Abstract

K-12 students often rely on testing examples to explore and determine the truth of mathematical conjectures. However, little is known about how K-12 students choose examples and what elements are important when considering example choice. In other domains, experts give explicit consideration to the typicality of examples – how representative a given item is of a general class. In a pilot study, we interviewed 20 middle school students who classified examples as typical or unusual and justified their classification. We then gave middle school students and mathematicians a survey where they rated the typicality of mathematical objects in two contexts – an everyday context (commonness in everyday life) and a mathematical context (how likely conjectures that hold for the object are to hold for other objects). Mathematicians had distinct notions of everyday and mathematical typicality – they recognized that the objects often seen in everyday life can have mathematical properties that can limit inductive generalization. Middle school students largely did not differentiate between everyday and mathematical typicality – they did not view special mathematical properties as limiting generalization, and rated items similarly regardless of context. These results suggest directions for learning mathematical argumentation and represent an important step towards understanding the nature of typicality in math.

Highlights

  • K-12 students often rely on testing examples to explore and determine the truth of mathematical conjectures

  • The most common reasons given for shapes being typical were: a shape being commonly encountered in everyday life (22% of instances), a shape having equal sides (14%), a shape being labelled as a square or equilateral triangle (12%), and a shape being labelled as an acute triangle (8%)

  • Is there a sense of “mathematical typicality” within mathematical contexts that is different from “everyday typicality” within everyday contexts, and what items are considered typical or unusual in these contexts? We investigate whether mathematicians and middle school students distinguish mathematical from everyday typicality by looking at how correlated their everyday typicality ratings were to their mathematical typicality ratings, as well as what specific objects they rate as more or less typical

Read more

Summary

Introduction

K-12 students often rely on testing examples to explore and determine the truth of mathematical conjectures. Middle school students largely did not differentiate between everyday and mathematical typicality – they did not view special mathematical properties as limiting generalization, and rated items regardless of context. These results suggest directions for learning mathematical argumentation and represent an important step towards understanding the nature of typicality in math. A large literature in cognitive science demonstrates that expertise involves non-formal reasoning structures (Bédard & Chi, 1992; Kahneman & Klein, 2009; Reyna, 2012), including judgments about the important characteristics of various objects in a domain In mathematics, such judgments may be useful when considering which examples to test to explore mathematical conjectures or ideas. Everyday typicality, based on familiarity may conflict with mathematical typicality, based on generalizability of mathematical properties

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call