Recent research on mathematics reforms in the United States indicates that the reforms are not yet widely implemented. Generally, this claim results from looking at the extent to which teachers use curricular materials or engage in particular classroom practices. This article moves beyond disparate questions of use and practice to examine interactions between teachers and curricula as evidenced by their enactments of whole-number lessons from a Standards-based curriculum. Specifically, we analyze videorecorded 1st- and 2nd-grade classroom lessons in terms of students' opportunities to reason and communicate about mathematics. This analysis indicates that the level of fidelity to the written curriculum differs from the level of fidelity to the authors' intended curriculum during lesson enactments. Drawing on this analysis, this article explores how curricula support and hinder teachers as they engage students in opportunities to learn mathematics and how teachers' instructional moves and choices impact the enactment of curricula.
Drawing on prior research on indirect proof, this paper reports on a series of exploratory studies that examine the extent to which findings on students' ways of reasoning about contradiction and contraposition characterize students' views of indirect existence proofs. Specifically, Study 1 documents students' comparative selections and selection rationales when asked to choose the Bmost convincing^proof, given a constructive and nonconstructive existence proof. Study 2 further examines findings from Study 1 by documenting novices' levels of conviction and interpretations of a nonconstructive existence proof. Findings show that when presented with a nonconstructive proof, students tended to not only find the proof convincing but also interpreted the proof constructively. Moreover, the data indicate students who exhibit an awareness of the nonconstructive structure were divided in terms of their views of which form -constructive or non-constructive -was the most convincing. The discussion considers students' reactions to the disjunctive structure of nonconstructive existence proofs and use of pragmatic and theoretical modes of thought.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.