Mathematical thinking

is
of course
very special
Why should we care
about whether it’s
special?
Because we’re asking society to fund
us to teach it.

Because we want to be able to

recognise mathematical thinking
when we see it.

Because somebody might ask us –

at a party or in a classroom.
 Because a teacher’s political position
+
her general educational philosophy
+
her views about nature of mathematics
and numeracy
= (sort of)
her approaches to teaching, and to
curriculum and accreditation issues
Based on Ernest, P., 1991, The Philosophy of Mathematics Education,
Basingstoke, Flamer Press
 What do you really
hope or believe about
the “specialness” of
maths?
Hopes and beliefs exercise
 What makes maths special?

•Content?
•Style of thinking?
•Style and standards of
proof?
Maths is ABOUT something

It’s about
numbers or
shapes or
symbols or
mental objects or........
Bain, I. 1986. Celtic Knotwork. London: Constable
Bain, I. 1986. Celtic Knotwork. London: Constable
Zaslavsky, C. 1973 Africa Counts. Westport. Lawrence Hill & Co.
Zaslavsky, C. 1973 Africa Counts. Westport. Lawrence Hill & Co.
Zaslavsky, C. 1973 Africa Counts. Westport. Lawrence Hill & Co.
Zaslavsky, C. 1973 Africa Counts. Westport. Lawrence Hill & Co.
Deal or No Deal.

Any mathematical
thinking going on there?
OK......

it’s not about things......

it’s about FACTS about the things.

Maths is really a set of facts about the

world...

like 1 + 1 = 2
Or.......

“for every line, L, and point, P, which

is not on that line, there exists a
unique line, M, through P that is
parallel to L.”

Is that a fact? A mathematical fact?

Ok,
forget content,
forget facts.

Maths isn’t a noun, it’s a verb.

It’s about a style of thinking.

 style of thinking.....
logical objective challenging
integrated
stuck but happy knitting ideas together
deductive consistent compartmentalised
creative
questioning
step-by-step disciplined rule-generating

speculating generalising enquiring

practical abstract well-organised

rule-following proof refutation algorithmic

structured by leaps and bounds intuitive

How about proof?

If you prove something, you’ve been

doing mathematical thinking........?

And if you haven’t proved something, you

haven’t .......?
When is a proof really a
proof?
Formal ? Algebraic? Computer-
generated? Visual? Intuition?
Consensus?

Proof-building by “incessant improvement

of guesses by speculation and criticism, by
the logic of proofs and refutations”
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and Refutations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 XXXX

XXXX
 XXXX

XXXX
 Mathematicians as enquirers
• Visual
- thinking in pictures, often dynamic

• Analytic
- thinking symbolically, often formalistically

• Conceptual
- thinking in ideas, classifying
Burton, L. (2004). Mathematicians as Enquirers - Learning about
Learning Mathematics. Dordecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
And finally.......

0
9 1

8 2

7 3

6 4
5