Visual and Analytic Strategies in Geometry

Main Article Content

George Kospentaris
Stella Vosniadou
Smaragda Kazi
Emiliana Thanou

Abstract

We argue that there is an increasing reliance on analytic strategies compared to visuo-spatial strategies, which is related to geometry expertise and not on individual differences in cognitive style. A Visual/Analytic Strategy Test (VAST) was developed to investigate the use of visuo-spatial and analytic strategies in geometry in 30 mathematics teachers and 134 11th grade students. Students’ performance in the VAST was also compared to performance in tests of visuo-spatial abilities, of abstract reasoning, and of geometrical knowledge. The results showed high performance of all the participants in the VAST items that could be solved by relying on visuo-spatial strategies. However, only the math teachers showed high performance in the VAST items that required the application of analytic geometrical strategies. There were high correlations between the students’ performance in the tests of visuo-spatial and abstract reasoning abilities and the VAST Analytic Strategies scale, but the contribution of these tests to the VAST analytic performance became statistically insignificant when geometrical knowledge was used as a mediating factor. The implications of this work for the learning and assessment of geometrical knowledge are discussed.  

Article Details

How to Cite
Kospentaris, G., Vosniadou, S., Kazi, S., & Thanou, E. (2016). Visual and Analytic Strategies in Geometry. Frontline Learning Research, 4(1), 40–57. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v%vi%i.226
Section
Articles

References

Battista, M. T. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, NCTM (pp. 843-908). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Bodner, G.M., & Guay, R.B. (1997). The Purdue Visualization of Rotations Test. The Chemical Educator, 2(4), 1-17.
Burger, W. F., & Shaughnessy, J. M. (1986). Characterizing the van Hiele levels of development in geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17, 31-48.
CSGT California Standards Test Geometry sample (2009). http://www.cde.ca.gov/Ta/tg/sr/ documents/cstrtqgeomapr15.pdf
Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Cheng, Y.L., & Mix, K.S. (2012). Spatial Training Improves Children's Mathematics Ability. Journal of Cognition and Development (published online, September 19, 2012). http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/15248372.2012.725186
Chi, M. T. H., (2008). Three Types of Conceptual Change: Belief Revision, Mental Model Transformation, and Categorical Shift. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (pp. 61-82). New York, NY: Routledge.
Clement, J. (1982). Students' preconceptions in introductory mechanics. The American Journal of Physics, 50(1), 66-71.
Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (2001). Logo and Geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph.Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
diSessa, A., (1982). Unlearning Aristotelian physics: A study of knowledge-based learning. Cognitive Science, 6(1), 37-75.DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog0601_2
Eisenberg, T., & Dreyfus, T. (1991). On the reluctance to visualize in mathematics. In W. Zimmermann & S. Cunningham (Eds.), Visualization in teaching and learning mathematics (pp. 26-37). Washington, DC: MAA.
Evans, J. St. B.T., & Stanovich, K. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241. Doi: 10.1177/1745691612460685
Fischbein, E. (1993). The theory of figural concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24 (2), 139-162.
Gutiérrez, A., & Jaime, A. (1998). On the assessment of the van Hiele levels of reasoning. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 20(2-3), 27-46.
Hegarty, M. (1992). Mental animation: Inferring motion from static diagrams of mechanical systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 18, 1084–1102.
Hegarty, M., Montello, D. R., Richardson, A. E., Ishikawa, T., & Lovelace, K. (2006). Spatial Abilities at Different Scales: Individual Differences in Aptitude-Test Performance and Spatial-Layout Learning. Intelligence, 34, 151-176.
Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. (2006). Individual differences in spatial abilities. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), Handbook of Visualspatial Thinking. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Houdement, C., & Kuzniak, A. (2003). Elementary Geometry Split into Different Geometrical Paradigms. Proceedings of CERME 3, Belaria, Italy. http://www.dm.unipi.it/~didattica/ CERME3/proceedings/Groups/TG7/TG7_Houdement_cerme3.pdf
Kastens, K.A., & Ishikawa, T. (2006). Spatial thinking in the geosciences and cognitive sciences: A cross-disciplinary look at the intersection of the two fields. In C. A. Manduca & D. W. Mogk (Eds.), Earth and mind: How geologists think and learn about the Earth (pp. 53-76). Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America.
Kilpatrick, J., Hoyles, C., & Skovsmose, O. (Eds.) in collaboration with Valero, P. (2005). Meaning in Mathematics Education, USA: Springer.
Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Spatial visualization in physics problem solving. Cognitive Science, 31, 549-579.
Lehrer, R., Jenkins, M., & Osana. H. (1998). Longitudinal study of children’s reasoning about space and geometry. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazan (Eds.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 137-167). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Lynn, B. M., & Lynch, C. M. (2010). van Hiele Revisited. Mathematics Teaching In The Middle School, 16(4), 232-238.
Newcombe, N. S. (2010). Picture this: Increasing math and science learning by improving spatial thinking. American Educator, Summer, 29-43.
Newcombe, N. S., & Frick, A. (2010), Early education for spatial intelligence: Why, what, and How. Mind, Brain and Education, 4(3), 102-111.
Newcombe, N. S., & Huttenlocher J. (2000). Making space: The development of spatial representation and reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Newcombe, N. S., Uttal, D. H. & Sauter, M. (in press). Spatial Development. In P. Zelazo (Ed), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Piaget, J., Inhelder, B., & Szeminska, A. (1948/1960). Child’s conception of geometry. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Pitta-Pantazi, D., & Christou, C. (2009). Cognitive styles, dynamic geometry and measurement performance. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70, 5-26.
Sanchez, C.A. (2012). Enhancing visuospatial performance through video game training to increase learning in visuospatial science domains. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19 (1), 58–65.
Schwartz, D.L., & Black, J.B. (1996). Shuttling between depictive models and abstract rules: Induction and fallback. Cognitive Science, 20, 457-497.
Shea, D. L., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: A 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 604–614.
Shtulman, A., & Valcarcel, J. (2012). Scientific knowledge suppresses but does not supplant earlier intuitions. Cognition, 124, 209–215.
Spelke, E. S., & Kinzler, K. D. (2007). Core knowledge. Developmental Science, 10, 89–96.
Spelke, E.S., Lee, S. A., & Izard, V. (2010). Beyond core knowledge: Natural geometry. Cognitive Science, 34(5), 863-884
Stieff, M. (2007). Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science. Learning and Instruction, 17, 219-234.
Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele levels and achievement in secondary school geometry. Colombus, OH: ERIC.
Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A.R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N.S. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 352-402.
Van Hiele P. M. (1986). Structure and Insight: A theory of Mathematics Education. London: Academic Press Inc.
Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental Models of the Day/Night Cycle. Cognitive Science, 18, 123-183.
Vosniadou, S. (2013). Conceptual change in learning and instruction: The framework theory approach. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change, 2nd Edition (pp. 11-30). New York, NY: Routledge.
Vosniadou, S., & Skopeliti, I. (2014). Conceptual change from the framework theory side of the fence. Science and Education, 23(7), 1427-1445.
Vosniadou, S., Pnevmantikos, D., Makris, N., Ikospentaki, K., Lepenioti, D., Chountala, A., & Kyrianakis, G. (2015). Executive Functions and Conceptual Change in Science and Mathematics Learning, 7th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Pasadena, CA. https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2015/papers/0434/paper0434.pdf
Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(4), 817–835.
Wiser, M., & Smith, C. (2013). Learning and teaching about matter in the middle school years. How can atomic-molecular theory be meaningfully introduced? In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change, 2nd Edition (pp. 177-194). New York, NY: Routledge.
Zazkis, R., Dubinsky, E., & Dautermann, J. (1996). Coordinating visual and analytic strategies: A study of students' understanding of the group D 4. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 435–457.