Comparison of Geometric Proof Development Tasks as Set up in the Textbook and as Implemented by Teachers in the Classroom

Autor/in	Mwadzaangati, Lisnet
Titel	Comparison of Geometric Proof Development Tasks as Set up in the Textbook and as Implemented by Teachers in the Classroom
Quelle	In: Pythagoras, 40 (2019) 1, Artikel 458 (14 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Mwadzaangati, Lisnet)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	1012-2346
Schlagwörter	Foreign Countries; Geometric Concepts; Validity; Mathematical Logic; Textbooks; Mathematics Instruction; Grade 11; Teaching Methods; Textbook Content; Inquiry; Cognitive Processes; Difficulty Level; Concept Formation; Secondary School Teachers; Malawi + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Ausland; Elementare Geometrie; Gültigkeit; Mathematical logics; Mathematische Logik; Textbook; Text book; Schulbuch; Lehrbuch; Mathematics lessons; Mathematikunterricht; School year 11; 11. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 11; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Lehrbuchtext; Cognitive process; Kognitiver Prozess; Schwierigkeitsgrad; Concept learning; Begriffsbildung
Abstract	This qualitative case study examined similarities and differences between circle geometric proof development tasks set up in the Malawian Grade 11 mathematics textbook, and those that are set up and implemented by teachers in the classroom. Data generation included analysing the content of circle geometry proof tasks from the mathematics textbook and video recordings of geometric proof development lessons taught by three teachers. The Mathematics Discourse in Instructional Framework for Textbook analysis (MDITx) by Ronda and Adler and the framework for analysing the level of cognitive demands of mathematical tasks by Smith and Stein were used to identify and analyse the mathematical tasks as set up by the textbook and as set up and implemented by three Malawian secondary school mathematics teachers in the classroom. The findings revealed that the textbook presented the geometric proof development tasks at a high level as they included both empirical exploration tasks and formal proof tasks. Despite this task setup in the textbook, only one teacher involved the learners in empirical exploration tasks and maintained the high cognitive level of the tasks during instruction. The other two teachers only presented the formal proof tasks. Although the formal proof tasks that were set up by the two teachers were of a high cognitive level, the procedures that were used during task implementation resulted in reduction of the cognitive level of the proof tasks. I therefore conclude that teachers' ability to set up and implement high cognitive level tasks that promote learners' understanding and discovery of deductive geometric proofs depends not only on the availability of a good quality textbook, but also on the teacher's conceptual ability to make effective use of textbook content. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	AOSIS. 15 Oxford Street, Durbanville, Cape Town, 7550 South Africa. Tel: +27-21-975-2602; Fax: +27-21-975-4635; e-mail: publishing@aosis.co.za; Web site: https://sajce.co.za/index.php/pythagoras
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01