical situations in mathematics*. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Churchman, C. W. (1971).
*The design of inquiring systems: Basic concepts of system and organization*. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar - Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students thinking during instruction.
*Educational Psychologist*,*23*, 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Duval, R. (2002). Proof understanding in mathematics: What ways for students?
*Proceedings of 2002 international conference on mathematics: Understanding proving and proving to understand*(pp. 61–77).Google Scholar - Ernest, P. (1999). Forms of knowledge in mathematics and mathematics education: Philosophical and rhetorical perspectives.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*38*(1), 67–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Fischbein, E. (1999). Intuitions and schemata in mathematical reasoning.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*38*(1), 11–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Harel, G. (2006). Mathematics education research, its nature and its purpose: A discussion of Lester’s paper.
*Zentralblatt fuer Didaktik der Mathematik*,*38*(1), 58–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Haylock, D. (1997). Recognising mathematical creativity in schoolchildren.
*Zentralblatt fuer Didaktik der Mathematik*,*29*(3), 68–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Hegarty, M., Mayer, R., & Monk, C. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers.
*Journal of Educational Psychology*,*87*(1), 18–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Hiebert, J. (2003). What research says about the NCTM Standards. In J. Kilpatrick, G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.),
*A Research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics*(pp. 5–26). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. Grouws (Ed.),
*Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning*(pp. 65–97). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar - Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.),
*Conceptual and procedural knowledge*(pp. 1–27). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Huckstep, P., & Rowland, T. (2000). Creative mathematics – real or rhetoric?
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*42*(1), 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Krummheuer, G. (1995). The ethnography of argumentation. In P. Cobb & H. Bauersfeld (Eds.),
*The emergence of mathematical meaning: Interaction in classroom cultures*(pp. 229–269). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Leron, U., & Hazzan, O. (1997). The world according to Johnny: A coping perspective in mathematics education.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*32*, 265–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lester, F. (2005). On the theoretical, conceptual, and philosophical foundations for research in mathematics education.
*Zentralblatt fuer Didaktik der Mathematik*,*37*(6), 457–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lithner, J. (2000a). Mathematical reasoning and familiar procedures.
*International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology*,*31*, 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lithner, J. (2000b). Mathematical reasoning in task solving.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*41*, 165–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lithner, J. (2002). Lusten att lära, Osby (The motivation to learn, Osby).
*Skolverkets nationella kvalitetsgranskningar*(*Quality inspections of the Swedish National Agency for Education*), in Swedish.Google Scholar - Lithner, J. (2003). Students mathematical reasoning in university textbook exercises.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*52*, 29–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lithner, J. (2004). Mathematical reasoning in calculus textbook exercises.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior*,*23*, 405–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Långström, P., & Lithner, J. (2007). Students learning strategies and mathematical reasoning in textbook-related metacognitive processes (in press).Google Scholar
- McGinty, R., VanBeynen, J., & Zalewski, D. (1986). Do our mathematics textbooks reflect what we preach?
*School Science and Mathematics*,*86*, 591–596.Google Scholar - Monaghan, J., & Ozmantar, M. (2006). Abstraction and consolidation.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*62*(3), 233–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000).
*Principles and standards for school mathematics*. Reston, VA: The Council.Google Scholar - Niss, M. (2003). Mathematical competencies and the learning of mathematics: The Danish KOM project.
*Third Mediterranean conference on mathematics education*(pp. 115–124).Google Scholar - Palm, T., Boesen, J., & Lithner, J. (2005).
*The requirements of mathematical reasoning in upper secondary level assessments.*Research Reports in Mathematics Education 5, Dept. of Mathematics, Umeå University.Google Scholar - Pirie, S., & Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterise it and how can we represent it?
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*26*, 165–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Pólya, G. (1954).
*Mathematics and plausible reasoning*(Vols. I and II). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar - Schoenfeld, A. (1985).
*Mathematical problem solving*. Orlando, FL: Academic.Google Scholar - Schoenfeld, A. (1991). On mathematics as sense-making: An informal attack on the unfortunate divorce of formal and informal mathematics. In J. Voss, D. Perkins, & J. Segal (Eds.),
*Informal reasoning and education*(pp. 311–344). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Schoenfeld, A. (2007). Method. In F. Lester (Ed.),
*Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning*(pp. 69–107). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar - Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2003). Validations of proofs considered as texts: Can undergraduates tell whether an argument proves a theorem?
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education*,*34*(1), 4–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*22*, 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sierpinska, A. (1996).
*Understanding in mathematics*. Routledge: Falmer.Google Scholar - Silver, E. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing.
*Zentralblatt fuer Didaktik der Mathematik*,*29*(3), 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Skemp, R. (1978). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding.
*Arithmetic Teacher*,*26*(3), 9–15.Google Scholar - Sriraman, B. (2004). The characteristics of mathematical creativity.
*The Mathematics Educator*,*14*(1), 19–34.Google Scholar - Stacey, K., & MacGregor, M. (1999). Taking the algebraic thinking out of algebra.
*Mathematics Education Research Journal*,*11*, 24–38.Google Scholar - Tall, D. (1991). Reflections. In D. Tall (Ed.),
*Advanced mathematical thinking*(pp. 251–259). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Tall, D. (1996). Functions and calculus. In A. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & C. Laborde (Eds.),
*International handbook of mathematics education*(pp. 289–325). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Tall, D. (2004). Thinking through three worlds of mathematics. In M. J. Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.),
*28th Conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education.*vol. 4 (pp. 281–288). Bergen.Google Scholar - van Hiele, P. (1986).
*Structure and insight. A theory of mathematics education*. Orlando: Academic.Google Scholar - Vinner, S. (1997). The pseudo-conceptual and the pseudo-analytical thought processes in mathematics learning.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*34*, 97–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Wedege, T., & Skott, J. (2006).
*Changing views and practices? A study of the Kapp-Abel mathematics competition*. Trondheim: NTNU.Google Scholar - Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education*,*27*(4), 458–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Yackel, E., & Hanna, G. (2003). Reasoning and proof. In J. Kilpatrick, 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

## Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007