The role of multiple solution tasks in developing knowledge and creativity in geometry

Journal of Mathematical Behavior

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 73-90

  Levav Waynberg, Anat ^a   Leikin, Roza ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

Author keywords

Geometry knowledge; Mathematical creativity; Multiple solution tasks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84155172312     PISSN: 07323123     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.11.001     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Anderson J.R. The adaptive character of thought 1990, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum.
2. Askew M. Policy, practices and principles in teaching numeracy: What makes a difference?. Issues in mathematics teaching 2001, 105-119. Routledge Falmer, London, GB. P. Gates (Ed.).
3. Chazan D. High school geometry students' justifications for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics 1993, 24:359-387.
4. Christou C., Mousoulides N., Pittalis M., Pitta-Pantazi D. Proofs through exploration in dynamic geometry environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 2004, 2:339-352.
5. Clements D.H. Teaching and learning geometry. A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics 2003, 151-173. NCTM, Reston, VA. J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin, D. Schifter (Eds.).
6. Clements D.H., Battista M.T. Geometry and spatial reasoning. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning 1992, 420-464. Macmillan, New York, NY. D.A. Grouws (Ed.).
7. De Villiers M. Using dynamic geometry to expend mathematics teachers' understanding of proof. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 2004, 35:703-724.
8. Dhombres J. Is one proof enough? Travels with a mathematician of the baroque period. Educational Studies in Mathematics 1993, 24:401-419.
9. Elia I., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen M., Kolovou A. Exploring strategy use and strategy flexibility in non-routine problem solving by primary school high achievers in mathematics. ZDM 2009, 41:605-618.
10. Ervynck G. Mathematical creativity. Advanced mathematical thinking 1991, 42-53. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. D. Tall (Ed.).
11. Hanna G. The ongoing value of proof. Paper presented at the PME 20 1996, retrieved from: http://fcis.oise.utoronto.ca/ghanna/pme96prf.html.
12. Hansen V.L. General considerations on curricula designs in geometry. Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century 1998, 235-242. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. C. Mammana, V. Villani (Eds.).
13. Haylock D.W. A framework for assessing mathematical creativity in schoolchildren. Educational Studies in Mathematics 1987, 18:59-74.
14. Heinz A., Star J.R., Verschaffel L. Flexible and adaptive use of strategies and representations in mathematics education. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education 2009, 41:535-540.
15. Herbst P. Engaging students in proving: A double bind on the teacher. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2002, 33:176-203.
16. Herbst P., Brach C. Proving and doing proofs in high school geometry classes: What is it that is going on for students?. Cognition and Instruction 2006, 24:73-122.
17. Hershkowitz R. Psychological aspects of learning geometry. Mathematics and cognition 1990, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA. J. Kilpatric, P. Nesher (Eds.).
18. Hiebert J., Carpenter T.P. Learning and teaching with understanding. Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning 1992, 65-97. Macmillan, New York, NY. D.A. Ggrouws (Ed.).
19. House P.A., Coxford A.F. Connecting mathematics across the curriculum: 1995 yearbook 1995, NCTM, Reston, VA.
20. Kieren T.E. Understanding for teaching for understanding. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research 1990, XXXVI:191-201.
21. Krutetskii V.A. The psychology of mathematical abilities in schoolchildren 1976, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. J. Kilpatrick, I. Wirszup (Eds.).
22. Kwon O.N., Park J.S., Park J.H. Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia Pacific Education Review 2006, 7:51-61.
23. Lawson M.J., Chinnappan M. Knowledge connectedness in geometry problem solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 2000, 31:26-43.
24. Lehrer R., Chazan D. Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space 1998, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
25. Leikin R. Problem-solving preferences of mathematics teachers: Focusing on symmetry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 2003, 6:297-329.
26. Leikin R. Habits of mind associated with advanced mathematical thinking and solution spaces of mathematical tasks. The fifth conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education - CERME-5 2007.
27. Leikin R. Exploring mathematical creativity using multiple solution tasks. Creativity in mathematics and the education of gifted students 2009, 129-145. Sense Publisher, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, (Chapter 9). R. Leikin, A. Berman, B. Koichu (Eds.).
28. Leikin R., Levav-Waynberg A. Exploring mathematics teacher knowledge to explain the gap between theory-based recommendations and school practice in the use of connecting tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics 2007, 66:349-371.
29. Leikin R., Levav-Waynberg A. Solution spaces of multiple-solution connecting tasks as a mirror of the development of mathematics teachers' knowledge. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education 2008, 8(3):233-251.
30. Leikin R., Levav-Waynberg A. Development of teachers' conceptions through learning and teaching: Meaning and potential of multiple-solution tasks. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education 2009, 9(4):203-223.
31. Leikin R., Levav-Waynberg A., Gurevich I., Mednikov L. Implementation of multiple solution connecting tasks: Do students' attitudes support teachers' reluctance?. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 2006, 28:1-22.
32. Levav-Waynberg A., Leikin R. Multiple solutions to a problem: A tool for assessment of mathematical thinking in geometry. The sixth conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education - CERME-6 2009.
33. Levav-Waynberg, A., & Leikin, R. Using multiple solution tasks for the evaluation of students' problem-solving performance in geometry. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, accepted.
34. Liljedahl P., Sriraman B. Musings on mathematical creativity. For the learning of mathematics 2006, Vol. 26. pp. 17-19.
35. Lithner J. A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics 2008, 67:255-276.
36. Mann E.L. Creativity: The essence of mathematics. Journal for the Education of the Gifted 2006, 30:236-260.
37. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA.
38. Neubrand M. General tendencies in the development of geometry teaching in the past two decades. Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century 1998, 226-228. Kluwer, Dordrecht, Netherlands. C. Mammana, V. Villani (Eds.).
39. Poincaré H. Science and method 1948, Dover, New York.
40. Polya G. On learning, teaching, and learning teaching. American Mathematical Monthly 1963, 70:605-619.
41. Polya G. How to solve it; A new aspect of mathematical method 1973, Princeton University Press.
42. Polya G. Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning and teaching problem solving 1981, Wiley, New York.
43. Schoenfeld A.H. Problem solving in the mathematics curriculum: A report, recommendations, and an annotated bibliography 1983, The Mathematical Association of America.
44. Schoenfeld A.H. Mathematical problem solving 1985, Academic Press, New York.
45. Schoenfeld A.H. When good teaching leads to bad results: The disasters of well-taught mathematics courses. Educational Psychologist 1988, 23:145-166.
46. Schoenfeld H.A. What do we know about mathematics curricula?. Journal of Mathematical Behaviour 1994, 13:55-80.
47. Sfard A. On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics 1991, 22:1-36.
48. Sierpinska A. Understanding in mathematics 1994, Falmer, Washington, DC.
49. Silver E.A. Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. ZDM-Zentralblatt fuer Didaktik der Mathematik 1997, 3:75-80.
50. Skemp R.R. The psychology of learning mathematics 1987, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
51. Sriraman B. Are giftedness and creativity synonyms in mathematics?. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education 2005, 1:20-36.
52. Sriraman B. The characteristics of mathematical creativity. ZDM 2009, 41:13-27.
53. Star J.R., Newton J.K. The nature and development of experts' strategy flexibility for solving equations. ZDM 2009, 41:557-567.
54. Star J.R., Rittle-Johnson B. Flexibility in problem solving: The case of equation solving. Learning and Instruction 2008, 18:565-579.
55. Star J.R., Rittle-Johnson B. It pays to compare: An experimental study on computational estimation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 2009, 102:408-426.
56. Stigler J.W., Hiebert J. The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education in the classroom 1999, The Free Press, New York, NY.
57. Torbeyns J., De Smedt B., Ghesquière P., Verschaffel L. Jump or compensate? Strategy flexibility in the number domain up to 100. ZDM 2009, 41:581-590.
58. Torrance E.P. The torrance tests of creative thinking. Technical-norms manual 1974, Scholastic Testing Services, Benseville, IL.
59. Vinner S. Avoidance of visual considerations in calculus students. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 1989, 11:149-156.
60. Vygotsky L.S. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes 1978, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, Published originally in Russian in 1930.
61. Yakes C., Star J.R. Using comparison to develop flexibility for teaching algebra. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 2009, retrieved from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/v21k817n9168x842/fulltext.pdf.
62. Zazkis R., Leikin R. Exemplifying definitions: Example generation for the analysis of mathematics knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics 2008, 69:131-148.