Mathematics Teachers’ Geometric Thinking: A Case Study of In-service Teachers’ Constructing, Conjecturing, and Exploring with Dynamic Geometry Software
Many research studies have been conducted on students’ or pre-service teachers’ geometric thinking, but there is a lack of studies investi.
Abstract:
Many research studies have been conducted on students’ or pre-service teachers’ geometric thinking, but there is a lack of studies investigating in-service teachers’ geometric thinking. This paper presents a case study of two high school teachers who attended the dynamic geometry (DG) professional development project for three years. The project focused on the effective use of dynamic geometry software to improve students’ geometry learning. The two teachers were interviewed using a task-based interview protocol about the relationship between two triangles. The interviews, including the teachers' work, were videotaped, transcribed, and analyzed based on the three levels of geometric thinking: recognition, analysis, and deduction. We found that the participating teachers manifested their geometric skills and thinking in constructing, exploring, and conjecturing in the DG environment. The study suggests that the DG environment provides an effective platform for examining teachers' geometric skills, and levels of geometric thinking and encourages inductive explorations and deductive skill development.
Keywords: Dynamic geometry, geometric thinking, mathematics teachers.
0
References
Abdelfatah, H. (2011). A story-based dynamic geometry approach to improve attitudes toward geometry and geometric proof. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 43, 441–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0341-6
Armah, R. B., Cofie, P. O., & Okpoti, C. A. (2018). Investigating the effect of van Hiele Phase-based instruction on pre-service teachers’ geometric thinking. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 4(1), 314-330. http://bit.ly/42lEHgM
Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Mariotti, M. A. (2010). Generating conjectures in dynamic geometry: The maintaining dragging model. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15, 225-253. https://doi.org//10.1007/s10758-010-9169-3
Bennison, A., & Goos, M. (2010). Learning to teach mathematics with technology: A survey of professional development needs, experiences, and impacts. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 22, 31-56. https://doi.org//10.1007/BF03217558
Christou, C., Mousoulides, N., Pittalis, M., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2004). Proofs through exploration in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 339-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-004-6785-1
Christou, C., Mousoulides, N., Pittalis, M., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2005). Problem solving and problem posing in a dynamic geometry environment. The Montana Mathematics Enthusiast, 2(2), 125-143. https://doi.org//10.54870/1551-3440.1029
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
Crompton, H., Grant, M. R., & Shraim, K. Y. H. (2018). Technologies to enhance and extend children's understanding of geometry: A configurative thematic synthesis of the literature. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 59-69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26273868
Furinghetti, F., & Paola, D. (2003). To produce conjectures and to prove them within a dynamic geometry environment: A case study. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Doherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 397-404). Honolulu, USA.
Goldenberg, E. P., Scher, D., & Feurzeig, N. (2008). What lies behind dynamic interactive geometry software? In G. Blume & M. K. Heid (Eds.), Research on technology in the learning and teaching of mathematic: Volume 2- Cases and perspectives (pp. 53–87). Information Age. .
Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2011). Teachers’ work with resources: Documentational geneses and professional geneses. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 189-213). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1966-8_2
Habre, S. (2009). Geometric conjectures in a dynamic geometry software environment. Mathematics and Computer Education, 43(2), 151-164.
Healy, L. (2015). The mathematics teacher in the digital era: an international perspective on technology focused professional development. Research in Mathematics Education, 17(2), 152-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2015.1045548
Hoffer, A. (1981). Geometry is more than proof. Mathematics Teacher, 74(1), 11-18. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.74.1.0011
Hourigan, M., & Leavy, A. M. (2017). Preservice primary teachers' geometric thinking: Is pre-tertiary mathematics education building sufficiently strong foundations? The Teacher Educator, 52(4), 346-364. https://doi.org/10.1080/08878730.2017.1349226
Jiang, Z. (2002). Developing preservice teachers’ mathematical reasoning and proof abilities in the Geometer’s Sketchpad environment. In Mewborn, D.S., Sztajn, P., White, D.Y., Wiegel, H.G., Bryant, R.L., & Nooney, K. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th annual meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 717-729). ERIC/CSMEE Publications. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/96574/
Jiang, Z., White, A., & Rosenwasser, A. (2011). Randomized control trials on the dynamic geometry approach. Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College, 2(2), 8-17. https://doi.org/10.7916/jmetc.v2i2.718
Jones, K. (2000). Providing a foundation for deductive reasoning: Students’ interpretations when using dynamic geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 55-85. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012789201736
Leikin, R., & Grossman, D. (2013). Teachers modify geometry problems: from proof to investigation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82, 515-531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9460-4
Leung, A. (2008). Dragging in a dynamic geometry environment through the lens of variation. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 13, 135-157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-008-9130-x
Lopez-Real, F., & Leung, A. (2006). Dragging as a conceptual tool in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(6), 665-679. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390600712539
Mackrell, K. (2011). Design decisions in interactive geometry software. ZDM – The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 43, 373-387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0327-4
Mariotti, M. A. (2000). Introduction to proof: The mediation of a dynamic software environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 25-53. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012733122556
Martin, W. G. (2000). Principles and standard for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
McBroom, E. S., Jiang, Z., Sorto, M. A., White, A., & Dickey, E. (2016). Dynamic approach to teaching geometry: A study of teachers' TPACK development. In M. Niess, K. Hollebrands, & S. Driskell (Eds.), Handbook of research on transforming mathematics teacher education in the digital age (pp. 519-550). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0120-6.ch020
Nagy-Kondor, R. (2008). Using dynamic geometry software at technical college. Mathematics and Computer Education, 42(3), 249-257.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2009). Common core state standards for mathematics. https://learning.ccsso.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/ADA-Compliant-Math-Standards.pdf
Olivero, F., & Robutti, O. (2007). Measuring in dynamic geometry environments as a tool for conjecturing and proving. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 12, 135-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-007-9115-1
Oxman, V., Stupel, M., & Segal, R. (2017). On teaching extrema triangle problems using dynamic investigation. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(4), 603-616. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2016.1259514
Oxman, V., Stupel, M., & Weissman, S. (2021). Surprising relations between the areas of different shapes and their investigation using a computerized technological tool. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 52(9), 1433-1446. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1847335
Özen, D., & Köse, N. Y. (2013). Investigating pre-service mathematics teachers’ geometric problem solving process in dynamic geometry environment. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 4(3), 61-74 https://bit.ly/3JquUgI
Phonguttha, R., Tayraukham, S., & Nuangchalerm, P. (2009). Comparisons of mathematics achievement, attitude towards mathematics and analytical thinking between using the geometer’s sketchpad program as media and conventional learning activities. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(3), 3036-3039. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1285446
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20, 715-728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6
Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Pareja Roblin, N., Tondeur, J., & van Braak, J. (2013). Technological pedagogical content knowledge–a review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 29(2), 109-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00487.x
Wares, A. (2004). Conjectures and proofs in a dynamic geometry environment. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 35(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390310001623472
Wares, A. (2007). Using dynamic geometry to stimulate students to provide Proofs. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 38(5), 599-608, https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390701228286
Wares, A. (2018). Dynamic geometry as a context for exploring conjectures. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(1), 153-159, https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2017.1366559
Zengin, Y. (2017). Investigating the use of the Khan Academy and mathematics software with a flipped classroom approach in mathematics teaching. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 89-100. http://www.jstor.org/stable/90002166