Modes of reasoning in explanations in Australian eighth-grade mathematics textbooks

Educational Studies in Mathematics

Volumn 72, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 271-288

  Stacey, Kaye ^a   Vincent, Jill ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Mathematical explanation; Modes of reasoning; Proof schemes; Secondary mathematics; Textbooks

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893697927     PISSN: 00131954     EISSN: 15730816     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10649-009-9193-1     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Ball, D. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. The Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373-397. doi: 10. 1086/461730.
2. Blum, W., & Kirsch, A. (1991). Preformal proof: examples and reflections. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(2), 183-203. doi: 10. 1007/BF00555722.
3. Cabassut, R. (2005). Argumentation and proof in examples taken from French and German textbooks. In M. Bosch (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME4) (pp. 391-400). Spain: ERME.
4. Goswami, U. (2004). Commentary: analogical reasoning and mathematical development. In L. English (Ed.), Mathematical and analogical reasoning of young learners, pp. 169-186. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Gravemeijer, K., & Stephan, M. (2002). Emergent models as an instructional heuristic. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolizing, modeling and tool use in mathematics education, pp. 145-169. Netherlands: Kluwer.
6. Hanna, G., & de Bruyn, Y. (1999). Opportunity to learn proof in Ontario grade twelve mathematics texts. Ontario Mathematics Gazette, 37(4), 23-29.
7. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (2007). Towards comprehensive perspectives on the learning and teaching of proof. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, (pp. 805-842). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
8. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., et al. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: results from the TIMSS 1999 Video Study. Washington, DC: National Centre for Education Statistics.
9. Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10. Mason, J., & Pimm, D. (1984). Generic examples: seeing the general in the particular. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(3), 277-289. doi: 10. 1007/BF00312078.
11. Mayer, R. E., Sims, V., & Tajika, H. (1995). A comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 443-460.
12. Nelsen, R. B. (1993). Proofs without words. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
13. Nordström, K., & Löfwall, C. (2005). Proof in Swedish upper secondary school mathematics textbooks-the issue of transparency. Proceedings of the 4th congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME4), pp. 448-457. Spain: ERME.
14. Pierce, B. (1930). Civic attitudes in American school textbooks. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Polya, G. (1954). Mathematics and plausible reasoning. Voluem I: Induction and analogy in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Sierpinska, A. (1994). Understanding in mathematics. London: Falmer.
17. Stylianides, G. (2008). Investigating the guidance offered to teachers in curriculum materials: The case of proof in mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6(1), 191-215. doi: 10. 1007/s10763-007-9074-y.
18. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Watson, A. (2008). School mathematics as a special kind of mathematics. ICMI Symposium on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of ICMI, Working Group 1: Disciplinary Mathematics and School Mathematics, Rome. http://www. unige. ch/math/EnsMath/Rome2008/WG1/Papers/WATSON. pdf (accessed 04/08/08).