Umeå University's logo

In mathematics, students’ abilities to make transformations between mathematical representations are fundamental. The recent implementation of digital technologies, such as Dynamic Geometry Environments (DGEs), have changed students’ access to mathematical representations by providing a variety of different representations, available just by pressing a button. Students use of a DGE may change their mathematical communication to become more dynamic and active. However, it is not clear how the use of DGEs and the change in communication style relate to more epistemological aspects of students’ mathematical work. This study, therefore, investigates the interplay between students’ dynamic mathematical communication and their transformations of mathematical representations when using a DGE from a competency perspective. Based on analyses of instances of lower secondary school students’ dynamic mathematical communication, findings indicate that students’ mathematical communication reflect the new ways of engaging with mathematical representations when using a DGE. Hence, the communication becomes dynamic. Theoretically, the complexity of having “continuous” transformations of mathematical representations may reduce the readiness of the mathematical communication competency. The “continuous” transformation may in fact cause students to unintentionally ascribe dynamic properties to mathematical representation.

This study uses a statistical method to identify verbal items among mathematical items from PISA 2003. The verbal items are preliminary analysed and compared to the non-verbal items concerning number of text lines, response types, cognitive level, and competences measured. The results show that the verbal items, to a higher percentage than the non-verbal items, measures the reproduction competency, are straigh­t­forward, and of open constructed-response type. These results and proposed further analyses are discussed.

This dissertation consists of two different but connected parts. Part A is based on two articles in mathematics and Part B on two articles in mathematics education.

Part A mainly focus on properties of positive currents in connection to polynomial convexity. Earlier research has shown that a point z⁰ lies in the polynomial hull of a compact set K if and only if there is a positive current with compact support such that dd^cT = μ−δ_z0. Here μ is a probability measure on K and δ_z0 denotes the Dirac mass at z₀. The main result of Article I is that the current T does not have to be unique. The second paper, Article II, contains two examples of different constructions of this type of currents. The paper is concluded by the proof of a proposition that might be the first step towards generalising the method used in the first example.

Part B consider the types of reasoning that are required by students taking introductory calculus courses at Swedish universities. Two main concepts are used to describe the students’ reasoning: imitative reasoning and creative reasoning. Imitative reasoning consists basically of remembering facts or recalling algorithms. Creative reasoning includes flexible thinking founded on the relevant mathematical properties of ob jects in the task. Earlier research results show that students often choose imitative reasoning to solve mathematical tasks, even when it is not a successful method. In this context the word choose does not necessarily mean that the students make a conscious and well considered selection between methods, but just as well that they have a subconscious preference for certain types of procedures. The research also show examples of how students that work with algorithms seem to focus solely on remembering the steps, and researchers argue that this weakens the students’ understanding of the underlying mathematics. Article III examine to what extent students at Swedish universities can solve exam tasks in introductory calculus courses using only imitative reasoning. The results show that about 70 % of the tasks were solvable by imitative reasoning and that the students were required to use creative reasoning in only one of 16 exams in order to pass. In Article IV, six of the teachers that constructed the analysed exams in Article III were interviewed. The purpose was to examine their views and opinions on the reasoning required in the exams. The analysis showed that the teachers are quite content with the present situation. The teachers expressed the opinion that tasks demanding creative reasoning are usually more difficult than tasks solvable with imitative reasoning. They therefore use the required reasoning as a tool to regulate the tasks’ degree of difficulty, rather than as a task dimension of its own. The exams demand mostly imitative reasoning since the teachers believe that they otherwise would, under the current circumstances, be too difficult and lead to too low passing rates.

Empirical research shows that students often use reasoning founded on copying algorithms or recalling facts (imitative reasoning) when solving mathematical tasks. Research also indicate that a focus on this type of reasoning might weaken the students' understanding of the underlying mathematical concepts. It is therefore important to study the types of reasoning students have to perform in order to solve exam tasks and pass exams. The purpose of this study is to examine what types of reasoning students taking introductory calculus courses are required to perform. Tasks from 16 exams produced at four different Swedish universities were analyzed and sorted into task classes. The analysis resulted in several examples of tasks demanding different types of mathematical reasoning. The results also show that about 70% of the tasks were solvable by imitative reasoning and that 15 of the exams could be passed using only imitative reasoning.

Students often use imitative reasoning, i.e. copy algorithms or recall facts, when solving mathematical tasks. Research show that this type of imitative reasoning might weaken the students' understanding of the underlying mathematical concepts. In a previous study, the author classified tasks from 16 final exams from introductory calculus courses at Swedish universities. The results showed that it was possible to pass 15 of the exams, and solve most of the tasks, using imitative reasoning. This study examines the teachers' views on the reasoning that students are expected to perform during their own and others mathematics exams. The results indicate that the exams demand mostly imitative reasoning since the teachers think that the exams otherwise would be too difficult and lead to too low passing rates.

Over the last decades, there has been an on-going international reform for school mathematics, which has, not surprisingly, been difficult to implement. This study focuses on teachers’ interpretation of formal written curriculum documents, especially whether their interpretations align with how a concept (the concept of problem) is conveyed in the documents (in Sweden). The results show that the formal written documents are vague, but that it to some extent conveys the concept of problem as “a task for which the solution method is not known in advance to the solver.” The interviews show that about 53 % of the teachers interpreted problem as “any task,” and that teachers’ interpretationstherefore are not aligned with how the concept is (albeit vaguely) conveyed in the documents.

More than 15 years after the introduction of a standards-based curriculum reform, the mathematics teachers are positive towards the reform message but have not changed their classroom practice accordingly. To improve the impact of future reforms, it is important to learn from this situation and to better understand the role of the national policy documents. The purpose of this study is therefore to examine how the standards-based reform in mathematics in Sweden was conveyed in the formal written curriculum. The research questions focus on to what extent and how clearly the national policy documents convey the message. The results show that the message is present to a large extent in the policy documents, but that it is vague and formulated with complex wording. The study gives concrete examples and shows in detail in what ways the documents are vague and complex.