Teachers’ and students’ beliefs on developing argumentative competence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24197/edmain.2.2024.60-72Keywords:
Argumentative competence, Qualitative study, Beliefs, Teacher practices, Mathematics EducationAbstract
When we deal with argumentative competence in class there are many points of view: teacher’s and student’s point of view and the external point of view of knowledge (in a theoretical sense). The research shows a qualitative experimental study that allows a comparison between different perspectives in order to measure argumentative competence. The study involved 5 classes and 9 teachers. First, the idea of argumentative competence was discussed from a theoretical and institutional point of view in the Italian school system. Then questionnaires were administered to teachers and deep interviews were conducted with students. Finally, teachers participated in focus groups, and this allowed reflections and encouraged discussion. The process implemented allowed an in-depth key on the concept of argumentative competence. Also, the analysis of the results of the questionnaire and interviews shows how classroom practices are related to teacher and students’ attitudes and beliefs in mathematics.
Downloads
References
Beswick, K. (2007). Teachers’ beliefs that matter in secondary mathematics classrooms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(1), 95–120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9035-3
Boero, P. (2011). Argumentation and proof: Discussing a “successful” classroom discussion. In M. Pytlak, T. Rowland & E. Swoboda (Eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 120–130). ERME.
Cox, J. R., & Willard, C. A. (1982). Introduction: The field of argumentation. In J. R. Cox, & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Advances in argumentation theory and research (pp. xiii–xvii). Southern Illinois University Press.
Cross, D., Taasoobshirazi, G., Hendricks, S., & Hickey, D. T. (2008). Argumentation: A strategy for improving achievement and revealing scientific identities. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 837–861. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701411567
Di Martino, P., & Zan, R. (2010). ‘Me and maths’: Towards a definition of attitude grounded on students’ narratives. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 13(1), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-009-9134-z
Durand-Guerrier, V., Boero, P., Douek, N., Epp, S. S., & Tanguay, D. (2012). Argumentation and proof in the mathematics classroom. In G. Hanna & M. de Villiers (Eds.), Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education (pp. 349-367). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2129-6_15
Furinghetti, F., & Morselli, F. (2011). Beliefs and beyond: Hows and whys in the teaching of proof. ZDM, 43(4), 587-599. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0316-7
Hanna, G., & Jahnke, H. N. (1996). Proof and proving. In A. Bishop, M. A. K. Clements, C. Keitel-Kreidt, J. Kilpatrick & C. Laborde (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 877-908). Springer.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.
McLeod, D. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: a reconceptualization. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 575-596). McMillan Publishing Company.
MIUR (2012), Indicazioni Nazionali per il curricolo della scuola dell’infanzia e del primo ciclo d’istruzione. https://www.mim.gov.it/documents/20182/51310/DM+254_2012.pdf
Nicholls, J., Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., & Patashnick, M. (1990). Assessing student’s theories of success in mathematics: Individual and classroom difference. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.21.2.0109
Planas, N. (2018). Language as resource: A key notion for understanding the complexity of mathematics learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 98, 215-229. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9810-y
Plantin, C. (1996). L’argumentation [Argumentation]. Seuil.
Prediger, S. (2019). Theorizing in design research. Methodological reflections on developing and connecting theory elements for language-responsive mathematics classrooms. AIEM - Avances de Investigación en Educación Matemática, 15, 5-27. https://doi.org/10.35763/aiem.v0i15.265
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013). What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 483-520. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313487606
Reid, D. A., & Knipping, C. (2010). Proof in mathematics education. Research, learning and teaching. Sense.
Spagnolo, C., Capone, R., & Gambini, A. (2021). Where do students focus their attention on solving mathematical tasks? An eye tracker explorative study. In M. Inprasitha, N. Changsri & N. Boonsena (Eds.), Proceedings of the 44th
Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (vol. 4, pp. 89-96). PME.
Venville, G. J., & Dawson, V. M. (2010). The impact of a classroom intervention on Grade 10 students’ argumentation skills, informal reasoning, and conceptual understanding of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 952–977. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20358
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students’ knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 35–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10008
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Camilla Spagnolo
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The articles published at Edma 0-6: Childhood Mathematics Education will have a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
The journal allows the authors to retain publishing rights. Authors may reprint their articles in other media without having to request authorization, provided they indicate that the article was originally published in Título de la revista.