• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.215-227
• /
• 2000

This study is on the differences of the functions of definitions between in proof geometry and in intuitional geometry. There are the functions of definitions in intuitional geometry which may connect to those in proof geometry. We assert that when we teach them, we should be careful, for the teaching of the functions of definitions in proof.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.419-438
• /
• 1999

This paper explored the impact of dynamic geometry software such as CabriII, GSP on student's understanding deductive justification, on the assumption that proof in school mathematics should be used in the broader, psychological sense of justification rather than in the narrow sense of deductive, formal proof. The following results have been drawn: Dynamic geometry provided positive impact on interacting between empirical justification and deductive justification, especially on understanding the necessity of deductive justification. And teacher in the computer environment played crucial role in reducing on difficulties in connecting empirical justification to deductive justification. At the beginning of the research, however, it was not the case. However, once students got intocul-de-sac in empirical justification and understood the need of deductive justification, they tried to justify deductively. Compared with current paper-and-pencil environment that many students fail to learn the basic knowledge on proof, dynamic geometry software will give more positive ffect for learning. Dynamic geometry software may promote interaction between empirical justification and edeductive justification and give a feedback to students about results of their own actions. At present, there is some very helpful computer software. However the presence of good dynamic geometry software can not be the solution in itself. Since learning on proof is a function of various factors such as curriculum organization, evaluation method, the role of teacher and student. Most of all, the meaning of proof need to be reconceptualized in the future research.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.245-261
• /
• 1999

Proof is an essential characteristic of mathematics and as such should be a key component in mathematics education. But, teaching proof in school mathematics have been unsuccessful for many students. The traditional approach to proofs stresses formal logic and rigorous proof. Thus, most students have difficulties of the concept of proof and students' experiences with proof do not seem meaningful to them. However, different views of proof were asserted in the reassessment of the foundations of mathematics and the nature of mathematical truth. These different views of justification need to be reflected in demonstrative geometry classes. The purpose of this study is to characterize the types of students' justification in demonstrative geometry classes taught using dynamic software. The types of justification can be organized into three categories : empirical justification, deductive justification, and authoritarian justification. Empirical justification are based on evidence from examples, whereas deductive justification are based logical reasoning. If we assume that a strong understanding of demonstrative geometry is shown when empirical justification and deductive justification coexist and benefit from each other, then students' justification should not only some empirical basis but also use chains of deductive reasoning. Thus, interaction between empirical and deductive justification is important. Dynamic geometry software can be used to design the approach to justification that can be successful in moving students toward meaningful justification of ideas. Interactive geometry software can connect visual and empirical justification to higher levels of geometric justification with logical arguments in formal proof.

• East Asian mathematical journal
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.299-320
• /
• 2009

In mathematics, the education of the geometry proof has been playing an important role in promoting the ability for logical thinking by means of developing the deductive reasoning. However, despite of those importance mentioned above, considering the present condition for the education of the geometry proof in middle schools, it is still found that most of classes are led mainly by teachers, operating the cramming system of eduction, and students in those classes have many difficulties in learning the geometry proof course. Accordingly this thesis suggests the other method that is distinguished from previous proof educations. The thesis of Kai-Lin Yang and Fou-Lai Lin on 'A Model of Reading Comprehension of Geometry Proof (RCGP)', which was published in 2007, have various practical examples based on the model. After composing classes based on those examples and instructing the geometry proof, found out a problem. And then advance a new teaching model that amendment and supplementation However, it is considered to have limitation because subjects were minority and classes were operated by man-to-man method. Hopefully, the method of proof education will be more developed through performing more active researches on this in the nearest future.

• Research in Mathematical Education
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.217-233
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study is to describe how dynamic geometry systems can be useful in proof activity; teaching sequences based on the use of dynamic geometry systems and to analyze the possible roles of dynamic geometry systems in both teaching and learning of proof. And also dynamic geometry environments can generate powerful interplay between empirical explorations and formal proofs. The point of this study was to show that how using dynamic geometry software can provide an opportunity to link between empirical and deductive reasoning, and how such software can be utilized to gain insight into a deductive argument.

• School Mathematics
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2002

The purpose of this study is to investigate the reasons and backgrounds of drawing auxiliary lines in the proof of geometry. In most of proofs in geometry, drawing auxiliary lines provide important clues, thus they play a key role in deductive proof. However, many student tend to have difficulties of drawing auxiliary lines because there seems to be no general rule to produce auxiliary lines. To alleviate such difficulties, informal activities need to be encouraged prior to draw auxiliary lines in rigorous deductive proof. Informal activities are considered to be contrasting to deductive proof, but at the same time they are connected to deductive proof because each in formal activity can be mathematically represented. For example, the informal activities such as fliping and superimposing can be mathematically translated into bisecting line and congruence. To elaborate this idea, some examples from the middle school mathematics were chosen to corroborate the relation between informal activities and deductive proof. This attempt could be a stepping stone to the discussion of how to teach auxiliary lines and deductive reasoning.

• Research in Mathematical Education
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.195-210
• /
• 2024

Researchers and curricula continue to call for proof to serve a central role in learning of mathematics throughout kindergarten to grade 12 and beyond. Despite its prominence and recognition gained during past decades, proof is still a stumbling block for both teachers and students. Research efforts have been made to address issues related to teaching and learning of proof. An area in which such research efforts have been made is analysis of curriculum material (i.e. textbook analysis) with a focus on proof. This study is another research effort in this area of research through investigating the guidance offered in curriculum materials with the following research question: What is the nature (e.g., kinds of content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge) of guidance is offered for teachers to implement proof tasks in grade 8 geometry textbooks? Results indicate that the guidance offered for proof tasks are concerned more with content knowledge about the content-specific instructional goals than with pedagogical content knowledge which supports teachers in preparing in-class interactions with students to teach proof.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.135-148
• /
• 2011

Middle school mathematics treats axiom as mere fact verified by experiment or observation and doesn't mention it axiom. But axiom is very important to understand the difference between empirical verification and mathematical proof, intuitive geometry and deductive geometry, proof and nonproof. This study analysed textbooks and surveyed gifted students' conception of axiom. The results showed the problem and limitation of middle school mathematics on the treatment of axiom and proof.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.291-298
• /
• 1998

This study deals with the problem of proof education in the middle school geometry bby examining van Hiele#s geometric thought level theory and Freudenthal#s mathematization teaching theory. The implications that have been revealed by examining the theory of van Hie이 and Freudenthal are as follows. First of all, the proof education at present that follows the order of #definition-theorem-proof#should be reconsidered. This order of proof-teaching may have the danger that fix the proof education poorly and formally by imposing the ready-made mathematics as the mere record of proof on students rather than suggesting the proof as the real thought activity. Hence we should encourage students in reinventing #proving#as the means of organization and mathematization. Second, proof-learning can not start by introducing the term of proof only. We should recognize proof-learning as a gradual process which forms with understanding the meaning of proof on the basic of the various activities, such as observation of geometric figures, analysis of the properties of geometric figures and construction of the relationship among those properties. Moreover students should be given this natural ground of proof.

• The Mathematical Education
• /
• v.44 no.4 s.111
• /
• pp.535-546
• /
• 2005

We study on intuitive verification and rigor proof which are in geometry of Korean and Russian $7\~8$ grade's mathematics textbooks. We compare contents of mathematics textbooks of Korea and Russia laying stress on geometry. We extract 4 proposition explained in Korean mathematics textbooks by intuitive verification, analyze these verification method, and compare these with rigor proof in Russian mathematics textbooks.