Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Advances in Mathematics Education Research on Proof and Proving pp 225–237Cite as

How Do Pre-service Teachers Rate the Conviction, Verification and Explanatory Power of Different Kinds of Proofs?

Part of the ICME-13 Monographs book series (ICME13Mo)

Abstract

In the opening session of a course for first-year secondary (lower track secondary school) pre-service teachers, the participants were asked to rate the conviction , verification and explanatory power of four different kinds of proofs (a generic proof with numbers, a generic proof in the context of figurate numbers , a proof in the context of figurate numbers using “geometric variables” and the formal proof). In this study, students’ ratings express their preference for the formal proof concerning the aspects conviction, verification, and explanatory power. The other proofs achieve significantly lower ratings, especially in the case of conviction . The results may open the discussion about the use of generic proofs, the use of figurate numbers and the concept of proofs that explain.

Keywords

  • Transition to university
  • Generic proof
  • Figurate numbers
  • Function of proof

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Biehler, R., & Kempen, L. (2013). Students’ use of variables and examples in their transition from generic proof to formal proof. In B. Ubuz, C. Haser, & M. A. Mariotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 86–95). Ankara: Middle East Technical University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics: Didactique des mathématiques 1970–1990 (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland, & V. Warfield, Eds. & Trans.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Villiers, M. (1990). The role and function of proof in mathematics. Pythagoras, 24, 17–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diezmann, C., & English, L. (2001). Promoting the use of diagrams as tools for thinking. In A. Cuoco & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), The roles of representation in school mathematics (pp. 77–89). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, T. (2000). Some views on proofs by teachers and mathematicians. In A. Gagatsis (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2nd Mediterranean Conference on Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 11–25). Nikosia: The University of Cyprus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dreyfus, T., Nardi, E., & Leikin, R. (2012). Forms of proof and proving in the classrom. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and proving in mathematics education: The 19th ICMI study (pp. 191–214). Heidelberg: Springer Science+Business Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duval, R. (1990). Pour une approche cognitive de I’argumentation. Annales de Didactique et de Sciences Cognitives, 3, 195–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duval, R. (2007). Cognitive functioning and the understanding of mathematical processes of proof. In P. Boero (Ed.), Theorems in school: From history, epistemology and cognition to classroom practice (pp. 137–161). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischbein. E., & Kedem, L. (1982). Proof and certitude in the development of mathematical thinking. In A. Vennandel (Ed.), Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 128–131). Antwerp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flores, A. (2002). Geometric representations in the transition from arithmetic to algebra. In F. Hitt (Ed.), Representation and mathematics visualization (pp. 9–30). North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from the learning design perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney, & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational Design research: The design, development and evaluation of programs, processes and products (pp. 45–85). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, G. (1989). Proofs that prove and proofs that explain. In G. Vergnaud, J. Rogalski, & M. Artigue (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 45–51). Paris: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, G. (1995). Challenges to the importance of proof. For the Learning of Mathematics, 15(3), 42–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, G. (2017). Reflections on proof as explanation. Proceedings of the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education.

    Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hemmi, K. (2006). Approaching proof in a community of mathematical practice. Doctoral Thesis, Stockholm University, Stockholm. Retrieved from: http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:189608/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

  • Hersh, R. (1993). Proving is convincing and explaining. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 389–399.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, M. (2005). Erkenntnisentwicklung. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jahnke, H. N. (1984). Anschauung und Begründung in der Schulmathematik Beiträge zum Mathematikunterricht (pp. 32–41). Bad Salzdethfurt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karunakaran, S., Freeburn, B., Konuk, N., & Arbaugh, F. (2014). Improving preservice secondary mathematics teachers’ capability with generic example proofs. Mathematics Teacher Educator, 2(2), 158–170.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kempen, L., & Biehler, R. (2016). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of generic proofs in elementary number theory. In K. Krainer & N. Vondrová (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 135–141). Prague: CERME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiel, E. (1999). Erklären als didaktisches Handeln. Würzburg: Ergon-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knuth, E. (2002). Teachers’ conceptions of proof in the context of secondary school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(1), 61–88.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, W. G., & Harel, G. (1989). Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 41–51.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J., & Pimm, D. (1984). Generic examples: Seeing the general in the particular. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 277–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, D. A., & Knipping, C. (2010). Proof in mathematics education. Research, learning and teaching. Rotterdam: Sense Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reid, D. A., & Vallejo Vargas, E. A. (2017). When is a generic argument a proof? In Proceedings of the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, T. (1998). Conviction, explanation and generic examples. In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 65–72). Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowland, T. (2002). Generic proofs in number theory. In S. R. Campbell & R. Zazkis (Eds.), Learning and teaching number theory (pp. 157–183). Westport, Connecticut: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stjernfelt, F. (2000). Diagrams as centerpiece of a Peircean epistemology. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 36(3), 357–384.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, A. J. (2007). The notion of proof in the context of elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(1), 1–20.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, G. J. (2010). Engaging secondary students in reasoning and proving. Mathematics Teaching, 219, 39–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, A. J., & Stylianides, G. J. (2009). Proof constructions and evaluations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72(2), 237–253.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tabach, M., Barkai, R., Tsamir, P., Tirosh, D., Dreyfus, T., & Levenson, E. (2010). Verbal justification—Is it a proof? Secondary school teachers’ perceptions. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(6), 1071–1090.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, K. (2014). Proof as a cluster concept. In C. Nicol, S. Oesterle, P. Liljedahl, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 5, pp. 353–360). Vancouver, Canada: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, K., & Mejia-Ramos, J. P. (2015). On relative and absolute conviction in mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 35(2), 15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458–477.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

    Leander Kempen

Authors
  1. Leander Kempen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leander Kempen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

    Andreas J. Stylianides

  2. Department of Mathematics, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, USA

    Prof. Guershon Harel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kempen, L. (2018). How Do Pre-service Teachers Rate the Conviction, Verification and Explanatory Power of Different Kinds of Proofs?. In: Stylianides, A., Harel, G. (eds) Advances in Mathematics Education Research on Proof and Proving. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70996-3_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70996-3_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70995-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70996-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

search

Navigation