{"title":"未来教师对身份结构的统一理解","authors":"Kaitlyn Stephens Serbin","doi":"10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>United States curriculum standards advise mathematics teachers to teach students to attend to structure and understand how mathematical concepts are related. This requires teachers to have a structural perspective and a coherent, unified understanding of mathematical structures that span curricula. This study explores Prospective Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ (PSMTs) unified understandings of identities and characterizes the structural features of identities that PSMTs attend to. I contribute a theoretical framework of three ways in which PSMTs reason about identities: a do-nothing element, a result of undoing something, and a coordination with inverse, binary operation, and set. I classify the level of coherence of their identity schemas demonstrated as they reasoned about the structural connections among additive, multiplicative, and compositional identities. I illustrate how having unified, coherent understandings of identities can lead PSMTs to reason productively about inverse and identity functions, while having incoherent understandings of identities can lead to inaccurate reasoning about inverse and identity functions. I conclude with teaching implications for fostering PSMTs’ unified understandings of algebraic concepts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prospective teachers’ unified understandings of the structure of identities\",\"authors\":\"Kaitlyn Stephens Serbin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101066\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>United States curriculum standards advise mathematics teachers to teach students to attend to structure and understand how mathematical concepts are related. This requires teachers to have a structural perspective and a coherent, unified understanding of mathematical structures that span curricula. This study explores Prospective Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ (PSMTs) unified understandings of identities and characterizes the structural features of identities that PSMTs attend to. I contribute a theoretical framework of three ways in which PSMTs reason about identities: a do-nothing element, a result of undoing something, and a coordination with inverse, binary operation, and set. I classify the level of coherence of their identity schemas demonstrated as they reasoned about the structural connections among additive, multiplicative, and compositional identities. I illustrate how having unified, coherent understandings of identities can lead PSMTs to reason productively about inverse and identity functions, while having incoherent understandings of identities can lead to inaccurate reasoning about inverse and identity functions. I conclude with teaching implications for fostering PSMTs’ unified understandings of algebraic concepts.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mathematical Behavior\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mathematical Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732312323000366\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732312323000366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Prospective teachers’ unified understandings of the structure of identities
United States curriculum standards advise mathematics teachers to teach students to attend to structure and understand how mathematical concepts are related. This requires teachers to have a structural perspective and a coherent, unified understanding of mathematical structures that span curricula. This study explores Prospective Secondary Mathematics Teachers’ (PSMTs) unified understandings of identities and characterizes the structural features of identities that PSMTs attend to. I contribute a theoretical framework of three ways in which PSMTs reason about identities: a do-nothing element, a result of undoing something, and a coordination with inverse, binary operation, and set. I classify the level of coherence of their identity schemas demonstrated as they reasoned about the structural connections among additive, multiplicative, and compositional identities. I illustrate how having unified, coherent understandings of identities can lead PSMTs to reason productively about inverse and identity functions, while having incoherent understandings of identities can lead to inaccurate reasoning about inverse and identity functions. I conclude with teaching implications for fostering PSMTs’ unified understandings of algebraic concepts.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Mathematical Behavior solicits original research on the learning and teaching of mathematics. We are interested especially in basic research, research that aims to clarify, in detail and depth, how mathematical ideas develop in learners. Over three decades, our experience confirms a founding premise of this journal: that mathematical thinking, hence mathematics learning as a social enterprise, is special. It is special because mathematics is special, both logically and psychologically. Logically, through the way that mathematical ideas and methods have been built, refined and organized for centuries across a range of cultures; and psychologically, through the variety of ways people today, in many walks of life, make sense of mathematics, develop it, make it their own.