Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Online example-based assessment as a resource for teaching about quadrilaterals

  • Published:
Educational Studies in Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We used an assessment platform to study the potential of rich student data obtained online to influence classroom instruction and help teachers respond to students’ needs. The article focuses on technology-based formative assessment in the course of teaching a unit on quadrilaterals. We studied example-eliciting tasks, requiring students to determine the truth of a given claim and to use interactive diagrams to construct examples to support their answer. Our aim was to teach the concept of parallelogram by exploring students’ concept images and responding adequately to their submissions. A group of 11-year-old students studied the unit as part of their geometry curriculum. We used an assessment platform, which provides tools designed to monitor examples produced by students interacting with a dynamic geometry environment and to characterize critical and non-critical attributes of the submitted constructions. We present the teaching decisions made by the teacher (the first author), who used automatic feedback on the characteristics of three assessment tasks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aldon, G., & Panero, M. (2020). Can digital technology change the way mathematics skills are assessed? ZDM-Mathematics Education, 52, 1333–1348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01172-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Developing the theory of formative assessment. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 21(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-008-9068-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burger, W. F., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (1986). Characterizing the van Hiele levels of development in geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17, 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, J., Olsher, S., & Yerushalmy, M. (2020). Didactic metadata informing teachers’ selection of learning resources: Boundary crossing in professional development. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 23(4), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-019-09428-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowley, M. L. (1987). The van Hiele model of the development of geometric thought. Learning and teaching geometry, K-12 (pp. 1–16).

    Google Scholar 

  • Daro, P., Mosher, F. A., & Corcoran, T. B. (2011). Learning trajectories in mathematics: A foundation for standards, curriculum, assessment, and instruction. CPRE Research Reports. cpre.2011.rr68/10.12698. Accessed 26 Sept 2021.

  • Ebby, C., & Petit, M. M. (2018). Using learning trajectories to elicit, interpret, and respond to student thinking. A Fresh Look at Formative Assessment in Mathematics Teaching (pp. 81–101)

    Google Scholar 

  • Fonger, N. L., Stephens, A., Blanton, M., Isler, I., Knuth, E., & Gardiner, A. M. (2018). Developing a learning progression for curriculum, instruction, and student learning: An example from mathematics education. Cognition and Instruction, 36(1), 30–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2017.1392965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, T. (2012). Learners’ level of understanding of the inclusion relations of quadrilaterals and prototype phenomenon. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2007). Learners’ understanding of the definitions and hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals: Towards a theoretical framing. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800008520167

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldenberg, P., & Mason, J. (2008). Shedding light on and with example spaces. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9143-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hershkowitz, R. (1987). The acquisition of concepts and misconceptions in basic geometry—or when “a little learning is a dangerous thing.” Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics, 3, 238–251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershkowitz, R. (1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry. In P. Nesher & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition (pp. 70–95). Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mesa, V. (2004). Characterizing practices associated with functions in middle school textbooks: An empirical approach. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56(2–3), 255–286. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000040409.63571.56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olsher, S. (2019). Making good practice common using computer-aided formative assessment. Technology in Mathematics Teaching (pp. 31–47). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19741-4_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Olsher, S., Yerushalmy, M., & Chazan, D. (2016). How might the use of technology in formative assessment support changes in mathematics teaching? For the Learning of Mathematics, 36(3), 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, J. W., Chudowsky, N., & Glaser, R. (2001). Knowing what students know: The science and design of educational assessment. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10019

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J. T. (2016). Keeping an eye on the teacher in the digital curriculum race. In M. Bates & Z. Usiskin (Eds.), Digital curricula in school mathematics (pp. 195–204). Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robutti, O. (2010). Graphic calculators and connectivity software to be a community of mathematics practitioners. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 42(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0222-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sangwin, C. (2015). Computer aided assessment of mathematics using STACK. International Congress on Mathematical Education, 12th (pp. 695–713). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17187-6_39

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. A., Penuel, W. R., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2018). Classroom assessment principles to support learning and avoid the harms of testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 37(1), 52–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, K., & Wiliam, D. (2012). Technology and assessment in mathematics. Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 721–751). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4684-2_23

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Supovitz, J. A., Ebby, C. B., Remillard, J., & Nathenson, R. A. (2018). Experimental impacts of the ongoing assessment project on teachers and students. CPRE Research Report.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Hiele, P. (1986). Structures and insight. A theory of mathematics education. Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venturini, M., & Sinclair, N. (2017). Designing assessment tasks in a dynamic geometry environment. Digital technologies in designing mathematics education tasks (pp. 77–98). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43423-0_5

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, A., & Shipman, S. (2008). Using learner generated examples to introduce new concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9142-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerushalmy, M., & Olsher, S. (2020). Online assessment of students’ reasoning when solving example-eliciting tasks: Using conjunction and disjunction to increase the power of examples. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 52, 1033–1049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01134-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerushalmy, M., Nagari-Haddif, G., & Olsher, S. (2017). Design of tasks for online assessment that supports understanding of students’ conceptions. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 49(5), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0871-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaslavsky, O., & Zodik, I. (2014). Example-generation as indicator and catalyst of mathematical and pedagogical understandings. Transforming mathematics instruction (pp. 525–546). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04993-9_28

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Zazkis, R., & Leikin, R. (2007). Generating examples: From pedagogical tool to a research tool. For the Learning of Mathematics, 27(2), 15–21.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by the Israel Science Foundation (grant 147/18).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel

    Porat Popper & Michal Yerushalmy

Authors
  1. Porat Popper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michal Yerushalmy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Porat Popper.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Popper, P., Yerushalmy, M. Online example-based assessment as a resource for teaching about quadrilaterals. Educ Stud Math 110, 83–100 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10109-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10109-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation