User Name:

Password:
Welcome Guest
Journals Home > Journal For The Education Of The Gifted > Volume 32 |  Issue 2 > Article Abstract
 

Abstract

Back to TOC
Reference
X

  • Bell, A. W. (1976). A study of pupils’ proof-explanations in mathematical situations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 7, 23–40.
  • Blum, W., & Kirsch, A. (1991). Preformal proving: Examples and reflections. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 183–203.
  • De Villiers, M. (1998). To teach definitions in geometry or teach to define? Proceedings of PME, 22(2), 248–255.
  • Fawcett, H. P. (1995). The nature of proof. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • Fischbein, E. (1982). Intuition and proof. For the Learning of Mathematics, 3(2), 8–24.
  • Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.
  • Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.
  • Gagné, F. (1991). Toward a differentiated model of giftedness and talent. In N. Colangelo & Davis G. A. (Eds.), Handbook of gifted education (pp. 65–80). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Hanna, G., & Jahnke, H. (2002). Another approach to proof: Arguments from physics. ZDM, 34(1), 1–8.
  • Heid, M. K. (1983). Characteristics and special needs of the gifted student in mathematics. Mathematics Teacher, 76, 221–226.
  • Krutetskii, V. A. (1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school children. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lee, K. H. (2005). Three types of reasoning and creative informal proofs by mathematically gifted students. Proceedings of PME, 29(3), 241–248.
  • Leron, U. (1982). How communicative is a proof ? Proceedings of PME, 6, 132–136.
  • Leron, U. (1983). Structuring mathematical proofs. The American Mathematical Monthly, 90, 174–185.
  • Mariotti, M. A., & Fischbein, E. (1997). Defining in classroom activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34, 219–248.
  • Miyazaki, M. (1991). The explanation by “example” for establishing the generality of conjectures. Proceedings of PME, 15(3), 9–16.
  • Movshovitz-Hadar, N. (1988). Stimulating presentation of theorems followed by responsive proofs. For the Learning of Mathematics, 8(2), 12–19.
  • Na, G., Han, D., Lee, K., & Song, S. (2007). Mathematically gifted students’ problem solving approaches on conditional probability. Proceedings of PME, 31(4), 1–8.
  • Ouvrier-Buffet, C. (2004). Construction of mathematical definitions: An epistemological and didactical study. Proceedings of PME, 28(3), 473–480.
  • Ouvrier-Buffet, C. (2006). Classification activities and definition construction at the elementary level. Proceedings of PME, 30(4), 297–304.
  • Presmeg, N. C. (1986). Visualization and mathematical giftedness. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17, 297–311.
  • Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1986). The Schoolwide Enrichment Model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
  • Ryu, H., Chong, Y., & Song, S. (2007). Mathematically gifted students’ spatial visualization ability of solid figures. Proceedings of PME, 31(4), 137–144.
  • Semadeni, Z. (1984). Action proof in primary mathematics teaching and in teacher training. For the Learning of Mathematics, 4(1), 32–34.
  • Sriraman, B. (2003). Mathematical giftedness, problem solving, and the ability to formulate generalizations: The problem-solving experiences of four gifted students. Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 14, 151–165.
  • Sriraman, B. (2004). Gifted ninth graders’ notions of proof: Investigating parallels in approaches of mathematically gifted students and professional mathematicians. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 267–292.
  • Tretter, T. R. (2005). Gifted students speak: Mathematics problem-solving insights. In S. K. Johnsen & J. Kendrick (Eds.), Math education for gifted students (pp. 119–143). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.
  • Usiskin, Z. (1987). Resolving the continuing dilemmas in school geometry. In M. M. Lindquist (Ed.), Learning and teaching geometry, K–12 (pp. 17–31). Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • Van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and insight. New York: Academic Press.
  • Zaslavsky, O., & Shir, K. (2005). Students’ conceptions of a mathematical definition. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 36, 317–346.
Fields marked with an asterisk * are mandatory.
 

Your Name:*
 

Your Email:*
 

Friend's Name:*
 

Friend's Email:*
 

Message:
 

 
Send CC to self
 

 
 

Bookmark
X
  • Volume 32
  •  Issue 2
  • Publication Date: Winter 2008
  • Page Number(s): 211-229
  • DOI: 10.4219/jeg-2008-851



A Case Study on the Local Organization of Two Mathematically Gifted Seventh-Grade Students

Jaehoon Yim, Yeong Ok Chong, Sang Hun Song, and Seokil Kwon

This study explores the performance of two mathematically gifted Korean 7th-grade students in tasks involving local organization in geometry. The students understood the necessity of definitions and starting points in defining terms and organizing geometrical properties. They improved the clarity of their definitions and arranged the properties systematically with the belief that the properties of the geometric figures would be discussed only after the defining work was completed. Through these activities, they understood an axiomatic method and its importance in geometry. The results suggest that mathematically gifted lower secondary students can be encouraged to advance into axiomatic geometry through local organization activities.


ShoppingCart Summary

Shopping
You have 59 item(s) in your cart.
Last item you added is
Mentoring: An Educational Alternative for Gifted Students.

View Cart