Abstract
As a key objective, secondary school mathematics teachers seek to improve the proof skills of students. In this paper we present an analytic framework to describe and analyze students' answers to proof problems. We employ this framework to investigate ways in which dynamic geometry software can be used to improve students' understanding of the nature of mathematical proof and to improve their proof skills. We present the results of two case studies where secondary school students worked with Cabri-Géeomèetre to solve geometry problems structured in a teaching unit. The teaching unit had theaims of: i) Teaching geometric concepts and properties, and ii) helping students to improve their conception of the nature of mathematical proof and to improve their proof skills. By applying the framework defined here, we analyze students' answers to proof problems, observe the types of justifications produced, and verify the usefulness of learning in dynamicgeometry computer environments to improve students' proof skills.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Arzarello, F. et al.: 1998a, ‘A model for analysing the transition to formal proofs in geometry', Proceedings of the 22nd PME International Conference Vol. 2, Stellenbosch, Rep. of South Africa, pp. 24–31.
Arzarello, F. et al.: 1998b, ‘Dragging in Cabri and modalities of transition from conjectures to proofs in geometry', Proceedings of the 22nd PME International Conference Vol. 2, Stellenbosch, Rep. of South Africa, pp. 32–39.
Balacheff, N.: 1987, ‘Processus de preuve et situations de validation', Educational Studies in Mathematics 18, 147–176.
Balacheff, N.: 1988a, Une Étude des Processus de Preuve en Mathématique chez des Élèves de Collège, 2 vols, Univ. J. Fourier, Grenoble (France).
Balacheff, N.: 1988b, ‘Aspects of proof in pupils’ practice of school mathematics', in D. Pimm (ed.), Mathematics, Teachers and Children, Hodder & Stoughton, London, pp. 216–235.
Baulac, Y., Bellemain, F. and Laborde, J.M.: 1988, Cabri-géomètre, un logiciel d'aide à l'enseignement de la géométrie, Cedic-Nathan, Paris.
Bell, A.W.: 1976a, The Learning of General Mathematical Strategies (Doctoral Dissertation), Shell Center for Mathematical Education, Nottingham (U.K.).
Bell, A.W.: 1976b, ‘A study of pupil's proof-explanations in mathematical situations', Educational Studies in Mathematics 7(1), 23–40.
Chazan, D.: 1993, ‘High school geometry students’ justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof', Educational Studies in Mathematics 24, 359–387.
Clements, D.H. and Battista, M.T.: 1992, ‘Geometry and spatial reasoning', in D.A. Grouws (ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, Mac-Millan, New York, pp. 420–464.
De Villiers, M.: 1990, ‘The role and function of proof in mathematics', Pythagoras 24, 17–24.
De Villiers, M.: 1991, ‘Pupils’ needs for conviction and explanation within the context of geometry', Pythagoras 26, 18–27.
De Villiers, M.: 1996, Some Adventures in Euclidean Geometry, Univ. of Durban-Westville, Durban (Rep. of South Africa).
De Villiers, M.: 1998, ‘An alternative approach to proof in dynamic geometry', in R. Lehrer and D. Chazan (eds.), Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry and Space, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (USA), pp. 369–393.
Hanna, G.: 1995, ‘Challenges to the importance of proof', For the Learning of Mathematics 15(3), 42–49.
Harel, G. and Sowder, L.: 1996, ‘Classifying processes of proving', Proceedings of the 20th PME International Conference Vol. 3, Valencia, Spain, pp. 59–66.
Healy, L.: 2000, ‘Identifying and explaining geometrical relationship: Interactions with robust and soft Cabri constructions', Proceedings of the 24th PME International Conference Vol. 1, Hiroshima, Japan, pp. 103–117.
Laborde, C. and Capponi, B.: 1994, ‘Cabri-Géomètre constituant d'un milieu pour l'apprentissage de la notion de figure géométrique', Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques 14(1/2), 165–209.
Malone, J.A., Atweh, B. and Northfield, J.R. (eds.): 1998, Research and Supervision in Mathematics and Science Education, Lawrence Erlbaum, London.
Mariotti, M.A. et al.: 1997, ‘Approaching geometry theorems in context: From history and epistemology to cognition', Proceedings of the 21st PME International Conference Vol. 1, Lahti, Finland, pp. 180–195.
Noss, R., Hoyles, C., Healy, L. and Hoelz, R.: 1994, ‘Constructing meanings for constructing: an exploratory study with Cabri Géomètre', Proceedings of the 18th PME International Conference Vol. 3, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 360–367.
Parzysz, B.: 1988, ‘“Knowing” vs “seeing”. Problems of the plane representation of space geometry figures', Educational Studies in Mathematics 19, 79–92.
Polya, G.: 1981, Mathematical Discovery, John Wiley, New York.
Senk, S.L.: 1985, ‘How well do students write geometry proofs?', The Mathematics Teacher 78(6), 448–456.
Senk, S.L.: 1989, ‘Van Hiele levels and achievement in writing geometry proofs', Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 20(3), 309–321.
Serra, M.: 1989, Discovering Geometry. An Inductive Approach, Key Curriculum Press, Berkeley (USA).
Sowder, L. and Harel, G.: 1998, ‘Types of students’ justifications', The Mathematics Teacher 91(8), 670–675.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marrades, R., Gutiérrez, Á. Proofs produced by secondary school students learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics 44, 87–125 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012785106627
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012785106627