Science & Education

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 47–60 | Cite as

How Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching May Profit from the Study of History of Mathematics

  • Reidar Mosvold
  • Arne Jakobsen
  • Uffe Thomas Jankvist


In this theoretical article, we aim at theorizing the old statement that mathematics teachers might profit from studying the history of mathematics. We do this by drawing upon the theoretical framework of mathematical knowledge for teaching (MKT). A selection of international studies on the history and pedagogy of mathematics is used as starting points for discussing how the different domains of teachers’ MKT—to a larger or smaller degree—can profit from the history of mathematics.


Content Knowledge Mathematics Teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge Mathematical Knowledge Elementary Teacher 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alpaslan, M., Isiksal, M., & Haser, C. (2011). Development of knowledge test on the history of mathematics. In: B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference on the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Vol 1 (p. 247). Ankara, Turkey: PME.Google Scholar
  2. Arcavi, A., Bruckheimer, B., & Ben-Zvi, R. (1982). Maybe a mathematics teacher can profit from the study of the history of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 3(1), 30–37.Google Scholar
  3. Avital, S. (1995). History of mathematics can help improve instruction and learning. In F. Swetz, J. Fauvel, O. Bekken, B. Johansson, & V. Katz (Eds.), Learn from the masters (pp. 3–12). Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar
  4. Bachelard, G. (1938). La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
  5. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2009). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Knowing mathematics for teaching to learners’ mathematical futures. Paper presented at The 2009 Curtis Center Mathematics and Teaching Conference. Retrieved, November 30, 2012, from
  6. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., & Mewborn, D. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 433–456). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barbin, E. (2007). On the argument of simplicity in Elements and schoolbooks of Geometry. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(2), 225–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Barnett, J. H. (2010). Abstract awakenings in algebra: Early group theory in the works of Lagrange, Cauchy, and Cayley. Retrieved November 30, 2012, from
  10. Barnett, J. H., Lodder, J., Pengelley, D., Pivkina, I., & Ranjan, D. (2011). Designing student projects for teaching and learning discrete mathematics and computer science via primary historical sources. In: V. Katz & C. Tzanakis (Eds.), Recent Developments on Introducing a Historical Dimension in Mathematics Education. MAA Notes 78 (pp. 187–200). Washington DC: The Mathematical Association of America.Google Scholar
  11. Baumert, J., Kunter, M., Blum, W., Brunner, M., Voss, T., Jordan, A., et al. (2010). Teachers’ mathematical knowledge, cognitive activation in the classroom, and student progress. American Educational Research Journal, 47(1), 133–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  13. Clark, K. M. (2012). History of mathematics: Illuminating understanding of school mathematics concepts for prospective mathematics teachers. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81(1), 67–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fauvel, J., & van Maanen, J. (1997). The role of the history of mathematics in the teaching and learning of mathematics: Discussion document for an ICMI study (1997–2000). Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34(3), 255–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fauvel, J., & van Maanen, J. (Eds.). (2000). History in mathematics education—the ICMI study. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  16. Fried, M. N. (2001). Can history of mathematics and mathematics education coexist? Science & Education, 10(4), 391–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fried, M. N. (2007). Didactics and history of mathematics: Knowledge and self-knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(2), 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hatisaru, V., & Cetinkaya, B. (2011). Using history of mathematics in teaching mathematics: Teachers’ views. In Ubuz, B. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference on the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Vol 1 (p. 312). Ankara, Turkey: PME.Google Scholar
  19. Heath, T. L. (1956). The thirteen books of Euclid’s elements (Vol. I). Dover Publications.Google Scholar
  20. Hill, H. C., Ball, D. L., & Schilling, S. (2008). Unpacking “pedagogical content knowledge”: Conceptualizing and measuring teachers’ topic-specific knowledge of students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39(4), 372–400.Google Scholar
  21. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42(2), 371–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hill, H. C., Sleep, L., Lewis, J. M., & Ball, D. L. (2007). Assessing teachers’ mathematical knowledge: What knowledge matters and what evidence counts? In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 111–155). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Jahnke, H. N., Arcavi, A., Barbin, E., Bekken, O., Furinghetti, F., El Idrissi, A., et al. (2000). The use of original sources in the mathematics classroom. In J. Fauvel & J. van Maanen (Eds.), History in mathematics education, The ICMI study (pp. 291–328). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  24. Jakobsen, A., Thames, M. H., Ribeiro, C. M., & Delaney, S. (2012). Using practice to define and distinguish horizon content knowledge. In: Preproceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematics Education, 8th15th July, 2012 (pp. 4635–4644). Seoul, South Korea.Google Scholar
  25. Jankvist, U. T. (2008). Den matematikhistoriske dimension i undervisning—gymnasialt set (The dimension of the history of mathematics in teaching—the case of upper secondary level). MONA, 4(1), 24–45.Google Scholar
  26. Jankvist, U. T. (2009). A categorization of the ‘whys’ and ‘hows’ of using history in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 71(3), 235–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jankvist, U. T. (2011). History, application, philosophy (haph) modules in mathematics education. In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th Conference on the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Vol 1 (p. 323). Ankara, Turkey: PME.Google Scholar
  28. Jankvist, U. T. (in press). On the use of primary sources in the teaching and learning of mathematics. In M. R. Matthews (Ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  29. Kersting, N. B., Givvin, K. B., Sotelo, F. L., & Stigler, J. W. (2011). Teachers’ analyses of classroom video predict student learning of mathematics: Further explorations of a novel measure of teacher knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 61(1–2), 172–181.Google Scholar
  30. Kjeldsen, T. H., & Petersen, P. H. (2012). History and the learning of mathematics: Detecting students’ meta-discursive rules. Paper presented at Topic Study Group 20 at ICME12, Seoul, Korea.Google Scholar
  31. Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 29–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Laubenbacher, R., & Pengelley, D. (2010). “Voici ce que j’ai trouvé:” Sophie Germain’s grand plan to prove Fermat’s Last Theorem. Historia Mathematica, 37(4), 641–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Panagiotou, E. N. (2011). Using history to teach mathematics: The case of logarithms. Science & Education, 20(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pengelley, D. (2012). Teaching number theory from Sophie Germain’s manuscripts: A guided discovery pedagogy. Paper presented at the HPM2012: The HPM Satellite Meeting of ICME-12. Daejon, Korea.Google Scholar
  35. Petersen, P. H. (2011). Potentielle vindinger ved inddragelse af matematikhistorie i matematikundervisningen [Potential gains by incorporating the history of mathematics in mathematics teaching]. Master thesis. Roskilde University, Denmark.Google Scholar
  36. Rangnes, T. E. (2007). Vekst og grafer—modellering med 8–9-åringer [Growth and graphs—modeling with 8–9 year-olds]. Tangenten, 17(4), 2–8.Google Scholar
  37. Rockoff, J. E., Jacob, B. A., Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2008). Can you recognize an effective teacher when you recruit one? Education Finance and Policy, 6(1), 43–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Royal Ministry of Education, Research and Church Affairs. (1999). The curriculum for the ten year compulsory school in Norway. Oslo: National Centre for Educational Resources.Google Scholar
  39. Schubring, G. (1988). Historische Begriffsentwicklung und Lernprozeß aus der Sicht neuerer mathematikdidaktischer Konzeptionen (Fehler, “Obstacles”, Transpositionen). Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 20(4), 138–148.Google Scholar
  40. Schubring, G. (2011). Conceptions for relating the evolution of mathematical concepts to mathematics learning—epistemology, history, and semiotics interacting. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 77(1), 79–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–21.Google Scholar
  44. Smestad, B. (2002). Matematikkhistorie i grunnskolens lærebøker: En kritisk vurdering. HIF-Rapport 2002:1. Alta: Høgskolen i Finmark.Google Scholar
  45. Smestad, B. (2011). Teachers’ conceptions of history of mathematics. In V. Katz & C. Tzanakis (Eds.), Recent developments on introducing a historical dimension in mathematics education (pp. 231–240). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sriraman, B., & English, L. (Eds.). (2010). Theories of mathematics education: Seeking new frontiers (advances in mathematics education). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Science.Google Scholar
  47. Sullivan, P., & Wood, T. (2008). Knowledge and beliefs in mathematics teaching and teaching development. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  48. Tall, D., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(2), 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ubuz, B. (Ed.) (2011). Proceedings of the 35th Conference on the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Developing mathematical thinking. Vol 1–4. Ankara, Turkey: PME.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Reidar Mosvold
    • 1
  • Arne Jakobsen
    • 1
  • Uffe Thomas Jankvist
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Education and Sports ScienceUniversity of StavangerStavangerNorway
  2. 2.Department of EducationAarhus UniversityCopenhagen NVDenmark

Personalised recommendations