Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7858/eamj.2013.010

Middle School Mathematics Teachers' Responses to a Student's Mistaken Mathematical Conjecture and Justification  

Kim, Young-Ok (Department of Mathematics Education Kyungnam University)
Publication Information
Abstract
The purpose of the study was to investigate the reality of middle school mathematics teachers' subject matter knowledge for teaching mathematical conjecture and justification. Data in the study were collected through interviewing nine Chinese and ten Korean middle school mathematics teachers. The teachers responded to the question that was designed in the form of a scenario that presents a teaching task related to a geometrical topic. The teachers' oral responses were audiotaped and transcribed, and their written notes were collected. The results of the study were compared to the analysis of American and Chinese elementary and secondary teachers' responses to the same task in Ball (1988) and Ma (1999). The findings of the study suggested that teachers' approaches to explaining and demonstrating a mathematical topic were significantly influenced by their knowledge of learners and knowledge of the curriculum they teach. One of the practical implications of the study is that teachers should recognize the advantages of learning the conceptual structure of a mathematical topic. It allows the teachers to have the flexibility to come up with meaningful mathematical approaches to teaching the topic, which are comprehensible to the learners whatever the grade levels they teach, rather than rule-based algorithms.
Keywords
Mathematical conjecture; justification; mathematics teachers' knowledge;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Battista, M. T. & Clements, D. H.(1995), Geometry and proof, Mathematics Teacher 88(1), 48-54.
2 Epp, S. S.(1998), A unified framework for proof and disproof, Mathematics Teacher 91(8), 708-713.
3 Kennedy, M. M., Ball, D. L., & McDiarmid, G. W.(1993), A study package for examining and tracking changes in teachers' knowledge, Technical series 93-1, Published by: The National Centre for Research on Teacher Education, Michigan State University.
4 Ma, L.(1996), Profound understanding of fundamental mathematics: what is it, why is it important, and how is it attained? Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.
5 Ma, L.(1999), Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6 Martin, W. G. & Harel, G.(1989), Proof frames of preservice elementary teachers, Journal for research in mathematics education 20, 41-51.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Petty, O. S. and Jansson, L. C.(1987), Sequencing examples and nonexamples to facilitate concept attainment, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 18(2), 112-125.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Sowder, L. and Harel, G.(1998), Types of students justifications, The Mathematics Teacher 91(8), 670-675.
9 Strauss, A. & Corbin, J.(1998), Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory(2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications, Inc.
10 Watson, J. M.(1991), Models to show the impossibility of division by zero, School Science and Mathematics 91(8), 373-376.   DOI
11 Weston, A.(2000), A rulebook for arguments, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., Indianapolis/Cambridge(3rd Edition).
12 Anderson, J. R.(1985), Cognitive psychology and its implication(2nd ed.), New York: W. H. Freeman.
13 Ball, D. L.(1988), Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical pedagogy: Examining what prospective teachers bring to teacher education, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.