• School Mathematics
• /
• v.13 no.3
• /
• pp.501-524
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study was to develop teaching-learning materials for informal activities geared toward teaching the nature and structure of proof, to make a case analysis of the application of the developed instructional materials to students in an elementary gifted class, to discuss the feasibility of proof education for gifted elementary students and to give some suggestions on that proof education. It's ultimately meant to help improve the proof abilities of elementary gifted students. After the characteristics of the eight selected gifted elementary students were analyzed, instructional materials of nine sessions were developed to let them learn about the nature and structure of proof by utilizing informal activities. And then they took a lesson two times by using the instructional materials, and how they responded to that education was checked. An analysis framework was produced to assess how they solved the given proof problems, and another analysis framework was made to evaluate their understanding of the structure and nature of proof. In order to see whether they showed any improvement in proof abilities, their proof abilities and proof attitude were tested after they took lessons. And then they were asked to write how they felt, and there appeared seven kinds of significant responses when their writings were analyzed. Their responses proved the possibility of proof education for gifted elementary students, and seven suggestions were given on that education.

• Journal for History of Mathematics
• /
• v.26 no.5_6
• /
• pp.345-353
• /
• 2013

Some teachers do not regard the computation of the sum of the angles of a triangle by using a cut-and-paste or paper-folding method as providing a proof that the sum of the angles of a triangle is equal to two right angles. Some even think that this way of working is not mathematics but more like an experiment in physics. Some see the method as no better than measurement of the angles by a protractor. The author will examine this issue in the teaching and learning of school geometry and more generally as a specific example from the perspective of HPM (History and Pedagogy of Mathematics).

• Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.521-538
• /
• 2006

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of teaching mathematical proofs that made use of the 'proof assisted cards' at the second year of middle school and to investigate students' ability to geometric proofs as well as changes of mathematical attitudes toward geometric proofs. The subjects are seven students at the 2nd year of D Middle School in Daegu who made use of the 'proof assisted cards' during five class periods. The researcher interviewed the students to investigate learning questions made by students as well as the 'proof assisted cards' before and after use. The findings are as follows: first, the students made change of geometric proof ability by proof activity with the 'proof assisted cards' and second, the students made significant change of mathematical attitudes toward geometric proofs by proof activity using the cards.

• The Mathematical Education
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.387-398
• /
• 2009

In this paper, we investigated the influence of technology, which gave an impact on students through the process of teaching & learning for the proof of an additive law of sine function in the mathematics education for the gifted. We chose students who were taking a course in enrichment mathematics at Science Education Institute for the Gifted in Mokpo National University, and analyzed their processes of a mathematical inference or conjecture, an algebraic description and a proof by visualization using technology. We found the following facts. That is, the visualization using technology is helpful to the gifted students in understanding principles and concepts of mathematics by intuition. Also, it is helpful to ones verifying various cases and generalizing principles. But, using technology can be a factor that disturbs learning of students who are clumsy with operating technology.

• 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.

• School Mathematics
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.109-122
• /
• 1999

In this paper we give a description of students' obstacles in their learning of geometry, especially resulted from their confusing a physical drawing with a figure, a geometrical object which a physical drawing represents. In computer-based teaching-learning environment, we could relieve such obstacles through providing students for experiences in which they must focus on elements of a figure and relations of them. But there may be potential in computer-based environment if we offer students only visual experience for validity of geometrical gacts: students' lack of understanding for need of proof and experience of cognitive obstacles which is very important for students to reflect their thinking and activities. Thus an didactical treatment must follows, which we also give an example.

• The Mathematical Education
• /
• v.63 no.2
• /
• pp.139-163
• /
• 2024

The purpose of this study is to examine the capabilities of ChatGPT as a tool for supporting students in generating mathematical arguments that can be considered proofs. To examine this, we engaged students enrolled in a mathematics pathways course in evaluating and revising their original arguments using ChatGPT feedback. Students attempted to find and prove a method for the area of a triangle given its side lengths. Instead of directly asking students to prove a formula, we asked them to explore a method to find the area of a triangle given the lengths of its sides and justify why their methods work. Students completed these ChatGPT-embedded proving activities as class homework. To investigate the capabilities of ChatGPT as a proof tutor, we used these student homework responses as data for this study. We analyzed and compared original and revised arguments students constructed with and without ChatGPT assistance. We also analyzed student-written responses about their perspectives on mathematical proof and proving and their thoughts on using ChatGPT as a proof assistant. Our analysis shows that our participants' approaches to constructing, evaluating, and revising their arguments aligned with their perspectives on proof and proving. They saw ChatGPT's evaluations of their arguments as similar to how they usually evaluate arguments of themselves and others. Mostly, they agreed with ChatGPT's suggestions to make their original arguments more proof-like. They, therefore, revised their original arguments following ChatGPT's suggestions, focusing on improving clarity, providing additional justifications, and showing the generality of their arguments. Further investigation is needed to explore how ChatGPT can be effectively used as a tool in teaching and learning mathematical proof and proof-writing.

• 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).

• Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.227-239
• /
• 2011

The circumcenter of a triangle is introduced in logic geometry part of 8th grade mathematics. To handle certain characteristics of a figure through mathematical proof may involve considerable difficulty, and many students have greater difficulties especially in learning textbook's methods of proving propositions about circumcenter of a triangle. This study compares the methods how the circumcenter of a triangle is explored among the Elements of Euclid, a classic of logic geometry, current textbooks of USA and those of Korea. As a result of it, this study tries to abstract some significant implications on teaching the circumcenter of a triangle.

• Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.183-203
• /
• 1999

In this study, we analysed the constituents of proof and examined into the reasons why the students have trouble in learning the proof, and proposed directions for improving the teaming and teaching of proof. Through the reviews of the related literatures and the analyses of textbooks, the constituents of proof in the level of middle grades in our country are divided into two major categories 'Constituents related to the construction of reasoning' and 'Constituents related to the meaning of proof. 'The former includes the inference rules(simplification, conjunction, modus ponens, and hypothetical syllogism), symbolization, distinguishing between definition and property, use of the appropriate diagrams, application of the basic principles, variety and completeness in checking, reading and using the basic components of geometric figures to prove, translating symbols into literary compositions, disproof using counter example, and proof of equations. The latter includes the inferences, implication, separation of assumption and conclusion, distinguishing implication from equivalence, a theorem has no exceptions, necessity for proof of obvious propositions, and generality of proof. The results from three types of examinations; analysis of the textbooks, interview, writing test, are summarized as following. The hypothetical syllogism that builds the main structure of proofs is not taught in middle grades explicitly, so students have more difficulty in understanding other types of syllogisms than the AAA type of categorical syllogisms. Most of students do not distinguish definition from property well, so they find difficulty in symbolizing, separating assumption from conclusion, or use of the appropriate diagrams. The basic symbols and principles are taught in the first year of the middle school and students use them in proving theorems after about one year. That could be a cause that the students do not allow the exact names of the principles and can not apply correct principles. Textbooks do not describe clearly about counter example, but they contain some problems to solve only by using counter examples. Students have thought that one counter example is sufficient to disprove a false proposition, but in fact, they do not prefer to use it. Textbooks contain some problems to prove equations, A=B. Proving those equations, however, students do not perceive that writing equation A=B, the conclusion of the proof, in the first line and deforming the both sides of it are incorrect. Furthermore, students prefer it to developing A to B. Most of constituents related to the meaning of proof are mentioned very simply or never in textbooks, so many students do not know them. Especially, they accept the result of experiments or measurements as proof and prefer them to logical proof stated in textbooks.