Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching Practices That Can Promote the Authoritative Proof Scheme

  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents case studies of the classroom teaching practices of two algebra teachers. Our data consist of videotaped classroom observations during a single academic year. We identify and characterize specific teaching practices that establish the norm that the teacher is the sole arbiter of mathematical correctness in the classroom. We suggest that these practices are likely to promote the development of the authoritative proof scheme in students. Our results can provide a basis for future research investigating the prevalence of these teaching practices and their impact on student learning and can be used as parameters to investigate teacher change.

Résumé

Cet article présente deux études de cas sur les pratiques d’enseignement de deux enseignants d’algèbre. Nos données sont constituées d’observations de classe filmées au cours d’une même année scolaire. Nous définissons et analysons certaines pratiques d’enseignement qui imposent une norme selon laquelle l’enseignant est le seul arbitre de la véracité mathématique dans la salle de classe. Nous estimons que de telles pratiques sont susceptibles de promouvoir les arguments d’autorité dans les démonstrations formelles. Nos résultats pourraient servir de base pour des recherches ultérieures sur la prévalence de ces pratiques d’enseignement et leur impact sur l’apprentissage des étudiants, et pourraient également servir de paramètres pour analyser les possibilités de changement chez les enseignants.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive psychology and its implications. San Francisco: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brownlee, J. (2003). Paradigm shifts in preservice teacher education students: A case study of changes in epistemological beliefs for two teacher education students. Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology, 3, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chazan, D. (1993). High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 359–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooney, T. J. (1995). On the notion of authority applied to teacher education. In D. T. Owens, M. K. Reed, & G. M. Millsaps (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 91–96). Columbus, OH: ERIC/CSMEE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. San Diego: Academic Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. (2007). Connections between generalizing and justifying: students’ reasoning with linear relationships. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 194–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etchberger, M. L., & Shaw, K. L. (1992). Teacher change as a progression of transitional images: A chronology of a developing constructivist teacher. School Science and Mathematics, 92(8), 411–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fennema, E., & Nelson, B. S. (1997). Mathematics teachers in transition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, L., & Schifter, D. (1997). Understanding teachers in transition: Characteristics of a model for developing teachers. In E. Fennema & B. S. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 19–54). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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), Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Rabin, J. M. (2010). Teaching practices associated with the authoritative proof scheme. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41, 14–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 234–283). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (2007). Toward comprehensive perspectives on the learning and teaching of proof. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 805–842). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, E. W. (1994). A conceptual analysis of the proof-writing performance of expert and novice students in elementary group theory. In J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research issues in undergraduate mathematics learning (pp. 49–157). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1998). Justifying and proving in school mathematics, executive summary. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (2000). A study of proof conceptions in algebra. Journal for Research on Mathematics Education, 31(4), 396–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heinze, A. (2002)....Because a square is not a rectangle. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 81–88). Norwich, UK: University of East Anglia.

  • Herbst, P. G. (2002). Engaging students in proving: A double bind on the teacher. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(3), 176–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Housman, D., & Porter, M. (2003). Proof schemes and learning strategies of above-average mathematics students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 53, 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, T. S., McCrone, S. M. S., Bower, M. L. W., & Dindyal, J. (2005). The interplay of teacher and student actions in the teaching and learning of geometric proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 95–124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, W. G., & Harel, G. (1989). Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 10(1), 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senk, S. L. (1985). How well do students write geometry proofs? Mathematics Teacher, 78(6), 448–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharon, M., & Martin, T. (2004). The impact of teacher actions on student proof schemes in geometry. In D. E. McDougal & J. A. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

  • Smith, J., & Thompson, P. W. (2007). Quantitative reasoning and the development of algebraic reasoning. In J. J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher, & M. L. Blanton (Eds.), Algebra in the early grades (pp. 95–132). New York: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowder, L. (1988). Children’s solutions of story problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 227–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowder, J. (2007). The mathematical education and development of teachers. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 157–224). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS videotape classroom study: Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States (National Center for Education Statistics Report No. NCES 99-0974). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, A. G. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 127–146). New York, NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. W. (1994). The development of the concept of speed and its relationship to concepts of rate. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 181–234). Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M., & Goldenberg, M. P. (1998). Some conceptions are difficult to change: One middle school mathematics teacher’s struggle. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 1(3), 269–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics, 0112, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0112, USA

    Guershon Harel & Jeffrey M. Rabin

Authors
  1. Guershon Harel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeffrey M. Rabin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guershon Harel.

Additional information

A brief report on this work has appeared separately (Harel & Rabin, 2010).

This work is supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation (REC 0310128, G. Harel PI). Opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and are not necessarily those of the Foundation.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Harel, G., Rabin, J.M. Teaching Practices That Can Promote the Authoritative Proof Scheme. Can J Sci Math Techn 10, 139–159 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/14926151003778282

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14926151003778282

Search

Navigation