Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Study on the Presentation of Geometric Proof in Secondary Mathematics Textbooks in China, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Research on Mathematics Textbooks and Teachers’ Resources

Part of the book series: ICME-13 Monographs ((ICME13Mo))

Abstract

This chapter presents a comparative study aiming to examine how geometric proof is treated in secondary school mathematics textbooks in China, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia, and explore the similarities and differences revealed in these three countries’ textbooks. The results show that, although all the selected textbooks from these countries introduced mathematics topics related to geometric proof, they differed considerably in three aspects: the number of examples, the distribution of contents and, to a lesser degree, the types of proof. The textbooks in China contain the highest percentage of geometric contents and pay the most attention to the topic of geometric proof itself. The national mathematics curricula are clearly a main factor for the differences revealed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Note this is not necessarily the case in other countries. For example, in China and England, the learning progression stipulated in the national syllabus (standards) is classified into different learning stages with each stage consisting of a few grades or years, and grade 7 to grade 9 (or year 7 to year 9 in England) are in the same learning stage (the third stage). Hence, textbook developers and authors might introduce different mathematics topics and contents for the same grade level, resulting in different sequencing of mathematics topics from grade 7 to grade 9.

References

  • Alafaleq, M., Mailizar, M., Wang, Y., & Fan, L. (2015). How equality and inequality of whole numbers are introduced in China, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia primary school textbooks? In X. Sun, B. Kaur, & J. Novantna (Eds.), Primary mathematics study on whole numbers: ICMI Study 23 conference proceedings (pp. 392–398). Macau, China: ICMI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlo, J. (2013). Why ask why: An exploration of the role of proof in the mathematics classroom (Doctoral dissertation, Portland State University, USA). http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2074&context=open_access_etds. Accessed September 14, 2017.

  • Blum, W., & Kirsch, A. (1991). Preformal proof: Examples and reflections. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 183–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boero, P., Douek, N., Morselli, F., & Pedemonte, B. (2010). Argumentation and proof: A contribution to theoretical perspectives and their classroom implementation. In M. F. F. Pinto & T. F. Kawasaki (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 179–205). Belo Horizonte: PME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burger, W. F., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (1986). Characterizing the van Hiele levels of development in geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17, 31–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cabassut, R. (2006). Argumentation and proof in examples taken from French and German textbooks. In M. Bosch (Ed.), Proceedings of the fourth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME4) (pp. 391–400). Spain: FUNDEMI IQS—Universitat Ramon Llull & ERME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clapham, C., & Nicholson, J. (Eds.). (2009). The concise oxford dictionary of mathematics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conner, A. (2008). Argumentation in a geometry class: Aligned with the teacher’s conception of proof. Paper presented at the 11th International Congress on Mathematics Education, Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, L. (2013). Textbook research as scientific research: Towards a common ground on issues and methods of research on mathematics textbooks. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 765–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, L., Mailizar, M., Alafaleq, M., & Wang, Y. (2016). How Pythagoras’ theorem is presented in secondary mathematics textbooks in China, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia: A comparative study. In N.-Y. Wang (Ed.), Textbook teaching? mathematics teaching? persons nurturing? a discourse on mathematics textbooks (pp. 99–122). Hong Kong: Hong Kong Association of Mathematics Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, L., Qi, C., Liu, X., Wang, Y., & Lin, M. (2017). Does a transformation approach improve students’ ability in constructing auxiliary lines for solving geometric problems? An intervention-based study with two Chinese classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(2), 229–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, L., & Wu, L. (2015). A review and analysis of the international trend in mathematics textbook research and development. Journal of Mathematics Education, 24(3), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: Development status and directions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 633–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freudenthal, H. (1971). Geometry between the devil and the deep sea. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 3(3/4), 413–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, G. (2000). Proof, explanation and exploration: An overview. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44(1), 5–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, G., & Jahnke, H. N. (1996). Proof and proving. In A. J. Bishop, K. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatric, & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 877–908). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In E. Dubinsky, A. Schoenfeld, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education (III) (pp. 234–283). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (2007). Towards comprehensive perspectives on the learning and teaching of proof. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 805–842). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, K. (2002). Issues in the teaching and learning of geometry. In L. Haggarty (Ed.), Aspects of teaching secondary mathematics: Perspectives on practice (pp. 121–139). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapadia, R. (1980). Euclid must go. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 11, 327–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilpatrick, J. (1992). A history of research in mathematics education. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 3–38). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knuth, E. J. (2002). Teachers’ conceptions of proof in the context of secondary school mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 61–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K. (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with different levels of prior achievement. Learning and Instruction, 24, 22–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma, F. (Ed.). (2014). Mathematics (Grade 7-9). Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press. (In Chinese).

    Google Scholar 

  • Malizar, M., Alafaleq, M., & Fan, L. (2014). A historical overview of mathematics curriculum reform and development in modern Indonesia. Teaching Innovations, 27(3), 58–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCrone, S. S., & Martin, T. S. (2004). Assessing high school students’ understanding of geometric proof. Canadian Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 4, 223–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education of Saudi Arabia. (2008). Development of curriculum of mathematics and natural sciences project in Saudi Arabia. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: Ministry of Education. (In Arabic).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Education of Saudi Arabia. (2014). Mathematics: student’ book (Grade 7-9). Riyadh, KSA: Obeican. (In Arabic).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2011/downloads/T11_IR_Mathematics_FullBook.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2016.

  • Nordstrom, K., & Lofwall, C. (2006). Proof in Swedish upper secondary school mathematics textbooks: The issue of transparency. In M. Bosch (Ed.), Proceedings of the fourth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME4) (pp. 448–457). Spain: FUNDEMI IQS—Universitat Ramon Llull & ERME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nuharini, D., & Wahyuni, T. (2012). Matematika: Konsep dan Aplikasi. Jakarta: Pusat Perbukuan, Departement Pendidikan Nasional. (In Bahasa Indonesia).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results in focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know? http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results-overview.pdf. Accessed July 10, 2016.

  • Rezat, S. (2006). The structures of German mathematics textbooks. ZDM Mathematics Education, 38(6), 482–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rezat, S., & Sträßer, R. (2012). From triangle to tetrahedron: Artifacts as fundamental constituents of the didactical situation. ZDM Mathematics Education, 44(5), 641–651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senk, S. L. (1985). How well do students write geometry proofs? The Mathematics Teacher, 78, 448–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stacey, K., & Vincent, J. (2009). Modes of reasoning in explanations in Australian eighth-grade mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72, 271–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, A. J. (2007). Proof and proving in school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 289–321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stylianides, G. (2008). Investigating the guidance offered to teachers in curriculum materials: The case of proof in mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 191–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usiskin, Z. (2014). Transformations in US commercial high school geometric textbooks since 1960: A brief report. In K. Jones, C. Bokhove, G. Howson, & L. Fan (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Mathematics Textbook Research and Development (pp. 471–476). Southampton, UK: Southampton Education School, University of Southampton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Usiskin, Z. P. (1972). The effects of teaching Euclidean geometry via transformations on student achievement and attitudes in tenth-grade geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3, 249–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Usiskin, Z. P., & Coxford, A. F. (1972). A transformation approach to tenth-grade geometry. The Mathematics Teacher, 65, 21–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, K. (2001). Student difficulty in constructing proofs: The need for strategic knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48, 101–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xu, B. (2013). The development of school mathematics textbooks in China since 1950. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 725–736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Southampton Education School, University of Southampton, Building 32, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK

    Lianghuo Fan, Mailizar Mailizar, Manahel Alafaleq & Yi Wang

  2. Syiah Kuala University, Banda Aceh, Indonesia

    Mailizar Mailizar

Authors
  1. Lianghuo Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mailizar Mailizar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Manahel Alafaleq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yi Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lianghuo Fan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Southampton Education School, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Lianghuo Fan

  2. Institut Français de l’Education, École Normale Supérieure de Lyon, Lyon, France

    Luc Trouche

  3. Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

    Chunxia Qi

  4. EIM—Institut für Mathematik, Universität Paderborn, Paderborn, Germany

    Sebastian Rezat

  5. School of Education, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

    Jana Visnovska

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fan, L., Mailizar, M., Alafaleq, M., Wang, Y. (2018). A Comparative Study on the Presentation of Geometric Proof in Secondary Mathematics Textbooks in China, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia. In: Fan, L., Trouche, L., Qi, C., Rezat, S., Visnovska, J. (eds) Research on Mathematics Textbooks and Teachers’ Resources. ICME-13 Monographs. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73253-4_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-73252-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-73253-4

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation