Investigating the Guidance Offered to Teachers in Curriculum Materials: The Case of Proof in Mathematics

Article

Abstract

Despite widespread agreement that proof should be central to all students’ mathematical experiences, many students demonstrate poor ability with it. The curriculum can play an important role in enhancing students’ proof capabilities: teachers’ decisions about what to implement in their classrooms, and how to implement it, are mediated through the curriculum materials they use. Yet, little research has focused on how proof is promoted in mathematics curriculum materials and, more specifically, on the guidance that curriculum materials offer to teachers to enact the proof opportunities designed in the curriculum. This paper presents an analytic approach that can be used in the examination of the guidance curriculum materials offer to teachers to implement in their classrooms the proof opportunities designed in the curriculum. Also, it presents findings obtained from application of this approach to an analysis of a popular US reform-based mathematics curriculum. Implications for curriculum design and research are discussed.

Key words

curriculum analysis curriculum development equivalent expressions mathematical tasks mathematics curriculum proof teachers textbooks 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 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 & Stoughton.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, D.L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. The Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ball, D.L. & Bass, H. (2003). Making mathematics reasonable in school. In J. Kilpatrick, W.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
  4. Ball, D.L. & Cohen, D.K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is - or might be - the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8, 14.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, D.L., Hoyles, C., Jahnke, H.N., & Movshovitz-Hadar, N. (2002). The teaching of proof. In L.I. Tatsien (Ed.), Proceedings of the international congress of mathematicians (vol. III, pp. 907–920). Beijing: Higher Education Press.Google Scholar
  6. Beaton, A.E., Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Gonzalez, E.J., Kelly, D.L., & Smith, T.A. (1996). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.Google Scholar
  7. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers’ learning. Elementary School Journal, 103, 287–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Corey, D. & Gamoran, S.M. (2006). Practicing change: Curriculum adaptation and teacher narrative in the context of mathematics education reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(2), 153–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Davis, E.A. & Krajcik, J.S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dewey, J. (1903). The psychological and the logical in teaching geometry. Educational Review, XXV, 387–399.Google Scholar
  12. Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23, 167–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Galbraith, P.L. (1981). Aspects of proving: A critical investigation of process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Goetting, M. (1995). The college students’ understanding of mathematical proof. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.Google Scholar
  15. Harel, G. (2001). The development of mathematical induction as a proof scheme: A model for DNR-based instruction. In S. Campbell & R. Zaskis (Eds.), Learning and teaching number theory (pp. 185–212). NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Google Scholar
  16. Healy, L. & Hoyles, C. (2000). Proof conceptions in algebra. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 396–428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hoyles, C. (1997). The curricular shaping of students’ approaches to proof. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 7–16.Google Scholar
  18. Knuth, E.J. (2002). Teachers’ conceptions of proof in the context of secondary school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(1), 61–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lappan, G., Fey, J.T., Fitzgerald, W.M., Friel, S.N., & Philips, E.D. (1998/2004). Connected mathematics project. Menlo Park, CA: Dale Seymour Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Lappan, G., Fey, J.T., Fitzgerald, W.M., Friel, S.N., & Philips, E.D. (2002). Getting to know connected mathematics: An implementation guide. Connected mathematics project. Menlo Park, CA: Dale Seymour Publications.Google Scholar
  21. Marrades, R. & Gutiérrez, A. (2000). Proofs produced by secondary school students learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44(1/2), 87–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Martin, W.G. & Harel, G. (1989). Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  24. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  25. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  26. Remillard, J.T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29, 315–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Remillard, J.T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers’ learning? Two fourth-grade teachers’ use of a new mathematics text. Elementary School Journal, 100, 331–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Remillard, J.T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schneider, R. & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 221–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1994). What do we know about mathematics curricula? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13, 55–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 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
  32. Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  33. Siegel, S. & Castellan, N.J. Jr. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  34. Silver, E.A. & Carpenter, T.P. (1989). Mathematical methods. In M.M. Lindquist (Ed.), Fourth mathematics assessment of national educational progress (pp. 10–18). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  35. Simon, M.A. & Blume, G.W. (1996). Justification in mathematics classrooms: A study of prospective elementary school students. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(1), 3–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sowder, L. & Harel, G. (1998). Types of students’ justifications. The Mathematics Teacher, 91(8), 670–675.Google Scholar
  37. Stein, M.K. & Kim, G. (2006). The role of mathematics curriculum in large-scale urban reform: An analysis of demands and opportunities. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, April 2006, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  38. Stein, M.K., Grover, B., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stylianides, A.J. (2007). The notion of proof in the context of elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stylianides, A.J., Stylianides, G.J., & Philippou, G.N. (2004). Undergraduate students’ understanding of the contraposition equivalence rule in symbolic and verbal contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 55, 133–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stylianides, G.J. Proof in the school mathematics curriculum: A historical perspective. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (in press).Google Scholar
  42. Stylianides, G.J. (2005). Investigating students’ opportunities to develop proficiency in reasoning and proving: A curricular perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
  43. Stylianides, G.J., Stylianides, A.J., & Philippou, G.N. (2007). Preservice teachers’ knowledge of proof by mathematical induction. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 10(3).Google Scholar
  44. US Department of Education. (2000). Before it’s too late. A report to the Nation from the National Commission of Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st century. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.Google Scholar
  45. Wang, J. & Paine, L. (2003). Learning to teach with mandated curriculum and public examination of teaching as contexts. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(1), 75–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yackel, E. & Hanna, G. (2003). Reasoning and proof. In J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 22–44). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instruction and LearningUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations