Advertisement

Web-Based Task Design Supporting Students’ Construction of Alternative Proofs

  • Mikio MiyazakiEmail author
  • Taro Fujita
  • Keith Jones
Chapter
  • 110 Downloads
Part of the Mathematics Education in the Digital Era book series (MEDE, volume 14)

Abstract

This study explores how a proving task with technology can be designed to develop students’ strategic knowledge of how to construct alternative proofs to the same problem, and how the designed task enriched their strategic knowledge in proving in the context of geometrical proof. The designed task had three components; open problem with flow-chart proofs, learning environment with web-based proof learning support system, and process of expressing strategic knowledge of how to reconstruct proofs. By analyzing experimental lessons with a grade 8 class (students aged 13–14), we found that these task components, and their interactions, contributed to developing students’ strategic knowledge. Using open problems with flow-chart proofs in a web-based proof learning support system enabled students to find alternative proofs to the same problem, and promoted the process of them expressing their strategic knowledge of how to reconstruct proofs.

Keywords

Task design Web-based proof learning support system Strategic knowledge 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology, Japan. Special thanks to Mr. Yasuyuki Matsunaga for data collection, and Mr. Daisuke Ichikawa for practicing the lessons.

References

  1. Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., & Yost, G. (1986). Using computers to teach: The geometry tutor. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5(1), 5–19.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 167–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Doyle, W. (1983). Academic work. Review of Educational Research, 53(2), 159–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fujita, T., Jones, K., & Miyazaki, M. (2018). Learning to avoid logical circularity in deductive proofs through computer-based feedback: Learners’ use of domain-specific feedback. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50(4), 699–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2014). Reasoning-and-proving in geometry in school mathematics textbooks in Japan. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. González, G., & Herbst, P. G. (2009). Students’ conceptions of congruency through the use of dynamic geometry software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14(2), 153–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Greeno, J. G. (1978). A study of problem solving. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 1). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. Hanna, G., & de Villiers, M. (2012). Aspects of proof in mathematics education. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and proving in mathematics education: the ICMI Study (pp. 1–10). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heinze, A., Cheng, Y.-H., Ufer, S., Lin, F.-L., & Reiss, K. (2008). Strategies to foster students’ competencies in constructing multi-steps geometric proofs: Teaching experiments in Taiwan and Germany. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 40(3), 443–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Jones, K., & Pepin, B. (2016). Research on mathematics teachers as partners in task design. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19(2–3), 105–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Komatsu, K. & Jones, K. (2019). Task design principles for heuristic refutation in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 17(4), 801–824.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-9892-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and refutations: The logic of mathematical discovery. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Luengo, V. (2005). Some didactical and epistemological considerations in the design of educational software: The Cabri-Euclide example. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 10(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. McCrone, S. S., & Martin, T. S. (2004). Assessing high school students’ understanding of geometric proof. Canadian Journal for Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 4(2), 223–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mejia-Ramos, J. P., Fuller, E., Weber, K., Rhoads, K., & Samkoff, A. (2012). An assessment model for proof comprehension in undergraduate mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(1), 3–18.Google Scholar
  16. Miyazaki, M., & Fujita, T. (2015). Proving as an explorative activity in mathematics education: New trends in Japanese research into proof. In B. Sriraman, et al. (Eds.), First sourcebook on Asian research in mathematics education: China, Korea, Singapore, Japan, Malaysia and India (pp. 1375–1407). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  17. Miyazaki, M., Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2015). Flow-chart proofs with open problems as scaffolds for learning about geometrical proofs. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(7), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Miyazaki, M., Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2017a). Students’ understanding of the structure of deductive proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 94(2), 223–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Miyazaki, M., Fujita, T., Jones, K., & Iwanaga, Y. (2017b). Designing a web-based learning support system for flow-chart proving in school geometry. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3(3), 233–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Panero, M., & Aldon, G. (2016). How teachers evolve their formative assessment practices when digital tools are involved in the classroom. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 2(1), 70–86.Google Scholar
  21. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Sherin, B., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. (2004). Scaffolding analysis: Extending the scaffolding metaphor to learning artifacts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 387–421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & 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(2), 455–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Weber, K. (2001). Student difficulty in constructing proofs: The need for strategic knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48(1), 101–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Wang, K., & Su, Z. (2017). Interactive, intelligent tutoring for auxiliary constructions in geometry proofs. https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.07154v1.
  26. Watson, A., & Ohtani, M. (Eds.). (2015). Task design in mathematics education: ICMI study 22. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Weber, K., & Mejia-Ramos, J. (2011). Why and how mathematicians read proofs: An exploratory study. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76(3), 329–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Shinshu UniversityNaganoJapan
  2. 2.University of ExeterExeterUK
  3. 3.University of SouthamptonSouthamptonUK

Personalised recommendations