Skip to main content

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

Abstract

Students who earned high marks during the proof semester of a geometry course were interviewed to understand what high-achieving students actually took away from the treatment of proof in geometry . The findings suggest that students had turned proving into a rote task, whereby they expected to mark a diagram and prove two triangles congruent.

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

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 129.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Cai, J., & Cirillo, M. (2014). What do we know about reasoning and proving? Opportunities and missed opportunities from curriculum analyses. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 132–140.

    Article  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 

  • Cirillo, M. (2009). Ten things to consider when teaching proof: What I wish I had known about teaching proof before I taught geometry. The Mathematics Teacher, 103(4), 251–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cirillo, M. (2011). “I’m like the Sherpa guide”: On learning to teach proof in school mathematics. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proeccedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Proceedings (Vol. 2, pp. 241–248). Ankara, Turkey: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cirillo, M. (2014). Supporting the introduction to formal proof. In C. Nicol, P. Liljedahl, P. Oesterle, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of Psychology of PME 38 and PME-NA 36 (Vol. 2, pp. 321–328). Vancouver, Canada: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cirillo, M., & Herbst, P. (2012). Moving toward more authentic proof practices in geometry. The Mathematics Educator, 21(2), 11–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cirillo, M., McCall, N., Murtha, Z., & Walters, S. (2017). Decomposing mathematical proof with secondary teachers. In L. West (Ed.), Reflective and collaborative processes to improve mathematics teaching (pp. 21–32). Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, D. H. (2003). Teaching and learning geometry. In J. Kilpatrick & W. G. Martin (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards of school mathematics (pp. 151–178). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, M. A. (1987). Geometry for secondary school teachers. In M. M. Lindquist (Ed.), Learning and teaching geometry, K-12, 1987 Yearbook (pp. 236–250). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fassnacht, C., & Woods, D. (2005). Transana v2.0x. Madison, WI: The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. http://www.transana.org.

  • Gal, H., & Linchevski, L. (2010). To see or not to see: Analyzing difficulties in geometry from the perspective of visual perception. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 163–183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1998). Technical report on the nationwide survey: Justifying and proving in school mathematics. London: Institute of Education, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, P., Aaron, W., Dimmel, J., & Erickson, A. (2013a). Expanding students’ involvement in proof problems: Are geometry teachers willing to depart from the norm? Paper presented at the 2013 Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Deep Blue at the University of Michigan. http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/97425.

  • Herbst, P., & Brach, C. (2006). Proving and doing proofs in high school geometry classes: What is it that is going on for students? Cognition and Instruction, 24(1), 73–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, P., Chen, C., Weiss, M., Gonzalez, G., Nachieli, T., Hamlin, M., & Brach, C. (2009). “Doing proofs” in geometry classrooms. In D. A. Stylianou, M. L. Blanton, & E. J. Knuth (Eds.), The teaching and learning of proof across the grades (pp. 250–268). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbst, P., Kosko, K., & Dimmel, J. (2013b). How are geometric proof problems presented? Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ recognition of the diagrammatic register. In M. Martinez & A. Castro Superfine (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 179–186). Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago. Available from Deep Blue at the University of Michigan. http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/97761.

  • Hershkowitz, R., Dreyfus, T., Ben-Zvi, D., Friedlander, A., Hadas, N., & Resnick, T. (2002). Mathematics curriculum development for computerized environments: A designer-researcher-teacher-learner activity. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 657–694). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. (1995). Released advanced mathematics items: Population 3. Third international mathematics and science study [TIMSS]. The Hague, The Netherlands: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, E. P., & Dressler, I. (1990). Integrated mathematics: Course II (2nd ed.). New York: Amsco School Publications Inc.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laborde, C. (2005). The hidden role of diagrams in students’ construction of meaning in geometry. In J. Kilpatrick, C. Hoyles, O. Skovsmose, & P. Valero (Eds.), Meaning in mathematics education (pp. 159–179). NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M. (1992). Practices and problems in teaching authentic mathematics. In F. K. Oser, A. Dick, & J. Patry (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching: The new synthesis (pp. 295–314). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lampert, M. (1993). Teachers’ thinking about students’ thinking about geometry: The effects of new teaching tools. In J. L. Schwartz, M. Yerushalmy, & B. Wilson (Eds.), The geometric supposer: What is it a case of? (pp. 143–177). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrone, S. M. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meserve, B. E., & Sobel, M. A. (1962). Mathematics for secondary school teachers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Otten, S., Gilbertson, N. J., Males, L. M., & Clark, D. L. (2014). The mathematical nature of reasoning-and-proving opportunities in geometry textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 16(1), 51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, K., Heinze, A., Renkl, A., & Gross, C. (2008). Reasoning and proof in geometry: Effects of a learning environment based on heuristic worked-out examples. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 455–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1988). When good teaching leads to bad results: The disasters of “well-taught” mathematics courses. Educational Psychologist, 23(2), 145–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sears, R., & Chávez, Ó. (2014). Opportunities to engage with proof: The nature of proof tasks in two geometry textbooks and its influence on enacted lessons. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46(5), 767–780.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaughnessy, M., & Burger, W. F. (1985). Spadework prior to deduction in geometry. The Mathematics Teacher, 78, 419–428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, N., Pimm, D., & Skelin, M. (2012). Developing an essential understanding of geometry for teaching mathematics in grades 9–12. Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. R. (1940). Three major difficulties in the learning of demonstrative geometry. The Mathematics Teacher, 33(99–134), 150–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, D. R. (2014). Reasoning-and-proving in the written curriculum: Lessons and implications for teachers, curriculum designers, and researchers. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 141–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the teachers and their students for allowing her to conduct this research. She would also like to thank Jamie Sutherland, Amanda Seiwell, and Erin Tellup for assisting with the data analysis. The research reported in this paper was supported with funding from the Knowles Science Teaching Foundation (PI: Michelle Cirillo) and the National Science Foundation (NSF; Award #1453493, PI: Michelle Cirillo). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michelle Cirillo .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cirillo, M. (2018). Engaging Students with Non-routine Geometry Proof Tasks. In: Herbst, P., Cheah, U., Richard, P., Jones, K. (eds) International Perspectives on the Teaching and Learning of Geometry in Secondary Schools. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77476-3_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77476-3_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-77475-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-77476-3

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics