Providing a foundation for deductive reasoning: Students' interpretations when using dynamic geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations

Educational Studies in Mathematics

Volumn 44, Issue 1-3, 2000, Pages 55-85

  Jones, Keith ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Appropriation of learning; Computer environments; Deductive reasoning; Dynamic geometry software; Geometry; Mathematical explanation; Mathematisation; Mediation of learning; Quadrilaterals; Secondary school; Sociocultural theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 4544259846     PISSN: 00131954     EISSN: 15730816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/a:1012789201736     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Balacheff, N.: 1988a, A Study of Students' Proving Processes at the Junior High School Level, Paper presented at the 66th Annual Meeting of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Chicago, USA.
2. Balacheff, N.: 1988b, 'Aspects of proof in pupils' practice of school mathematics', in D.Pimm (ed.), Mathematics, Teachers and Children, Hodder and Stoughton, London, pp. 216-235.
3. Balacheff, N.: 1996, 'Advanced educational technology: knowledge revisited', in T.T. Liao (ed.), Advanced Educational Technology: Research Issues and Future Potential, Springer, Berlin.
4. Balacheff, N. and Sutherland, R.: 1994, 'Epistemological domain of validity of microworlds: the case of Logo and Cabri-géomètre', in R. Lewis and P. Mendelsohn (eds.), Lessons from Learning, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
5. Bartolini Bussi, M.G. and Mariotti, M.A.: 1999, 'Semiotic mediation: from history to mathematics classroom', For the Learning of Mathematics 19(2), 27-35.
6. Baulac, Y, Bellemain, F. and Laborde, J.-M.: 1988, Cabri- géomètre, Cedic-Nathan, Paris.
7. th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Valencia, Spain, vol. 2, 121-128.
8. Chazan, D.: 1993, 'Instructional implications of students' understanding of the differences between empirical verification and mathematical proof, in Judah L. Schwartz, Michal Yerushalmy and Beth Wilson (eds.), The Geometric Supposer: What is It a Case of, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J.
9. Chazan, D. and Yerushalmy, M.: 1998, 'Charting a course for secondary geometry', in R. Lehrer and D. Chazan, Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry and Space, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 67-90.
10. Choi koh, S.S.: 1999, 'A student's learning of geometry using the computer', The Journal of Educational Research 92(5), 301-311.
11. de Villiers, M.: 1990, 'The role and function of proof in mathematics', Pythagoras 24, 17-24.
12. de Villiers, M.: 1994, 'The role and function of a hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals', For the Learning of Mathematics 14(1), 11-18.
13. de Villiers, M.: 1998, 'An alternative approach to proof in dynamic geometry', in R. Lehrer and D. Chazan, Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry and Space, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 369-393.
14. Dreyfus, T.: 1999, 'Why Johnny can't prove', Educational Studies in Mathematics 38(1-3), 85-109.
15. Dreyfus, T. and Hadas, N.: 1996, 'Proof as answer to the question why', Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik 28(1), 1-5.
16. Duval, R.: 1998, 'Geometry from a cognitive point of view', in C. Mammana and V. Villani (eds.) Perspectives on the Teaching of Geometry for the 21st Century, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 37-51.
17. Edwards, L.D.: 1997, 'Exploring the territory before proof: students' generalizations in a computer microworld for transformation geometry', International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 2(3), 187-215.
18. Fuys, D., Geddes, D., and Tischer, R.: 1988, The van Hiele Model of Thinking in Geometry Among Adolescents, Va. National Council of teachers of Mathematics, Reston.
19. Gattegno, C: 1988, The Awareness of Mathematization, Educational Solutions (also available as chapters 10-12 of Science of Education, part 2B), New York.
20. Goldenberg, E.P. and Cuoco, A.A.: 1998, 'What is dynamic geometry', in R. Lehrer and D. Chazan, Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry and Space, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 351-367.
21. Gutiérrez, A., Jaime, A. and Fortuny, J.M.: 1991, 'An alternative paradigm to evaluate the acquisition of the van Hiele levels', Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 22(3), 237-251.
22. Hanna, G.: 1990, 'Some pedagogical aspects of proof', Interchange 21(1), 6-13.
23. Hanna, G.: 1998, 'Proof as understanding in geometry', Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 20(2&3), 4-13.
24. Hanna, G. and Jahnke, H.N.: 1996, 'Proof and proving', in A.J. Bishop (ed.), International Handbook on Mathematics Education, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
25. Healy, L., Hoelzl, R., Hoyles, C. and Noss, R. (1994), 'Messing up'. Micromath 10(1), 14-16.
26. Hershkowitz, R.: 1990, 'Psychological aspects of learning geometry', in P. Nesher and J. Kilpatrick (eds.), Mathematics and Cognition, CUP, Cambridge, pp. 70-95.
27. Hoyles, C: 1995, 'Exploratory software, exploratory cultures?', in A.A. DiSessa, C. Hoyles and R. Noss with L.D. Edwards (eds.), Computers and Exploratory Learning, Springer, Berlin, pp. 199-219.
28. Hoyles, C: 1997, 'The curricular shaping of students' approaches to proof', For the Learning of Mathematics 17(1), 7-16.
29. Hoyles, C. and Jones, K.: 1998, 'Proof in dynamic geometry contexts', in C. Mammana and V. Villani (eds.), Perspectives on the Teaching of Geometry for the 21st Century, Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 121-128.
30. Hoyles, C. and Noss, R. (eds.): 1992, Learning Mathematics and Logo, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
31. Hölzl, R.: 1995, 'Between drawing and figure', in R. Sutherland and J. Mason (eds.), Exploiting Mental Imagery with Computers in Mathematics Education, Springer, Berlin.
32. Hölzl, R.: 1996, 'How does "dragging" affect the learning of geometry', International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 1(2), 169-187.
33. Hölzl, R., Healy, L., Hoyles, C. and Noss, R.: 1994, 'Geometrical relationships and dependencies in Cabri', Micromath 10(3), 8-11.
34. th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Valencia, Spain, Volume 3, pp. 145-152.
35. st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Finland, University of Helsinki, Volume 3, pp. 121-128.
36. nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch, Volume 3, pp. 96-103.
37. Laborde, C.: 1992, 'Solving problems in computer-based geometry environment: the influence of the features of the software', Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik 24(4), 128-135.
38. Laborde, C.: 1993a, 'The computer as part of the learning environment; The case of geometry', in C. Keitel and K. Ruthven (eds.), Learning from Computers: Mathematics Education and Technology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
39. Laborde, C.: 1993b, 'Do the pupils learn and what do they learn in a computer based environment? The case of Cabri-géomètre', in B. Jaworski (ed.) Proceedings of the 1993 Technology in Mathematics Teaching Conference, University of Birmingham, UK, pp. 39-52.
40. Laborde, C. and Laborde, J.-M.: 1995, 'What about a learning environment where Euclidean concepts are manipulated with a mouse?', in A.A. DiSessa, C. Hoyles and R. Noss with L.D. Edwards (eds.), Computers and Exploratory Learning, Springer, Berlin.
41. Maher, C.A. and Martino, A.M.: 1996, 'The development of the idea of mathematical proof: a 5-year case study', Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 27(2), 194-214.
42. nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Stellenbosch, South Africa: University of Stellenbosch, Volume 3, pp. 180-195.
43. th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Recife, Brazil. Vol 1, pp. 102-111.
44. Noss, R., Healy, L., Hoyles, C. and Hoelzl, R.: 1994, 'Constructing meanings for construction', in J.P. da Ponte and J.F. Matos (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Lisbon, Portugal, Volume 3, pp. 360-367.
45. Noss, R. and Hoyles, C.: 1996, Windows on Mathematical Meanings: learning cultures and computers, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
46. Pea, R.D.: 1987, 'Cognitive technologies for mathematics education', in A.H. Schoenfeld (ed.), Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J., pp. 89-122.
47. Pea, R.D.: 1993, 'Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education', in G. Salomon (ed.), Distributed Cognitions: psychological and educational considerations, CUP, Cambridge, pp. 47-87.
48. Pratt, D. and Ainley, J.: 1996, 'The construction of meaning for geometrical constructions: two contrasting cases', International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 1(3), 293-322.
49. Senk, S.L.: 1989, 'Van Hiele levels and achievement in writing geometry proofs', Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(3), 309-321.
50. Treffers, A.: 1987, Three Dimensions: A Model of Goal and Theory Description in Mathematics Instruction, the Wiskobas Project, Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht.
51. Usiskin, Z.: 1982, Van Hiele Levels and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry, University of Chicago, Chicago, Il.
52. van Hiele, P.M.: 1986, Structure and Insight: a theory of mathematics education, Academic Press, Orlando, Fla.
53. Wertsch, J.V.: 1991, Voices of the Mind: a sociocultural approach to mediated action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma.
54. Wertsch, J.V.: 1998, Mind as Action, Oxford University Press, New York.
55. Wheeler, D.: 1982, 'Mathematization matters', For the Learning of Mathematics, 3(1), 45-47.
56. st Conference of the International on the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Lahti, Finland, Vol. 4, pp. 291-298.