2008
DOI: 10.1007/s10649-007-9110-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What makes a counterexample exemplary?

Abstract: In this paper we describe two episodes of instructional interaction, in which examples are used in order to help students face their misconceptions. We introduce the notions of pivotal example and bridging example and highlight their role in creating and resolving a cognitive conflict. We suggest that the convincing power of counterexamples depends on the extent to which they are in accord with individuals' example spaces.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
59
0
5

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 82 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
59
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…Another approach discussed by Pedemonte (2007Pedemonte ( , 2008 employs the construct of structural distance, and she argues for an abductive step in the structurant argumentation in order to assist transition by decreasing the gap between argumentation and proof. Another proposition is that pivotal, bridging or counterexamples could assist students with proof ideas (Stylianides and Stylianides 2007;Zazkis and Chernoff 2008). A potential benefit of a counterexample is to produce cognitive conflict in the student, while a pivotal example is designed to create a turning point in the learner's cognitive perception.…”
Section: Proof and Provingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Another approach discussed by Pedemonte (2007Pedemonte ( , 2008 employs the construct of structural distance, and she argues for an abductive step in the structurant argumentation in order to assist transition by decreasing the gap between argumentation and proof. Another proposition is that pivotal, bridging or counterexamples could assist students with proof ideas (Stylianides and Stylianides 2007;Zazkis and Chernoff 2008). A potential benefit of a counterexample is to produce cognitive conflict in the student, while a pivotal example is designed to create a turning point in the learner's cognitive perception.…”
Section: Proof and Provingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Counterexamples may also foster deductive reasoning, since deductions are made by building models and looking for counterexamples. For Zazkis and Chernoff (2008) a counterexample is a mathematical concept, while a pivotal example is a pedagogical concept, which is within, but pushing the boundaries of the set of examples students have experienced. The role of examples also arose in research by Weber and Mejia-Ramos (2011) on proof reading by mathematicians.…”
Section: Proof and Provingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the denominator is not the difference between the two independent variables of the numerator, then it does not belong to '( ) f a ." Extending examples can be used to generate or describe examples and to define the possible variations of the category, while the variation itself falls within a range of permissible changes [13] and creates and resolves cognitive conflict [17]. These observations and examples are relevant from the perspective of the theory of variation, for the comparison of variance and invariance is important to prepare students to grasp the characteristics of mathematical objects [18,19].…”
Section: Extending Examplesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Zazkis and Chernoff argued that pivotal counterexamples can be addressed in an instructional learning design to anticipate a state of which students confront with contradictive conceptions [10]. A counterexample is said to be pivotal for students when the example leads a "turning point" to their conceptions, i.e., the example causes a dissonance to the wrong or lack of understanding of students.…”
Section: The Problem Solvings On the Destructive Situations 1) Pivomentioning
confidence: 99%