Students' conceptions of the definitions of congruent and similar triangles

References

• Alessandra Mariotti, M., & Fischbein, E. (1997). Defining in classroom activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34(3), 219–248. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002985109323
   Google Scholar
• Borasi, R. (1992). Learning mathematics through inquiry. Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K., & Belgrave, L. L. (2007). Grounded theory. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, S. I., & Kim, S. J. (2013). A study on students’ understanding of figures through descriptive assessment. East Asian Mathematical Journal, 29(2), 207–239. https://doi.org/10.7858/eamj.2013.014
   Google Scholar
• De Villiers, M. (1998). To teach definitions in geometry or teach to define? In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 248–255). PME.
   Google Scholar
• De Villiers, M. (2004). Using dynamic geometry to expand mathematics teachers’ understanding of proof. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 35(5), 703–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739042000232556
   Google Scholar
• De Villiers, M., Govender, R., & Patterson, N. (2009). Defining in geometry. In T. Craine & R. Rubinstein (Eds.), Seventy-first NCTM yearbook: Understanding geometry for a changing world (pp. 189–203). NCTM.
   Google Scholar
• Fischbein, E. (1994). The interaction between the formal, the algorithmic, and the intuitive components in a mathematical activity. In R. Biehler, R. W. Scholz, R. Strässer, & B. Winkelmann (Eds.), Didactics of mathematics as a scientific discipline (pp. 231–245). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Foster, C. (2014). Being inclusive. Mathematics in School, 43(3), 12–13.
   Google Scholar
• Freudenthal, H. (1968). Why to teach mathematics so as to be useful. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1(1–2) 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00426224
   Google Scholar
• Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2007). Learners’ understanding of the definitions and hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals: Towards a theoretical framing. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800008520167
   Google Scholar
• Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1976). Grounded theory: The discovery of grounded theory. Sociology the Journal of the British Sociological Association, 12, 27–49.
   Google Scholar
• González, G., & Herbst, P. (2009). Students’ conceptions of congruency through the use of dynamic geometry software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14(2), 153–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-009-9152-z
   Google Scholar
• Gökbulut, Y., & Ubuz, B. (2013). Prospective primary teachers’ knowledge on prism: Generating definitions and examples. Elementary Education Online, 12(2), 401–412.
   Google Scholar
• Hadas, N., Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2000). The role of contradiction and uncertainty in promoting the need to prove in dynamic geometry environments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44(1), 127–150. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1012781005718
   Google Scholar
• Harel, G., Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2006). Advanced mathematical thinking: Some PME perspectives. In A. Gutiérrez & P. Boero (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: Past, present and future (pp. 147–172). Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Hazzan, O., & Leron, U. (1996). Students’ use and misuse of mathematical theorems: The case of Lagrange’s theorem. For the Learning of Mathematics, 16(1), 23–26.
   Google Scholar
• Haj-Yahya, A., Hershkowitz, R., & Dreyfus, T. (2014). Investigating students' geometrical proofs through the lens of students definitions. In S. Oesterle, P. Liljedahl, C. Nicol, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of PME 38 and PME-NA 36 (Vol. 3, pp. 217–224). PME.
   Google Scholar
• Haj-Yahya, A. (2019). Can classification criteria constitute a correct mathematical definition? Pre-service and In-service Teachers' Perspectives. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 5(1), 88–101.
   Google Scholar
• Hershkowitz, R. (1987). The acquisition of concepts and misconceptions in basic geometry – or when “a little learning is dangerous thing”. In J. D. Novak (Ed.), Proceedings of the second International seminar on misconceptions and educational strategies in science and mathematics (Vol. 3, pp. 238–251). Cornell University.
   Google Scholar
• Hershkowitz, R. (1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry. In P. Nesher & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition (pp. 70–95). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoyles, C. (1998). A culture of proving in school mathematics? In D. Tinsley & D. C. Johnson (Eds.), Information and communications technologies in school mathematics (pp. 169–182). Chapman Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, K., & Fujita, T. (2013). Characterising triangle congruency in lower secondary school: The case of Japan. In B. Ubuz, Ç Haser, & M. A. Mariotti (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th congress of the European society for research in mathematics education (pp. 655–664).
   Google Scholar
• Jones, K., Fujita, T., & Miyazaki, M. (2013). Learning congruency-based proofs in geometry via a web-based learning system. Proceedings of the British Society for Research Into Learning Mathematics, 33(1), 31–36.
   Google Scholar
• Kaur, H. (2015). Two aspects of young children’s thinking about different types of dynamic triangles: Prototypicality and inclusion. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(3), 407–420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0658-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leikin, R., & Winicky-Landman, G. (2001). Defining as a vehicle for professional development of secondary school mathematics teachers. Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 3, 62–73.
   Google Scholar
• Leung, K. C. I., Ding, L., Leung, A. Y. L., & Wong, N. Y. (2014). Prospective teachers’ competency in teaching how to compare geometric figures: The concept of congruent triangles as an example. Proceedings of the KSME 2014 Spring Conference on Mathematics Education held at Hankuk Univ. of Foreign Studies, Seoul (pp. 171–185).
   Google Scholar
• Lewins, A., & Silver, C. (2007). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Linchevsky, L., Vinner, S., & Karsenty, R. (1992). To be or not to be minimal? Student teachers views about definitions in geometry. In W. Geeslin & K. Graham (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics education (Vol. 2, pp. 48–55). PME.
   Google Scholar
• Marchis, I. (2012). Preservice primary school teachers’ elementary geometry knowledge. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(2), 33–40.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, R. C. (1994). Making the transition to formal proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273731
   Google Scholar
• Okazaki, M. (2013). Identifying situations for fifth graders to construct definitions as conditions for determining geometric figures. In A. M. Lindmeier & A. Heinze (Eds.), Proceedings of the 37th conference of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. 3, pp. 409–416). PME.
   Google Scholar
• Özyıldırım-Gümüş, F., & Şahiner, Y. (2017). Investigation on how pre-service elementary mathematics teachers write and use mathematical definitions. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 9(3), 523–552.
   Google Scholar
• Patkin, D., & Plaksin, O. (2011). Congruent triangles sufficient and insufficient conditions suggested milestones for inquiry and discussion. Korean Society of Mathematical Education, 15(4), 327–340.
   Google Scholar
• Pickreign, J. (2007). Rectangles and rhombi: How well do pre-service teachers know them? Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1, 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Pimm, D. (1993). Just a matter of definition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25(3), 261–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273865
   Google Scholar
• Saldaña, J. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2008). Overcoming students' difficulties in learning to understand and construct proofs. In M. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics (pp. 95–110). Mathematical Association of America. https://doi.org/10.5948/upo9780883859759.009
   Google Scholar
• Smith, J. T. (2010). Definitions and nondefinability in geometry. The American Mathematical Monthly, 117(6), 475–489. https://doi.org/10.4169/000298910x492781
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tall, D. O., & 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. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00305619
   Google Scholar
• Türnüklü, E., Alayli, F. G., & Akkas, E. N. (2013). Investigation of prospective primary mathematics teachers’ perceptions and images for quadrilaterals. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 13(2), 1225–1232.
   Google Scholar
• Unlu, M., & Horzum, T. (2018). Mathematics teacher candidates’ definitions of prism and pyramid. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 4(2), 670–685. https://doi.org/10.21890/ijres.438373
   Google Scholar
• Usiskin, Z., Griffin, J., Witonsky, D., & Willmore, E. (2008). The classification of quadrilaterals: A study of definition. Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dormolen, J., & Zaslavsky, O. (2003). The many facets of a definition: The case of periodicity. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(1), 91–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(03)00006-3
   Google Scholar
• van Hiele, P. M., & van Hiele, D. (1958). A method of initiation into geometry. In H. Freudenthal (Ed.), Report on methods of initiation into geometry (pp. 67–80). Walters.
   Google Scholar
• Vinner, S. (1991). The role of definitions in the teaching and learning of mathematics. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 65–81). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Weber, K. (2002). Beyond proving and explaining: Proofs that justify the use of definitions and axiomatic structures and proofs that illustrate technique. For the Learning of Mathematics, 22(3), 14–17.
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, P. S. (1990). Inconsistent ideas related to definitions and examples. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 12(3–4), 31–47.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, H. S. (2005). Key mathematical ideas in grades 5–8. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the NCTM, Anaheim, CA. Retrieved September 12, 2005 from http://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/NCTM2005a.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Zandieh, M., & Rasmussen, C. (2010). Defining as a mathematical activity: A framework for characterizing progress from informal to more formal ways of reasoning. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 29(2), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2010.01.001
   Google Scholar
• Zaslavsky, O., & Shir, K. (2005). Students’ conceptions of a mathematical definition. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 36(4), 317–346.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar