[KSCI] Korea Science Citation Index Service

Students Approaches in Constructing Convincing Arguments in Geometry Using Technology: A Case Study

Rahim, Medhat H. (Faculty of Education, Lakehead University)
Siddo, Radcliffe A. (Faculty of Education, Lakehead University)

Publication Information

Research in Mathematical Education / v.14, no.3, 2010 , pp. 219-231 More about this Journal

Abstract

Mathematically, a proof is to create a convincing argument through logical reasoning towards a given proposition or a given statement. Mathematics educators have been working diligently to create environments that will assist students to perform proofs. One of such environments is the use of dynamic-geometry-software in the classroom. This paper reports on a case study and intends to probe into students' own thinking, patterns they used in completing certain tasks, and the extent to which they have utilized technology. Their tasks were to explore the shape-to-shape, shape-to-part, and part-to-part interrelationships of geometric objects when dealing with certain geometric problem-solving situations utilizing dissection-motion-operation (DMO).

Keywords

proof; technology; convincing arguments; case study; dynamic geometry software;

Citations & Related Records

Reference

1	Healy, L. & Hoyles, C. (1999). Visual and symbolic reasoning in mathematics: making connections with computers? Mathematical Thinking and Learning 1(1), 59-84. ERIC EJ600191 DOI ScienceOn
2	Pettersson, R. (1989). Visuals for itiformation research and practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
3	Piaget, J. (1962). Comments on Vygotsky's critical remarks concerning the thought and language of the child. Boston: MIT Press.
4	National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. ERIC ED495271
5	National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2008). Focus in high school mathematics: Reasoning and sense making. Reston, VA: Author. ERIC ED507511
6	Liang, H-N. & Sedig, K: (2010). Can interactive visualization tools engage and support preuniversity students in exploring non-trivial mathematical concepts? Computers & Education 54(4),972-991. ERIC EJ875181 DOI ScienceOn
7	O'Daffer, P. G. & Clemens, S. R. (1992). Geometry: An Investigative Approach, Second Edition. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
8	Metaxas, N. & Karagiannidou, A. (2010). When two circles determine a triangle. Discovering and proving a geometrical condition in a computer environment. International Journal of Computer Mathematical Learning 15(1),63-71. EIRC EJ883929 DOI ScienceOn
9	Kosslyn, S. (1996). Image and Brain. MIT Press.
10	Wirszupe, I. (1976). Breakthroughs in the psychology of learning and teaching geometry. In: J. L. and D. A. Bradbard (Eds.), Space and geometry: Papers from research workshop, Columbus, OH: ERIC Center for Science, Mathematics and Environmental Education.
11	Eves, H. (1972). A Survey of geometry: Revised Edition. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. DOI ScienceOn
12	Zimmermann, W. & Cunningham S. (1991). Editors' Introduction: What is Mathematical Visualization? In: Zimmermann W. and Cunningham S. (Eds.), Visualization in Teaching and Learning Mathematics (pp. 1-8). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
13	Hoffmann, D. (1998). Visual intelligence: How we create what we see? New York: Norton.
14	Rahim, M. H. & Siddo, R. (2009). The use of visualization in learning and teaching mathematics. Proceedings of the $10^{th}$ International Conference: The Mathematics Education into the $21^{sl}$ Century Project, Dresden, Saxony, Germany, September 11-17 (pp. 496-500).
15	Sedig, K. & Liang, H-N. (2006). Interactivity of visual mathematical representations: Factors affecting learning and cognitive processes. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 17(2), 179-212. ERIC EJ726333
16	Spence, R. (2007). Information visualization: Design for interaction, 2nd Edition. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
17	Whiteley, W. (2000). Dynamic geometry programs and the practice of geometry. Paper presented at the International Congress of Mathematics Education (ICME 9) Tokyo, Japan, July 31- August 6.
18	Rahim, M. H. & Sawada, D. (1990). The duality of qualitative and the quantitative knowing in school geometry. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 21(2), 303-308. ME 19901.02060 DOI ScienceOn
19	Rahim, M. H. (In press). Dynamic geometry software-based Dissection-motion-operations: A Visual Medium for proof and proving. Learning and Teaching Mathematics Journal.
20	Rahim, M. H. & Sawada, D. (1986). Revitalizing school geometry through Dissection Motion Operations. School Science Mathematics Journal 8(3), 235-246. ME 1986x.00472 ERIC EJ334993