Research in Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Global van Hiele (GVH) Questionnaire as a Tool for Mapping Knowledge and Understanding of Plane and Solid Geometry

  • Patkin, Dorit (Mathematics Department, Kibbutzim College of Education Technology and the Arts)
  • Received : 2013.12.03
  • Accepted : 2014.06.27
  • Published : 2014.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper presents the Global van Hiele (GVH) questionnaire as a tool for mapping knowledge and understanding of plane and solid geometry. The questionnaire facilitates identification of the respondents' mastery of the first three levels of thinking according to van Hiele theory with regard to key geometrical topics. Teacher-educators can apply this questionnaire for checking preliminary knowledge of mathematics teaching candidates or pre-service teachers. Moreover, it can be used when planning a course or granting exemption from studying in basic geometry courses. The questionnaire can also serve high school mathematics teachers who are interested in exposing their students to multiple-choice questions in geometry.

Keywords

References

  1. Ben-Menachem, O. & Sela, L. (2005). Integrating the test in the assessment culture. Eureka 21, 32-36. [Hebrew]
  2. Cohen, N. (2007). Analytical-visual combination in the performance of assignments in space-Analysis of thinking processes of pre-and in-service teachers. Ph.D. Thesis. Beer-Sheba, Israel: Ben Gurion University of the Negev. [Hebrew]
  3. Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In: G. Douglas (Ed.). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, (pp. 420-464), New York: Macmillan.
  4. Crowley, M. L. (1987). Van Hiele Model of the Development of Geometrical Thought. In: M. Montgomery Lindquist, & A. P. Shulte (Eds.), Learning and Teaching Geometry, K-12, (pp. 1-16), 1987 Yearbook of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM), Reston, VA.: NCTM, 1987.
  5. Friedlander, A. (1988). Principles in the teaching of Euclidian geometry. In: A. Friedlander (Ed,), Teaching geometry-Collection of sources and activities for methodics lessons (pp. 149-219), Rehovoth: Weizmann Institute of Science, Department of Sciences Teaching. [Hebrew]
  6. Geddes, D.; Fuys, D.; Lovett, J. C. & Tischler, R. (1982). An Investigation of the Van Hiele Model of Thinking in Geometry Among Adolescents. Project Report, presented at NCTM 1982 Annual Meeting, Toronto, Canada.
  7. Geddes, D.; Fuys, D.; Lovett, J. C. & Tischler, R. (1985). An investigation of the van Hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. Final report. Research in science education (RISE) program of the National Science Foundation, Grant no. SED 7920640, Washington, D.C.: National Science Foundation
  8. Guberman, R. (2008). A framework for characterizing the development of arithmetic thinking. In: Proceedings of ICME-11-Topic study group 10, Research and development in the teaching and learning of number systems and arithmetic. Monterrey, Mexico. (pp. 113-121).
  9. Gutierrez, A. (1992). Exploring the links between van Hiele levels and 3-dimensional geometry. Topologie Struct. 18, 31-48. ME 1995a.00083
  10. Gutierrez, A.; Jaime, A. & Fortuny, J. M., (1991). An alternative paradigm to evaluate the acquisition of the van Hiele levels. J. Res. Math. Educ. 22(3), 237-251. ME 1992a.00854 https://doi.org/10.2307/749076
  11. Halat, E. & Sahin, O. (2008). Van Hiele levels of pre-and in-service Turkish elementary school teachers and gender related differences in geometry. Math. Educ. 11(1-2), 143-158. ME 2012f.00713
  12. Hoffer, A. R. (1979). Geometry: a model of the universe. Menlo Park, Calif.: Addison-Wesley.
  13. Hoffer, A. R. (1981). Geometry is more than a proof. Math. Teacher. 74(1), 11-18. ME 1981x.01699
  14. Hoffer, A. R. (1983). Van-Hiele based research. In: R. Lesh & M.Landau (Eds.), Acquisition of Mathematics Concepts and Processes. New York, NY: Academic Press. ME 1985d.02153
  15. Koester, B. A. (2003). Prisms and pyramids: Constructing three-dimensional models to build understanding. Teach. Child. Math. 9(8), 436-442. ME 2003f.05035
  16. Levi, A. (1969). Computerised summary of test results. Jerusalem, Israel: Ministry of Education and Culture, Curricula Unit. [Hebrew]
  17. Patkin, D. (1990). The utilization of computers: Its influence on individualized learning, pair versus individualistic learning. On the perception and comprehension of concepts in Euclidean geometry at various cognitive levels within high school students. Doctoal dissertation, Tel-Aviv, Israel: Tel-Aviv University. [Hebrew]
  18. Patkin, D. (2010). The role of "personal knowledge" in solid geometry among primary school mathematics teachers. J. Korea Soc. Math. Educ. Ser. D 14(3), 263-279.
  19. Patkin, D. & Levenberg, I. (2004) Geometry-Part II for junior high and high school, (2nd ed.). Israel, Holon : Rachgold Press. [Hebrew]
  20. Patkin, D. & Levenberg, I. (2010) Geometry-Part I for junior high and high school, (2nd ed.). Published by the authors. [Hebrew]
  21. Patkin, D. & Sarfaty, Y. (2012). The effect of solid geometry activities of pre-service elementary school mathematics teachers on concepts understanding and mastery of geometric thinking levels. J. Korean Soc. Math. Educ., Ser. D, Res. Math. Educ. 16 (1),.31-50.
  22. Patkin, D., & Barkai, R. (in press). Geometric Thinking Levels of Pre-and In-Service Mathematics Teachers at Various Levels of their Education. In: D. Patkin & A. Gazit (Eds.), The Narrative of Mathematics Teachers-Elementary School Mathematics Teachers' Features of Education, Knowledge, Teaching and Personality. Israel, Tel-Aviv, Moffet Institute Press.
  23. Piaget, J. (1969) The intellectual development of the adolescent. In: A. H. Esman (Ed.), The Psychology of Adolescence (1985). NewYork, NY: International Universities Press.
  24. Pyshkalo, A. M. (1968). Geometry in Grades 1-4: Problems in the Formations of Geometric Conceptions in Pupils in the Primary Grades. (Trans. 1981 by Recent East European Mathematical Literature of the University of Chicago, I. Wirszup, Ed.) Moscow: Prosveshchenie Publishing
  25. Reingold, O. (1986). The effect of stimulation means by using the computer as an 'electronic board' by the knowledge and understanding of concepts in formal geometry. M.A. dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, School of Education. [Hebrew]
  26. Senk, S. L. (1983). Proof-writing Achievement and van Hiele levels among secondary school geometry students. Ph.D. dissertation, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
  27. Senk, S. L. (1985).How well do students write geometry proofs? Mathematics Teacher, 78(6), 448-456. ME 1986x.00184
  28. Senk, S. L. & Usiskin, Z. (1983). Geometry proof-writing: A new view of differences in mathe matical ability. American Journal of Education 91 (2), 187-201. https://doi.org/10.1086/443680
  29. Tepper, A. (1986). Effect of colour in computer-aided teaching and its influence on the comprehension of concepts in Euclidian geometry. M.A. dissertation, Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University, School of Education. [Hebrew]
  30. Teppo, A. (1991). Van Hiele levels of geometric thought revisited. Math. Teacher. 84(3), 210-220. ME 1991g.37100
  31. Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele levels and achievement in secondary school geometry. Final report of the Cognitive Development and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry-CDASSG Project. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED220288).
  32. Van Hiele, P. M. (1959). La pensee de l'enfant et la Geometrie. Bulletin de l'Association des Professeurs de Mathematiques de l'Enseignement Public 198, 199-205.
  33. Van Hiele, P. M. (1987). Van-Hiele levels, A method to facilitate the finding of levels of thinking in geometry by using the levels in arithmetic. Paper presented at the conference on learning and teaching geometry: Issues for research and practice. Syracuse University.
  34. Van Hiele, P. M. (1999). Developing geometric thinking through activities that begin with play. Teach. Child. Math. 5(6), 310-316. ME 2000b.01169
  35. Wirszup, I. (1976). Breakthroughs in the psychology of learning and teaching geometry. In: J. I. Martin & D. A. Bradbard (Eds.), Space and geometry: Papers from a research workshop. (pp. 75-97). Columbus, Ohio: ERIC Center for Science, Mathematics and Environment Education.

Cited by

  1. Procedural and relational understanding of pre-service mathematics teachers regarding spatial perception of angles in pyramids pp.1464-5211, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1480808