Barrier, T. (2011) Les pratiques langagières de validation des étudiants en analyse réelleRecherches en Didactique des Mathématiques 31/3
Inglis, M. (2011) Proof in mathematics education: research, learning and teachingResearch in Mathematics Education 13/3, 316-320
Furinghetti, F. and Morselli, F. (2011) Beliefs and beyond: hows and whys in the teaching of proof ZDM The International Journal of Mathematics Education 43/4, 587-599
Abdelfatah, H. (2011) A story-based dynamic geometry approach to improve attitudes toward geometry and geometric proof ZDM The International Journal of Mathematics Education 43/3, 441-450
Antonini, S. (2011) Generating examples: focus on processes ZDM The International Journal of Mathematics Education 43/2, 205-217
Pedemonte, B. and Buchbinder, O. (2011) Examining the role of examples in proving processes through a cognitive lens: the case of triangular numbers ZDM The International Journal of Mathematics Education 43/2, 257-267
Buchbinder, O. and Zaslavsky, O. (2011) Is this a coincidence? The role of examples in fostering a need for proof ZDM The International Journal of Mathematics Education 43/2, 269-281
Coex, Seoul, Korea
July 8th to 15th, 2012
This is the announcement of the Topic Study Group 14, about reasoning and proof, at ICME 12.
The Congress will be held in Coex, Seoul, Korea, on July 2012 from 8th to 15th. Further details about how to attend and contribute to the congress can be accessed from the site.
Co-chairs: Stephane Cyr (Canada)
Maria Alessandra Mariotti (Italy)
Team Members: Andreas Stylianides (UK)
Viviane Durand-Guerrier (France)
Youngmee Koh (Korea)
Kirsti Hemmi (Sweden)
The role and importance assigned to argumentation and proof in the last decade has led to an enormous variety of approaches to research in this area. Differences concern the focus researchers take in their approach, as well in the methodological choices they make. This leads not only to different perspectives, but also to different terminology when we are talking about phenomena. Differences are not always immediately clear, as we sometimes use the same words but assign different meanings to them. On the other hand, different categories that we build from empirical research in order to describe students’ processes, understandings and needs are rarely discussed conceptually across the research field. Conceptual and terminological work is helpful in that it allows us to progress as a community operating with a wide range of research approaches.
Here, it is argued that formal logic and set theory be taught, not necessarily as ends in themselves, but as perhaps the best way to introduce the various methods of proof to mathematics undergraduates and advanced high school students ─ methods that are applicable in all branches of mathematics, in both formal and informal proofs.
There has been much discussion on the most effective way to introduce the methods of proof to mathematics undergraduates and advanced high school students. The traditional approach is one based on Euclidean geometry, one that, it is hoped, would build on the student's spatial sense developed over the years since childhood. Studies have shown, however, that proof-writing skills learned in one branch of mathematics such as geometry may not be easily transferred to other branches such as abstract algebra and analysis.