The learning and teaching of linear algebra: Observations and generalizations
Section snippets
Sources of student difficulties
Linear algebra is one of two courses—the other being calculus—required by virtually all science, engineering, economics, and mathematics students, the number of whom is likely to be in the hundreds of thousands. Yet, by all accounts—subjective reports by mathematicians who taught linear algebra as well as research studies—students find linear algebra difficult. An example of the subjective reports is Carlson's (1993) broadly-cited reflection on his experience of teaching elementary linear
TE's learning environment
We stipulate that outcomes of any teaching experiment are crucially impacted by—and therefore must be interpreted and understood in the context of—its learning environment. In this section, we describe the social and intellectual climates realized in the TE.
The social climate of the TE was set so that the participants—inservice secondary school teachers—re-experienced themselves as mathematics learners. They solved mathematical problems in small-working groups, discussed their solutions and
Research questions
The TE was organized around three main parameters: It focused on the theory of linear equations, was oriented within particular social and intellectual climates, and its design and implementation took into consideration a series of obstacles known to be a source of difficulties for linear algebra students. The questions we set for this study were:
- 1.
Did the participants in the TE, which was organized around these parameters, construct viable knowledge in the theory of systems of linear equations?
Data source and analysis
The participants in this experiment were 10 in-service secondary school teachers (hereafter, “participants”) from a large Southwestern metropolitan region. Initially, the primary reason for selecting these participants as our population of interest was educational, to promote advanced mathematical knowledge among inservice secondary mathematics teachers. We have been pursuing this professional development goal for the last 15 years with different groups of teachers and in different mathematical
Planning stage
The first unit consisted of 15 problems dealing with scenarios of heat or traffic flow, chemical reactions, economic systems of exchange of goods, center of mass, and spatial relations among planes. Most of the scenarios were linear; the rest non-linear. The aim was that through the participants’ solutions to these problems and discussions thereof, the participants will retrieve, re-construct, or newly construct the following ways of understanding.
- (a)
Differentiate between linear and non-linear
Planning stage
The first central idea to be developed in the second unit was the following:
Let S be an m × n system, with equations ε1, ε2, …, εm. For any m scalars c1, c2, …, cm, any solution of system S is a solution of the equation εΣ = c1ε1 + c2ε2 + ⋯ + cmεm.
The goal is that through a discussion of this idea the foundational concept of “linear combination” (i.e., the equation ɛΣ is a linear combination of the equations, ε1, ε2, …, εm) will be elicited, and with it, the following conclusion:
Given two systems S1 and S
Contributions and hypotheses
The planning, implementation, and data analysis of the TE took into considerations sources of student obstacles known in the literature. We distinguished between didactical obstacles, those which results from a narrow instruction, and epistemological obstacles, those which are unavoidable due the meaning of concepts. The didactical obstacles included inadequate attention to conceptual understanding; introduction of a hodgepodge of concepts, ideas, and symbolism early in linear algebra courses;
Acknowledgments
This study is based upon work supported by the <gs1>National Science Foundation</gs1> under Grant Nos. <gn1>0934695</gn1> and <gn1>1035503</gn1>. Any opinion expressed in this paper is of the author, not the National Science Foundation.
References (60)
Students’ understanding of proofs: A historical analysis and implications for the teaching of geometry and linear algebra
Linear Algebra and Its Applications
(1999)- et al.
Analyzing student understanding in linear algebra through mathematical activity
Journal of Mathematical Behavior
(2015) - et al.
Collegiate mathematics teaching: An unexamined practice
Journal of Mathematical Behavior
(2010) - et al.
APOS theory—A framework for research and curriculum development in mathematics education
(2014) Aspects of proof in pupils’ practice of school mathematics
- Barkai, R., Tsamir, P., Tirosh, D., & Dreyfus, T. (2002). Proving or refuting arithmetic claims: The case of elementary...
- Booth, L. R. (1989). Grade 8 students’ understanding of structural properties in mathematics. In G. Vergnaud, J....
- Bogomolny, M. (2006). The role of example-generation tasks in students’ understanding of linear algebra. Ph.D....
- et al.
Linear algebra revisited: An attempt to understand students’ conceptual difficulties
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology
(2009) Theory of didactical situations in mathematics
(1997)
Teaching linear algebra: Must the fog always roll in?
The College Mathematics Journal
The role of mathematical transformations and practice in mathematical development
Visual instruction of abstract concepts for non-major students
The International Journal of Engineering Education
Meta level in the teaching of unifying and generalizing concepts in mathematics
Educational Studies in Mathematics
The linear algebra curriculum study group recommendations for the first course in linear algebra
The College Mathematics Journal
On a research program about the teaching and learning of linear algebra in first year of French Science University
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Sciences and Technology
Research into the teaching and learning of linear algebra
Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking
ISETL: A programming language for learning mathematics
Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics
The student's construction of quantification
For the Learning of Mathematics
Some thoughts on a first course in linear algebra at the college level
On student understanding of AE and EA quantification
APOS: A constructivist theory of learning in undergraduate mathematics education research
The effects of formalism on teacher trainees’ algebraic and geometric interpretation of the notions of linear dependency/independency
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology
The language of quantification in mathematics instruction
The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance
Psychological Review
Cited by (25)
Analysis of tutors’ responses to students’ queries in a second linear algebra course at a mathematics support center
2022, Journal of Mathematical BehaviorCitation Excerpt :It is evident that industry is in need of individuals who are skillful in more advanced linear algebra, with the STEM job market heavily reliant on data science which depends on a deep appreciation of linear algebra (Stewart et al., 2022). The mathematics education research literature over the past three decades has investigated many aspects of the teaching and learning of this subject (e.g., Hillel & Sierpinska, 1994; Harel, 1999; Dorier, 2000; Thomas & Stewart, 2011; Harel, 2017; Stewart, Andrews-Larson, & Zandieh, 2019; Bouhjar, Andrews-Larson, & Haider, 2021). It is noteworthy that with some exceptions (e.g., Britton & Henderson, 2009; Stewart, Cronin, Tran, & Powers, 2022), most available literature is from first courses in linear algebra, and studies on second courses are particularly scarce.
Non-examples of problem answers in mathematics with particular reference to linear algebra
2019, Journal of Mathematical BehaviorCitation Excerpt :Harel (2008b, 2008b) introduced a comprehensive conceptual framework “which seeks to understand fundamental problems of mathematics teaching and learning” (Harel, 2013b, p. 3Harel, 2013bHarel, 2013b, p. 3). This epistemologically solid framework has already exhibited its analytical power and usefulness for designing teaching environments (e.g., Harel, 2013b, 2017). The framework has been termed with the acronym DNR, which stands for three pillar principles: duality, necessity, and repeated reasoning.
The Conceptual Validity Aspect of Pre-service Mathematics Teachers' Reasoning on Linear Algebra
2024, AIP Conference ProceedingsA study on multiple representation and self-efficacy perception in systems of linear equations
2024, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and TechnologyUndergraduate students’ conceptualization of elementary row operations in solving systems of linear equations
2023, Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education