• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.123-145
• /
• 2013

This study was expected to yield the meaningful conclusions from the experimental group who took lessons based on inductive activities using GeoGebra at the beginning of proof learning and the comparison one who took traditional expository lessons based on deductive activities. The purpose of this study is to give some helpful suggestions for teaching proof to mathematically gifted elementary students. To attain the purpose, two research questions are established as follows. 1. Is there a significant difference in proof abilities between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? 2. Is there a significant difference in proof attitudes between the experimental group who took inductive lessons using GeoGebra and comparison one who took traditional expository lessons? To solve the above two research questions, they were divided into two groups, an experimental group of 10 students and a comparison group of 10 students, considering the results of gift and aptitude test, and the computer literacy among 20 elementary students that took lessons at some education institute for the gifted students located in K province after being selected in the mathematics. Special lesson based on the researcher's own lesson plan was treated to the experimental group while explanation-centered class based on the usual 8th grader's textbook was put into the comparison one. Four kinds of tests were used such as previous proof ability test, previous proof attitude test, subsequent proof ability test, and subsequent proof attitude test. One questionnaire survey was used only for experimental group. In the case of attitude toward proof test, the score of questions was calculated by 5-point Likert scale, and in the case of proof ability test was calculated by proper rating standard. The analysis of materials were performed with t-test using the SPSS V.18 statistical program. The following results have been drawn. First, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in proof ability than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Second, experimental group who took proof lessons of inductive activities using GeoGebra as precedent activity before proving had better achievement in the belief and attitude toward proof than the comparison group who took traditional proof lessons. Third, the survey about 'the effect of inductive activities using GeoGebra on the proof' shows that 100% of the students said that the activities were helpful for proof learning and that 60% of the reasons were 'because GeoGebra can help verify processes visually'. That means it gives positive effects on proof learning that students research constant character and make proposition by themselves justifying assumption and conclusion by changing figures through the function of estimation and drag in investigative software GeoGebra. In conclusion, this study may provide helpful suggestions in improving geometry education, through leading students to learn positive and active proof, connecting the learning processes such as induction based on activity using GeoGebra, simple deduction from induction(i.e. creating a proposition to distinguish between assumptions and conclusions), and formal deduction(i.e. proving).

• The Mathematical Education
• /
• v.44 no.3 s.110
• /
• pp.457-475
• /
• 2005

We have inquired on what the statistical classes of the secondary schools had been aiming to, say the epistermlogical objects. And we now appreciate that the main obstacle to the systematic articulation is the lack of anticipation on what the statistical concepts are. This study focuses on the ingredients of the statistical concepts. Those are to be the ground of the systematic articulation of statistic courses, especially of the one for the school kids. Thus we required that those ingredients must satisfy the followings. i) directly related to the contents of statistics ii) psychologically developing iii) mutually exclusive each other as much as possible iv) exhaustive enough to cover all statistical concepts We examined what and how statisticians had been doing and the various previous views on these. After all we suggest the following three concepts are the core of conceptual developments of statistic, say the concept of distributions, the summarizing ability and the concept of samples. By the concepts of distributions we mean the frequency views on each random categories and that is developing from the count through the probability along ages. Summarizing ability is another important resources to embed his probe with the data set. It is not only viewed as a number but also to be anticipated as one reflecting a random phenomena. Inductive generalization is one of the most hazardous thing. Statistical induction is a scientific way of challenging this and this starts from distinguishing the chance with the inevitable consequences. One's inductive logic grows up along with one's deductive arguments, nevertheless they are different. The concept of samples reflects' one's view on the sample data and the way of compounding one's logic with the data within one's hypothesis. With these three in mind we observed Korean Statistic Curriculum from K to 12. Distributional concepts are dealt with throughout but not sequenced well. The way of summarization has been introduced in the 1 st, 5th, 7th and the 10th grade as a numerical value only. One activity on the concept of sample is given at the 6th grade. And it jumps into the statistical reasoning at the selective courses of ' Mathematics I ' or of ' Probability and Statistics ' in the grades of 11-12. We want to suggest further studies on the developing stages of these three conceptual features so as to obtain a firm basis of successive statistical articulation.

• Education of Primary School Mathematics
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.13-26
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this research is to analyze geometrical level and the justification process in the proofs of construction by mathematically gifted elementary students. Justification is one of crucial aspect in geometry learning. However, justification is considered as a difficult domain in geometry due to overemphasizing deductive justification. Therefore, researchers used construction with which the students could reveal their justification processes. We also investigated geometrical thought of the mathematically gifted students based on van Hieles's Theory. We analyzed intellectual of the justification process in geometric construction by the mathematically gifted students. 18 mathematically gifted students showed their justification processes when they were explaining their mathematical reasoning in construction. Also, students used the GSP program in some lessons and at home and tested students' geometric levels using the van Hieles's theory. However, we used pencil and paper worksheets for the analyses. The findings show that the levels of van Hieles's geometric thinking of the most gifted students were on from 2 to 3. In the process of justification, they used cut and paste strategies and also used concrete numbers and recalled the previous learning experience. Most of them did not show original ideas of justification during their proofs. We need to use a more sophisticative tasks and approaches so that we can lead gifted students to produce a more creative thinking.

• Journal of The Korean Association For Science Education
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.376-388
• /
• 1996

The first and the second "Discussion Contest of Scientific Investigation" was evaluated in this study. This contest was a part of 'Korean Youth Science Festival' held in 1993 and 1994. The evaluation was based on the data collected from the middle school students of final teams, their teachers, a large number of middle school students and college students who were audience of the final competition. Questionnaires, interviews, reports of final teams, and video tape of final competition were used to collect data. The study focussed on three research questions. The first was about the preparation and the research process of students of final teams. The second was about the format and the proceeding of the Contest. The third was whether participating the Contest was useful experience for the students and the teachers of the final teams. The first area, the preparation and the research process of students, were investigated in three aspects. One was the level of cooperation, participation, support and the role of teachers. The second was the information search and experiment, and the third was the report writing. The students of the final teams from both years, had positive opinion about the cooperation, students' active involvement, and support from family and school. Students considered their teachers to be a guide or a counsellor, showing their level of active participation. On the other hand, the interview of 1993 participants showed that there were times that teachers took strong leading role. Therefore one can conclude that students took active roles most of the time while the room for improvement still exists. To search the information they need during the period of the preparation, student visited various places such as libraries, bookstores, universities, and research institutes. Their search was not limited to reading the books, although the books were primary source of information. Students also learned how to organize the information they found and considered leaning of organizing skill useful and fun. Variety of experiments was an important part of preparation and students had positive opinion about it. Understanding related theory was considered most difficult and important, while designing and building proper equipments was considered difficult but not important. This reflects the students' school experience where the equipments were all set in advance and students were asked to confirm the theories presented in the previous class hours. About the reports recording the research process, students recognize the importance and the necessity of the report but had difficulty in writing it. Their reports showed tendency to list everything they did without clear connection to the problem to be solved. Most of the reports did not record the references and some of them confused report writing with story telling. Therefore most of them need training in writing the reports. It is also desirable to describe the process of student learning when theory or mathematics that are beyond the level of middle school curriculum were used because it is part of their investigation. The second area of evaluation was about the format and the proceeding of the Contest, the problems given to students, and the process of student discussion. The format of the Contests, which consisted of four parts, presentation, refutation, debate and review, received good evaluation from students because it made students think more and gave more difficult time but was meaningful and helped to remember longer time according to students. On the other hand, students said the time given to each part of the contest was too short. The problems given to students were short and open ended to stimulate students' imagination and to offer various possible routes to the solution. This type of problem was very unfamiliar and gave a lot of difficulty to students. Student had positive opinion about the research process they experienced but did not recognize the fact that such a process was possible because of the oneness of the task. The level of the problems was rated as too difficult by teachers and college students but as appropriate by the middle school students in audience and participating students. This suggests that it is possible for student to convert the problems to be challengeable and intellectually satisfactory appropriate for their level of understanding even when the problems were difficult for middle school students. During the process of student discussion, a few problems were observed. Some problems were related to the technics of the discussion, such as inappropriate behavior for the role he/she was taking, mismatching answers to the questions. Some problems were related to thinking. For example, students thinking was off balanced toward deductive reasoning, and reasoning based on experimental data was weak. The last area of evaluation was the effect of the Contest. It was measured through the change of the attitude toward science and science classes, and willingness to attend the next Contest. According to the result of the questionnaire, no meaningful change in attitude was observed. However, through the interview several students were observed to have significant positive change in attitude while no student with negative change was observed. Most of the students participated in Contest said they would participate again or recommend their friend to participate. Most of the teachers agreed that the Contest should continue and they would recommend their colleagues or students to participate. As described above, the "Discussion Contest of Scientific Investigation", which was developed and tried as a new science contest, had positive response from participating students and teachers, and the audience. Two among the list of results especially demonstrated that the goal of the Contest, "active and cooperative science learning experience", was reached. One is the fact that students recognized the experience of cooperation, discussion, information search, variety of experiments to be fun and valuable. The other is the fact that the students recognized the format of the contest consisting of presentation, refutation, discussion and review, required more thinking and was challenging, but was more meaningful. Despite a few problems such as, unfamiliarity with the technics of discussion, weakness in inductive and/or experiment based reasoning, and difficulty in report writing, The Contest demonstrated the possibility of new science learning environment and science contest by offering the chance to challenge open tasks by utilizing student science knowledge and ability to inquire and to discuss rationally and critically with other students.