Article Sidebar

Download
Statistic
Read Counter : 5

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

The comprehension of mathematical proofs by preservice mathematics teachers is vital for their ability to effectively teach mathematical reasoning. Despite its importance, existing research reveals a significant gap in preservice teachers’ understanding and application of formal proof methods, especially in the context of mathematical argumentation. This study aims to address this gap by examining how preservice teachers construct mathematical proofs, using Toulmin’s argumentation model as a framework. A qualitative exploratory case study design was adopted, involving written proofs from 72 third-year preservice teachers at a South African university, supplemented by task-based interviews with nine participants. The findings indicate that 62.5% of the participants were able to construct correct direct proofs, and 61.1% applied the contraposition proof method correctly. However, only 30.6% produced valid proofs using the contradiction method. Further analysis uncovered notable gaps in essential components of proof construction, such as warrants, backing, and rebuttals, particularly when dealing with tasks requiring contraposition and contradiction methods. While many participants (62.5%) demonstrated procedural fluency in direct proofs, 31.9% failed to provide explicit definitions or logical precision, suggesting a superficial engagement with proof construction. These results highlight the need for teacher education programs to emphasize a deeper conceptual understanding of proof structures, which is crucial for preparing preservice mathematics teachers to foster reasoning and argumentation skills in their future classrooms.

Keywords

Contradiction Contraposition Direct Proofs Preservice Mathematics Teachers Proof Comprehension Toulmin’s Argumentation Model

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Mukuka, A., & Tatira, B. (2025). Pre-service mathematics teachers’ proof comprehension through Toulmin’s argumentation model. Journal on Mathematics Education, 16(1), 111–130. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v16i1.pp111-130
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Antonini, S., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Indirect proof: What is specific to this way of proving? ZDM Mathematics Education 40(3), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0091-2
  2. Australian Curriculum. (2019). Australian curriculum: Mathematics. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
  3. Azrou, N., & Khelladi, A. (2019). Why do students write poor proof texts? A case study on undergraduates’ proof writing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102(2), 257–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09911-9
  4. Brodie, K. (2010). Teaching mathematical reasoning in secondary school classrooms. Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09742-8
  5. Brown, S. A. (2018). Are indirect proofs less convincing? A study of students’ comparative assessments. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 49, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.12.010
  6. Buchbinder, O., & McCrone, S. (2020). Preservice teachers learning to teach proof through classroom implementation: Successes and challenges. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 58, 100779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2020.100779
  7. Buchbinder, O., & McCrone, S. (2023). Preparing prospective secondary teachers to teach mathematical reasoning and proof: the case of the role of examples in proving. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 55(4), 779–792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01493-4
  8. Cupillari, A. (2024). Basic techniques to prove if/then statements. In The Nuts and Bolts of Proofs: An Introduction to Mathematical Proofs (5th Ed., pp. 7–42). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B9780-323-99020-2.00002-7
  9. Demiray, E., & Bostan, M. I. (2015). An Investigation of Pre-service Middle School Mathematics Teachers’ Ability to Conduct Valid Proofs, Methods Used, and Reasons for Invalid Arguments. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 1109–1130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9664-z
  10. Department for Education. (2021, September 28). National curriculum in England: Mathematics programmes of study. https://bit.ly/4eLJ36v
  11. Department of Basic Education. (2011). Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement: Mathematics Grades 10-12. http://www.education.gov.za
  12. Doruk, M. (2019). Preservice mathematics teachers’ determination skills of the proof techniques: The case of integers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology (IJEMST), 7(4), 335–348. https://ijemst.org/index.php/ijemst/article/view/729
  13. Doruk, M., & Kaplan, A. (2015). Prospective mathematics teachers’ difficulties in doing proofs and causes of their struggle with proofs. International Eurasian Educational Research Congress, 315–328.
  14. Ferry, D. (2010). Basic proof techniques. St. Louis: Washington University. https://www.cse.wustl.edu/~cytron/547Pages/f14/IntroToProofs_Final.pdf
  15. Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20(9), 1408–1416. http://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol20/iss9/3
  16. Goos, M., & Kaya, S. (2020). Understanding and promoting students’ mathematical thinking: a review of research published in ESM. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 103(1), 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09921-7
  17. Haavold, P., Roksvold, J., & Sriraman, B. (2024). Pre-service teachers’ knowledge of and beliefs about direct and indirect proofs. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/19477503.2024.2363710
  18. Hanna, G. (2020). Mathematical proof, argumentation, and reasoning. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 561–566). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_102
  19. Hanna, G., & Barbeau, E. (2010). Proofs as bearers of mathematical knowledge. In G. Hanna, H. Jahnke, & H. Pulte (Eds.), Explanation and Proof in Mathematics (pp. 85–100). Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0576-5_7
  20. Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), CBMS Issues in Mathematics Education. Research in collegiate mathematics education III: Vol. Vol. 7 (pp. 234–283). Mathematical Association of America.
  21. Knuth, E. J. (2002a). Secondary School Mathematics Teachers’ Conceptions of Proof. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(5), 379–405. https://doi.org/10.2307/4149959
  22. Knuth, E. J. (2002b). Teachers’ conceptions of proof in the context of secondary school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5(1994), 61–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-010-9143-y
  23. Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
  24. Lesseig, K., Hine, G., Na, G. S., & Boardman, K. (2019). Perceptions on proof and the teaching of proof: A comparison across preservice secondary teachers in Australia, USA and Korea. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31(4), 393–418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00260-7
  25. Maoto, S., Masha, K., & Mokwana, L. (2018). Teachers’ learning and assessing of mathematical processes with emphasis on representations, reasoning and proof. Pythagoras, 39(1), a373. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v39i1.373
  26. Mejia-Ramos, J. P., Fuller, E., Weber, K., Rhoads, K., & Samkoff, A. (2012). An assessment model for proof comprehension in undergraduate mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9349-7
  27. Moore, R. C. (1994). Making the transition to formal proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273731
  28. Morris, R. L. (2021). The values of mathematical proofs. In B. Sriraman (Ed.), Handbook of the History and Philosophy of Mathematical Practice (pp. 1–32). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19071-2_34-1
  29. Mukuka, A., & Alex, J. K. (2024). Foundational mathematical knowledge of prospective teachers: Evidence from a professional development training. Pythagoras, 45(1), a764. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v45i1.764
  30. Mukuka, A., Balimuttajjo, S., & Mutarutinya, V. (2023). Teacher efforts towards the development of students’ mathematical reasoning skills. Heliyon, 9(4) e14789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14789
  31. Mukuka, A., Mutarutinya, V., & Balimuttajjo, S. (2021). Mediating effect of self-efficacy on the relationship between instruction and students’ mathematical reasoning. Journal on Mathematics Education, 12(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.12.1.12508.73-92
  32. Mukuka, A., Shumba, O., Balimuttajjo, S., & Mutarutinya, V. (2019). An analysis of prospective teachers’ mathematical reasoning on number concepts. African Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics and Sciences, 15(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.4314/ajesms.v15i2.10
  33. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics.
  34. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2020). The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1–8: Mathematics. King’s Printer for Ontario, 2020–25. https://bit.ly/40LfBcj
  35. Pedemonte, B. (2007). How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9057-x
  36. Pedemonte, B. (2001). Relation between argumentation and proof in mathematics: cognitive unity or break. In Proceedings of the 2nd Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 70-80).
  37. Quarfoot, D., & Rabin, J. M. (2022). A Hypothesis framework for students’ difficulties with proof by contradiction. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 8(3), 490–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-021-00150-z
  38. Rodríguez-Nieto, C. A., Cervantes-Barraza, J. A., & Font Moll, V. (2023). Exploring mathematical connections in the context of proof and mathematical argumentation: A new proposal of networking of theories. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(5), em2264. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13157
  39. Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2017). A comparison of proof comprehension, proof construction, proof validation and proof evaluation. Proceedings of the Conference on Didactics of Mathematics in Higher Education as a Scientific Discipline, 339–345.
  40. Siswono, T. Y. E., Hartono, S., & Kohar, A. W. (2020). Deductive or inductive? prospective teachers’ preference of proof method on an intermediate proof task. Journal on Mathematics Education, 11(3), 417–438. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.3.11846.417-438
  41. Stylianides, G. J., Stylianides, A. J., & Moutsios-Rentzos, A. (2024). Proof and proving in school and university mathematics education research: a systematic review. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 56(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01518-y
  42. Stylianides, G. J., Stylianides, A. J., & Weber, K. (2017). Research on the teaching and learning of proof: Taking stock and moving forward. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 237–266). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  43. Tatira, B. (2021). Mathematics education students’ understanding of binomial series expansion based on the APOS theory. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(12), em2035. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11287
  44. Tatira, B. (2023). Undergraduate students’ conceptualization of elementary row operations in solving systems of linear equations. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(11), em2349. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/13679
  45. Tatira, B., & Mukuka, A. (2024). Unpacking pre-service teachers’ conceptualization of logarithmic differentiation through the APOS theory. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(12), em2541. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15655
  46. Tchonang Youkap, P., Njomgang Ngansop, J., Tieudjo, D., & Nchia Ntam, L. (2019). Influence of drawing and figures on secondary school students’ argumentation and proof: An investigation on parallelogram. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 12(2), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.12.2.10
  47. Toulmin, S. E. (2003). The uses of argument (updated ed.). Cambridge University Press.
  48. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The use of arguments. Cambridge University Press.
  49. Varghese, T. (2009). Secondary-level student teachers’ conceptions of mathematical proof. Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1, 1–14. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ859284
  50. Weber, K. (2004). A framework for describing the processes that undergraduates use to construct proofs. In M. Johnsen Høines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 425–432). PME. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED489676
  51. Zeybek, Z., & Galindo, E. (2014). Pre-service elementary teachers’ misconceptions of proof and counterexamples and their possible influences on their instructional decisions. Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of PME 38 and PME-NA 36, (pp. 433–440). PME. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED599998.pdf