A Study of Grade 10 Students' Conceptions of Proof in a Singapore Secondary School
Saved in:
| Title: | A Study of Grade 10 Students' Conceptions of Proof in a Singapore Secondary School |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Navinesh Thanabalasingam, Berinderjeet Kaur, Weng Kin Ho, Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA) |
| Source: | Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. 2025. |
| Availability: | Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. GPO Box 2747, Adelaide SA 5001, Australia. Tel: +61-8-8363-0288; Fax: +61-8-8362-9288; e-mail: sales@merga.net.au; Web site: http://www.merga.net.au/ |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 8 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Speeches/Meeting Papers Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Grade 10 High Schools Secondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Grade 10, Secondary School Students, Mathematical Logic, Validity, Mathematics Instruction, Mathematical Concepts, Concept Formation, Foreign Countries |
| Geographic Terms: | Singapore |
| Abstract: | This paper examines Grade 10 students' conceptions of proof in a secondary school in Singapore. Using a purposive survey of 9 mathematical items, proofs by 8 students for two items, one on Number and Algebra and another on Geometry and Trigonometry, were coded using Harel's proof schemes. The findings show that the students' proofs for the two questions displayed a range of proof schemes, except the authoritative scheme. With the exception, of the perceptual scheme, the predominance of other schemes was item specific. It was also apparent from the proofs written by the students that they struggled to articulate their arguments using correct mathematical language. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | ED676449 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | This paper examines Grade 10 students' conceptions of proof in a secondary school in Singapore. Using a purposive survey of 9 mathematical items, proofs by 8 students for two items, one on Number and Algebra and another on Geometry and Trigonometry, were coded using Harel's proof schemes. The findings show that the students' proofs for the two questions displayed a range of proof schemes, except the authoritative scheme. With the exception, of the perceptual scheme, the predominance of other schemes was item specific. It was also apparent from the proofs written by the students that they struggled to articulate their arguments using correct mathematical language. |
|---|
