Towers: Schemes, Strategies, and Arguments

  • Carolyn A. Maher
  • Manjit K. Sran
  • Dina Yankelewitz


In the previous chapter, we examined the representations, strategies, and problem-solving schemes used by four second- and third-grade students to build their solution to the shirts and jean problem (which was to determine how many outfits could be formed from three different shirts and two different pairs of jeans and to provide a convincing argument of the solution). In their effort to make sense of the components of the problem and to monitor their work, the students developed various notations to represent the data and illustrated the use of certain strategies. In this chapter, we examine how those students and others in the longitudinal study build on those representations and strategies in their work on some towers problems


Class Session Elevator Pattern Tall Tower Staircase Pattern Blue Cube 
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. Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (2000). From patterns to theories: Conditions for conceptual change. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 247–271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Maher, C. A. (2002). How students structure heir own investigations and educate us: What we have learned from a fourteen year study. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-sixth annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME26) (Vol. 1, pp. 31–46). Norwich, England: School of Education and Professional Development, University of East Anglia.Google Scholar
  3. Martino, A. M., & Maher, C. A. (1999). Teacher questioning to promote justification and generalization in mathematics: What research practice has taught us. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(1), 53–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Maher, C. A. (1998). Constructivism and constructivist teaching: Can they coexist? In O. Bjorkqvist (Ed.), Mathematics teaching from a constructivist point of view (pp. 29–42). Finland: Abo Akeademi, Pedagogiska fakulteten.Google Scholar
  5. Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (1997). Conditions for conceptual change: From pattern recognition to theory posing. In H. Mansfield (Ed.), Young children and mathematics: Concepts and their representations. Durham, NH: Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers.Google Scholar
  6. Davis, R. B. (1984). Learning mathematics: The cognitive science approach to mathematics education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Martino, A. M. (1992). Elementary students’ construction of mathematical knowledge: Analysis by profile. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.Google Scholar
  8. Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (1996b). Young children inventing methods of proof: The gang of four. In L. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (1996a). The development of the idea of mathematical proof: A 5-year case study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(2), 194–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carolyn A. Maher
    • 1
  • Manjit K. Sran
    • 2
    • 3
  • Dina Yankelewitz
    • 4
  1. 1.Graduate School of Education, Rutgers UniversityNew BrunswickUSA
  2. 2.Mathematics DepartmentMonroe Township High schoolMonroe TownshipUSA
  3. 3.College of Business and Management, DeVry UniversityNorth BrunswickUSA
  4. 4.Department of General StudiesThe Richard Stockton College of New JerseyPomonaUSA

Personalised recommendations