The nature of students' productive and non-productive example-use for proving

Inbar Aricha-Metzer, Orit Zaslavsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Our work stems from the view that example-based reasoning has the potential of enhancing students' mathematical thinking, and in particular can be helpful in engaging in proving and learning to prove. We aimed at better understanding the nature of example-use across grade levels, and in particular, how judicious example-use may support students' ability to reason and prove. The paper builds on individual task-based interviews that were conducted with 12 middle school students, 16 high school students, and 10 undergraduate students, whose majors were mathematics or mathematics related. The tasks called for conjecturing and proving. In our analysis we distinguish between empirical example-use and generic example-use, and examine whether the example-uses that we identified were productive for proving, in terms of developing a proof, a deductive argument, or a sound justification that may lead to a proof. We illustrate these distinctions through ten cases drawn from the data. Our findings indicate a relatively strong tendency of students to use examples generically. It also suggests a strong, though not surprising, connection between treating examples generically and productively. Implications for practice and further research are discussed.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Mathematical Behavior
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017

Fingerprint

Students
Justification
Reasoning
Mathematics
student
Aptitude
mathematics
Acoustic waves
Learning
Interviews
school grade
Research
Sound
ability
interview
school
learning

Keywords

  • Example-based reasoning
  • Example-use
  • Generic examples
  • Proof and proving

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Applied Psychology
  • Applied Mathematics

Cite this

The nature of students' productive and non-productive example-use for proving. / Aricha-Metzer, Inbar; Zaslavsky, Orit.

In: Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{a2ebcdb45ea147d98a5db9057a260f94,
title = "The nature of students' productive and non-productive example-use for proving",
abstract = "Our work stems from the view that example-based reasoning has the potential of enhancing students' mathematical thinking, and in particular can be helpful in engaging in proving and learning to prove. We aimed at better understanding the nature of example-use across grade levels, and in particular, how judicious example-use may support students' ability to reason and prove. The paper builds on individual task-based interviews that were conducted with 12 middle school students, 16 high school students, and 10 undergraduate students, whose majors were mathematics or mathematics related. The tasks called for conjecturing and proving. In our analysis we distinguish between empirical example-use and generic example-use, and examine whether the example-uses that we identified were productive for proving, in terms of developing a proof, a deductive argument, or a sound justification that may lead to a proof. We illustrate these distinctions through ten cases drawn from the data. Our findings indicate a relatively strong tendency of students to use examples generically. It also suggests a strong, though not surprising, connection between treating examples generically and productively. Implications for practice and further research are discussed.",
keywords = "Example-based reasoning, Example-use, Generic examples, Proof and proving",
author = "Inbar Aricha-Metzer and Orit Zaslavsky",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.09.002",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Mathematical Behavior",
issn = "0732-3123",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The nature of students' productive and non-productive example-use for proving

AU - Aricha-Metzer, Inbar

AU - Zaslavsky, Orit

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Our work stems from the view that example-based reasoning has the potential of enhancing students' mathematical thinking, and in particular can be helpful in engaging in proving and learning to prove. We aimed at better understanding the nature of example-use across grade levels, and in particular, how judicious example-use may support students' ability to reason and prove. The paper builds on individual task-based interviews that were conducted with 12 middle school students, 16 high school students, and 10 undergraduate students, whose majors were mathematics or mathematics related. The tasks called for conjecturing and proving. In our analysis we distinguish between empirical example-use and generic example-use, and examine whether the example-uses that we identified were productive for proving, in terms of developing a proof, a deductive argument, or a sound justification that may lead to a proof. We illustrate these distinctions through ten cases drawn from the data. Our findings indicate a relatively strong tendency of students to use examples generically. It also suggests a strong, though not surprising, connection between treating examples generically and productively. Implications for practice and further research are discussed.

AB - Our work stems from the view that example-based reasoning has the potential of enhancing students' mathematical thinking, and in particular can be helpful in engaging in proving and learning to prove. We aimed at better understanding the nature of example-use across grade levels, and in particular, how judicious example-use may support students' ability to reason and prove. The paper builds on individual task-based interviews that were conducted with 12 middle school students, 16 high school students, and 10 undergraduate students, whose majors were mathematics or mathematics related. The tasks called for conjecturing and proving. In our analysis we distinguish between empirical example-use and generic example-use, and examine whether the example-uses that we identified were productive for proving, in terms of developing a proof, a deductive argument, or a sound justification that may lead to a proof. We illustrate these distinctions through ten cases drawn from the data. Our findings indicate a relatively strong tendency of students to use examples generically. It also suggests a strong, though not surprising, connection between treating examples generically and productively. Implications for practice and further research are discussed.

KW - Example-based reasoning

KW - Example-use

KW - Generic examples

KW - Proof and proving

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85030648854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85030648854&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.09.002

DO - 10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.09.002

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85030648854

JO - Journal of Mathematical Behavior

JF - Journal of Mathematical Behavior

SN - 0732-3123

ER -