Modelling mathematical argumentation: the importance of qualification |
| |
| Authors: | Matthew Inglis Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos and Adrian Simpson |
| |
| Institution: | (1) Learning Sciences Research Institute, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK;(2) Institute of Education, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK;(3) School of Education, University of Durham, Durham, UK |
| |
| Abstract: | In recent years several mathematics education researchers have attempted to analyse students’ arguments using a restricted
form of Toulmin’s The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, UK, 1958] argumentation scheme. In this paper we report data from task-based interviews conducted with highly talented postgraduate
mathematics students, and argue that a superior categorisation of genuine mathematical argumentation is provided by the use
of Toulmin’s full scheme. In particular, we suggest that modal qualifiers play an important and previously unrecognised role
in mathematical argumentation, and that one of the goals of instruction should be to develop students’ abilities to appropriately
match up warrant-types with modal qualifiers. |
| |
| Keywords: | Argumentation Informal logic Number theory Proof Reasoning Toulmin |
| 本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录！ |
|
