Abstract
The gap between empirical and deductive reasoning is a global problem that has produced many students who have difficulties learning proofs. In this paper, we explore the conditions that aid students in entering into proof learning and how they can increase their ability before learning proofs through design experiments. First I discuss the theoretical backgrounds of the holistic perspective and didactical situation theory, and set a research framework as the transition from empirical to theoretical recognition consisting of the three aspects of inference, figure, and social influence. Next, I report my design experiments in plane geometry redesigned for the seventh grade, and examine how students may enter the world of proof by learning geometric transformation and construction as summarized in the three aspects of the framework. Finally, I suggest key ideas for designing lessons that promote transition.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Battista, M. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 843–908). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Berlin: Kluwer.
Chazan, D. (1993). High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 359–387.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A.., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
de Villiers, M. (1990). The role and function of proof in mathematics. Pythagoras, 24, 17–24.
Duval, R. (1998). Geometry from a cognitive point of view. C. Mammana et al. (Eds.), Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century (pp. 37–52). Berlin: Kluwer.
Duval, R. (2002). Proof understanding in mathematics: What ways for students? In Proceedings of 2002 International Conference on Mathematics: Understanding Proving and Proving to Understand (pp. 23–44).
Fawcett, H. (1938). The Nature of Proof. New York: National council of teachers of mathematics, Teachers College.
Hanna, G. (1991). Mathematical proof. D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 54–61). Berlin: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Hanna, G., & Jahnke, H. (1996). Proof and proving. In A. Bishop et al. (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 877–908). Berlin: Kluwer.
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). Charlotte: Information Age.
Hirabayashi, I. (1986). For the effective mathematics education. Bulletin of Nara University of Education, 36(2), 13–29. (in Japanese).
Hirabayashi, I. (1987). Studies on the development of activism in mathematics education. Chiyoda-Ku: Toyokan. (in Japanese).
Hirabayashi, I. (1991). Overviews of elementary geometry and considerations of the points. In New courses of teaching elementary mathematics: Early and middle elementary grades (pp. 39–72). Bunkyo-Ku: Kaneko Shobo. (in Japanese).
Hirabayashi, I. (2001). Recent perspectives of research in mathematics education: “Culture” and “Ecology”. Research in Mathematics Education, 7, 1–6. (in Japanese).
Knipping, C. (2008). A method of revealing structures of argumentations in classroom proving processes. ZDM, 40, 427–441.
Koseki, K. (Ed.) (1987). The teaching of proof in geometry. Japan: Meiji Tosho. (in Japanese).
Koyama, M. (2007). Need for humanizing mathematics education. In J. H. Woo et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 115–118). Seoul, Korea: PME.
Kunimune, S. (2003). Teaching and learning with a necessity of doing proof. In Booklet for the working sessions (pp. 220–223). Japan Society of Mathematical Education. (in Japanese).
Mariotti, M. (2000). Introduction to proof: The mediation of a dynamic software environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 25–53.
Miller, J. (2007). The holistic curriculum. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Murakami, I. (1994). The developmental process of the recognition of figure in the teaching of geometry. In Proceedings of the 27th Conference of Japan Society of Mathematical Education (pp. 125–130). (in Japanese).
NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM, Reston.
Ohta, S. (1998). The place of proof in geometry teaching. In Booklet for the working sessions (pp. 103–108). Japan Society of Mathematical Education. (in Japanese).
Okazaki, M. (2003). Study on the structure of the teaching unit of addition and subtraction with positive and negative numbers from the holistic perspective: From the viewpoints of the theory of didactical situations and the algebraic cycle of thinking. Research in Mathematical Education, 9, 1–13. (in Japanese).
Okazaki, M., & Iwasaki, H. (2003). Geometric construction as an educational material mediating between elementary and secondary mathematics. Research in Mathematical Education, 80, 3–27. (in Japanese).
Piaget, J. (2000). Studies in reflecting abstraction. Psychology Press.
Pirie, S., & Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterize it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 165–190.
Sato, M. (1996). Educational methods. (pp. 7–32). Tokyo: Iwanami. (in Japanese).
Souma, K. (1998). Teaching of geometric proof with an emphasis on the necessity. In Booklet for the working sessions (pp. 97–102). Japan Society of Mathematical Education. (in Japanese).
Sekiguchi, Y. (2002). Proof for the inquiry activities. In Booklet for the working sessions (pp. 181–184). Japan Society of Mathematical Education. (in Japanese).
Stylianides, A. (2007). Proof and proving in school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(3), 289–321.
Takii, A. (2001). Elementary mathematics lessons for fostering classroom cultures. Chiyoda-Ku: Toyokan. (in Japanese).
Tall, D. (2008). The transition to formal mathematical thinking in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(2), 5–24.
Tsubota, K. (2001). Creating elementary mathematics lessons: Towards symbiotic and mutually creative learning. Chiyoda-Ku: Toyokan. (in Japanese).
van Hiele, P. (1986). Structure and insight: A theory of mathematics education. Waltham: Academic Press.
Wittmann, E. (1995). Mathematics education as a design science. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29, 355–374.
Wittmann, E. (2001). Developing mathematics education as a systemic process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48, 1–20.
Yoshida, A. (1999). The holistic education: Philosophy and movement. Tokyo: Nippon Hyoron-sha. (in Japanese).
Acknowledgments
I would like to thank Mr. Seijiro Komoto for his contributions to the process of conducting the design experiment. I also thank the school staff members and students who participated in the experiment. This study was funded by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (No. 23501019).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Okazaki, M. (2015). Exploring the Nature of the Transition to Geometric Proof Through Design Experiments From the Holistic Perspective. In: Cho, S. (eds) Selected Regular Lectures from the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17187-6_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17187-6_35
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-17186-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-17187-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)