Connections between generalizing and justifying: Students' reasoning with linear relationships

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 38, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 194-229

  Ellis, Amy B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Algebra; Conceptual knowledge; Constructivism; Learning; Middle grades, 5 8; Patterns relationships in mathematics; Proof; Qualitative methods

Indexed keywords

EID: 34248512314     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K., & Pelletier, R. (l 995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
2. Bassok, M., & Holyoak, K. (1993). Pragmatic knowledge and conceptual structure: Determinants of transfer between quantitative domains. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 68-98). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishers.
3. Andrew, P. (1995). Proof in secondary mathematics: The necessary place of the concrete. Mathematics in School, 24, 40-42.
4. Blanton, M., & Kaput, J. (2000, October). Generalizing and progressively formalizing in a third- grade mathematics classroom: Conversations about even and odd numbers. In M. L. Fernandez (Ed.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 115-119). Columbus, OH: The ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
5. Blanton, M., & Kaput, J. (2002, April). Developing elementary teachers' algebra "eyes and ears": Understanding characteristics of professional development that promote generative and self-sustaining change in teacher practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
6. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 24, pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
7. Carpenter, T., & Franke, M. (2001). Developing algebraic reasoning in the elementary school: Generalization and proof. In H. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference: The future of the teaching and learning of algebra (pp. 155-162). Melbourne, Australia: The University of Melbourne.
8. Carpenter, T., & Levi, L. (2000). Developing conceptions of algebraic reasoning in the primary grades. Research Report #002. Madison, WI: National Center for Improving Student Learning and Achievement in Mathematics and Science. Retrieved August 15, 2005 from http://www.wisc.wcer. edu/ncisla
9. Chazan, D. (1993). High school geometry students' justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 359-387.
10. Cobb, P., & Steffe, L. P. (1983). The constructivist researcher as teacher and model builder. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 258-277.
11. Coe, R., & Ruthven, K. ( 1994). Proof practices and constructs of advanced mathematics students. British Educational Research Journal, 2, 41-53.
12. Coxford, A. F., Fey, J. T., Schoen, H. L., Burrill, G., Hart, E. W., Watkins, A. E., et al. (1998). Contemporary mathematics in context. Chicago: Everyday Learning Corporation.
13. Curcio, F., Nimerofsky, B., Perez, R., & Yaloz, S. (1997). Exploring patterns in nonroutine problems. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 2, 262-269.
14. Davydov, D. D. (1990). Soviet studies in mathematics education: Vol. 2. Types of generalization in instruction: Logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school curricula. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
15. Dreyfus, T. (1991 ). Advanced mathematical thinking processes. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 25-41). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
16. Dreyfus, T., Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. (2001). The construction of abstract knowledge in interaction. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 377-384). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute.
17. Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 95-123). Dordrecht. The Netherlands: Kluwer.
18. Ellis, A. B. (in press). A taxonomy for categorizing generalizations: Generalizing actions and reflection generalizations. Journal of the Learning Sciences.
19. English, L., & Warren, E. ( 1995). General reasoning processes and elementary algebraic understanding: Implications for instruction. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 17(4), 1-19.
20. Epp, S. (1998). A unified framework for proof and disproof. Mathematics Teacher, 91, 708-713.
21. Fitzgerald, F. (1996). Proof in mathematics education. Journal of Education, 178, 35-45.
22. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine Publishing Company.
23. Greeno, J. G., Smith, D. R., & Moore, J. L. (1993). Transfer of situated learning. In D. K. Detterman & R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Transfer on trial: Intelligence, cognition, and instruction (pp. 99-167). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishers.
24. Harel, G. (2006). Students' proof schemes revisited. In P. Boero (Ed.), Theorems in school: From history, epistemology and cognition to classroom practice (pp. 61-72). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
25. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students' proof schemes. In E. Dubinsky, A. Schoenfeld, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Research on collegiate mathematics education (Vol. III, pp. 234-283). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
26. Harel, G., & Tall, D. ( 1991 ). The general, the abstract, and the generic. For the Learning of Mathematics, 11(1), 38-42.
27. Hoyles, C. (1997). The curricular shaping of students' approaches to proof. For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 7-16.
28. Jurow, A. S. (2004). Generalizing in interaction: Middle school mathematics students making mathematical generalizations in a population-modeling project. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11, 279-300.
29. Kaput, J. (1999). Teaching and learning a new algebra with understanding. In E. Fennema, & T. Romberg (Eds.), Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 133-155). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390-419). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.
31. Knuth, E., & Elliott, R. (1998). Characterizing students' understandings of mathematical proof. Mathematics Teacher, 91, 714-717.
32. Knuth, E., Slaughter, M., Choppin, J., & Sutherland, J. (2002). Mapping the conceptual terrain of middle school students' competencies in justifying and proving. In D. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, D. White, H. Wiegel, R. Bryant, & K. Noony (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 1693-1700). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
33. Koedinger, K. R. (1998). Conjecturing and argumentation in high school geometry students. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 319-347). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Lannin, J. K. (2005). Generalization and justification: The challenge of introducing algebraic reasoning through patterning activities. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7, 231-258.
35. Lappan, G., Fey, J., Fitzgerald, W., Friel, S., & Phillips, E. (1998). Connected mathematics project. Ann Arbor, MI: Dale Seymour Publications.
36. Lee, L. (1996). An initiation into algebraic culture through generalization activities. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.), Approaches to algebra (pp. 87-106). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
37. Lee, L., & Wheeler, D. ( 1987). Algebraic thinking in high school students: Their conceptions of generalization and justification (Research Report). Montreal, Canada: Concordia University, Department of Mathematics.
38. Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa. Educational Researcher. 32(1), 17-20.
39. Lobato, J. (in press). Research methods for alternative approaches to transfer: Implications for design experiments. In A. Kelly, & R. Lesh (Eds), Design research in education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Lobato, J., Ellis, A. B., & Muñoz, R. (2003). How "focusing phenomena" in the instructional environment afford students' generalizations. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(3), 1-36.
41. Lobato, J., & Siebert, D. (2002). Quantitative reasoning in a reconceived view of transfer. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, 87-116.
42. Lobato, J., & Thanheiser, E. (2000). Using technology to promote and examine students' construction of ratio-as-measure. In M. L. Fernández (Ed.), Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 371 -377). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
43. Lobato, J., & Thanheiser, E. (2002). Developing understanding of ratio and measure as a foundation for slope. In B. Litwiller & G. Bright (Eds.), Making sense of fractions, ratios, and proportions: 2002 yearbook (pp. 162-175). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
44. McConnell, J. W., Brown, S., Usiskin, Z., Senk, S. L., Widerski, T., Anderson, S., et al. (1998). Everyday mathematics: UCSMP algebra. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman/Addison Wesley.
45. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
46. Orton, A., & Orton, J. (1994). Students' perception and use of pattern and generalization. In J. P. da Ponto & J. F. Matos (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. III, pp. 407-414). Lisbon, Portugal: PME Program Committee.
47. Otte, M. (1994). Mathematical knowledge and the problem of proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 299-321.
48. Pegg, J., & Redden, E. (1990). Procedures for, and experiences in, introducing algebra in New South Wales. Mathematics Teacher, 83, 386-391.
49. Peirce, C. M. (1878). Deduction, induction, and hypothesis. Popular Science Monthly, 13, 470-482.
50. Petocz, P., & Petocz, D. (1997). Pattern and proof: The art of mathematical thinking. The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 53(3), 12-17.
51. Piaget, J. (2001). Studies in reflecting abstraction. R. Campbell, (Ed.). Sussex: Psychology Press.
52. Radford, L. ( 1996). Some reflections on teaching algebra through generalization. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.), Approaches to algebra (pp. 107-111). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
53. RAND Mathematics Study Panel (2002). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. (Report No. DRU-2773-OERI). Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
54. Reid, D. (2002). Conjectures and refutations in grade 5 mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33, 5-29.
55. Roschelle, J., & Kaput, J. J. (1996). SimCalc Mathworlds for the Mathematics of Change. Communications of the ACM, 39(8), 97-99.
56. Schliemann, A. D., Carraher, D. W., & Brizuela, B. M. (2001). When tables become function tables. Proceedings of the 25th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 145-152). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
57. Singley, M. K., & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
58. Stacey, K. ( 1989). Finding and using patterns in linear generalising problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 147-164.
59. Stacey, K., & MacGregor, M. (1997). Building foundations for algebra. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 2, 253-260.
60. Steffe, L., & Izsak, A. (2002). Pre-service middle-school teachers' construction of linear equation concepts through quantitative reasoning. In D. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, D. White, H. Wiegel, R. Bryant, & K. Noony (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 1163-1172).
61. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education. Strauss, A., & Corbin, C. ( 1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
62. Szombathely, A., & Szarvas, T. ( 1998). Ideas for developing students' reasoning: A Hungarian perspective. Mathematics Teacher, 91, 677-681.
63. Thompson, P. W. (1988). Quantitative concepts as a foundation for algebra. In M. Behr (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 163-170). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
64. Tuomi-Gröhn, T., & Engeström, Y. (2003). Between school and work: New perspectives on transfer and boundary crossing. Amsterdam: Pergamon.
65. Usiskin, Z. (1987). Resolving the continuing dilemmas in school geometry. In M. Lindquist & A. Shulte (Eds.), Learning and teaching geometry, K-12 (pp. 17-31). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.