Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

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

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

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

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers’ learning. Elementary School Journal, 103, 287–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E.A. & Krajcik, J.S. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1903). The psychological and the logical in teaching geometry. Educational Review, XXV, 387–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, W. (1988). Work in mathematics classes: The context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist, 23, 167–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, P.L. (1981). Aspects of proving: A critical investigation of process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 1–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goetting, M. (1995). The college students’ understanding of mathematical proof. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park.

  • 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyles, C. (1997). The curricular shaping of students’ approaches to proof. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 7–16.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J.T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29, 315–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remillard, J.T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, R. & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 221–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld, A.H. (1994). What do we know about mathematics curricula? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13, 55–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, S. & Castellan, N.J. Jr. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sowder, L. & Harel, G. (1998). Types of students’ justifications. The Mathematics Teacher, 91(8), 670–675.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, G.J. Proof in the school mathematics curriculum: A historical perspective. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (in press).

  • 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.

  • 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).

  • 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 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Instruction and Learning, University of Pittsburgh, 230. South Bouquet Street, Wesley W. Posvar Hall Rm# 5517, Pittsburgh, PA, 15260, USA

    Gabriel J. Stylianides

Authors
  1. Gabriel J. Stylianides
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gabriel J. Stylianides.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stylianides, G.J. Investigating the Guidance Offered to Teachers in Curriculum Materials: The Case of Proof in Mathematics. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 6, 191–215 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9074-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9074-y

Key words

Search

Navigation