At what age should mathematical proofs be taught to students

In summary: ...because their mathematical sophistication would most likely extend as far as addition of three digit numbers what precisely would they be seeking out to prove?
  • #1
pentazoid
146
0
I think college is way tooo late to learn how to write mathematical proofs! Proof writing should begin at least either in elementary school or middle school. Proof writing is just as important to a students education as learning how to write sentences and learn how to combined those sentences to create paragraghs and learn how to combined paragraphs together properly to write a decent term paper, because PRoof writing will improve your deductive and reasoning skills. I think a lot of people hate mathematics because they don't understand how the equations were derived . In high school, math was just memorizing formulas and algorithms . When I got to college, They just threw proofs right at me, and now my system that I have been using all my life to passed mathematics failed because you had to apply systematic methodology for writing proofs and so sadly I dropped my math major.
 
Science news on Phys.org
  • #2
What makes you think that elementary school children have the intellectual maturity necessary to understand mathematical proofs?

Further, given that their mathematical sophistication would most likely extend as far as addition of three digit numbers what precisely would they be seeking out to prove?
 
  • #3
SticksandStones said:
What makes you think that elementary school children have the intellectual maturity necessary to understand mathematical proofs?

Further, given that their mathematical sophistication would most likely extend as far as addition of three digit numbers what precisely would they be seeking out to prove?
I hope 9 year olds aren't just learning how to add 3 digit numbers. IF they are, then the kids who had the luxury of being taught in the public education system, are really screwed.

sure they have the intellectual capacity to write proofs just like they have the intellectual capacity to to write sentences and paragraphs. I think they lacked mathematical sophistication because we are not taught how to write proofs. Students should learned how mathematics equations and diagrams like Pascal's Triangle and N-factorial are derived
because right now they really don't have a strong grasp on understanding what those equations mean.
 
  • #4
I can't say what age exactly, but certainly sooner than they are now. Do high schools in the US even do proofs anymore? It doesn't even have to be formal proof, but some kind of "mathematical reasoning", to use a tired phrase, is necessary. Students are so used to being fed rule after rule that they completely shut down when they're asked to think. This happens even in AP calculus with strong students. Why are volumes of revolution so hard for them? Because there's multiple steps and no simple formula to just plug things into. We're really doing a disservice to students.

It happened to me today when trying to explain the exponent rules. Students couldn't understand why I wrote out (5^5)/(5^2) as (5x5x5x5x5)/(5x5), canceled, and got 5^3. They asked why I didn't just tell them that the answer was 5^3 instead of trying to explain why. They also couldn't understand why I crossed out two fives from top and bottom (they're in 9th grade).

Even worse is that it seems to be acceptable and normal for entering high school students to not be able to work with fractions! Why is there no national outrage over this? Just about anything short of proving that every vector space has a basis in the 3rd grade seems worth trying.
 
  • #5
pentazoid said:
I hope 9 year olds aren't just learning how to add 3 digit numbers. IF they are, then the kids who had the luxury of being taught in the public education system, are really screwed.

I think the first time I encountered proofs was in 8th grade algebra or 9th grade geometry. I think that was a fine time to do so (I remember really enjoying them in geometry... since my teacher had given us noticed that if you proved something you thought was useful and handed it in as extra credit, then you could also use it later in your proofs on tests). I went through the public system and think I turned out just fine with regards to handling higher mathematics.

I'm not sure if you have a nine year old, but my nine-year old still still can't remember to tuck in his shirt or wash his face, and tying his shoes is hit-and-miss. He can't always get his single digits multiplication tables with reasonable accuracy, especially if we don't quiz him on them. I'm trying to keep him interested in math by having him help me "test" activities I'm designing for high school teachers on probability, etc. (and get practice on addition, subtraction, etc. that way).
 
  • #6
physics girl phd said:
I think the first time I encountered proofs was in 8th grade algebra or 9th grade geometry. I think that was a fine time to do so (I remember really enjoying them in geometry... since my teacher had given us noticed that if you proved something you thought was useful and handed it in as extra credit, then you could also use it later in your proofs on tests). I went through the public system and think I turned out just fine with regards to handling higher mathematics.

I'm not sure if you have a nine year old, but my nine-year old still still can't remember to tuck in his shirt or wash his face, and tying his shoes is hit-and-miss. He can't always get his single digits multiplication tables with reasonable accuracy, especially if we don't quiz him on them. I'm trying to keep him interested in math by having him help me "test" activities I'm designing for high school teachers on probability, etc. (and get practice on addition, subtraction, etc. that way).

Well I didn't encountered proofs until sophomore year of college and I did terrible in my proof class, because up until then , I just wasn't used to proof writing. At least in elementary school, they should teach you what deductive reasoning is and introduce you to logic, and they should demonstrate to the student how proofs are written. It just doesn't make sense to me to have study math for 13 years and just begin encountering proofs in your sophomore year just after you studied calculus. I supposed when you are only studying arithmetic, writing proofs are not necessary, but students should still be taught deductive reasoning. I think you should begin proof writing when the student begins to study geometry and algebra.
 
  • #7
It should be available at the advanced middle school level for good students, and at the early to intermediate level of high school for everybody.

Elementary school? Maybe some simple proof system... like propositional calculus. I bet a 10-year-old could prove "If A then B means NOT(A) or B", "If A then B and if B then C then if A then C", etc. This would have the added benefit of giving them exposure to things like set and logic notation. Proofs are also easy for logic.

Thoughts?
 
  • #8
Long, long time ago, I first encountered formal proofs as a high school junior in plane geometry, and I thought it was just wonderful. It was the thing that has been missing in all my math classes up to that point. It could have come earlier.
 
  • #9
The first time I saw a proof was in my 8th grade algebra course. I don't recall the teacher going over them or assigning them as homework, but the text, Algebra I by Dolciani, offered numerous examples. I really didn't understand what a proof actually is and why they are necessary until college, which is really sad.

What's worse is that the middle school algebra texts of recent publication appear to offer no example proofs and are not very rigorous from what I have seen in the school district I used to work at. Worse still is the fact that mathematical rigor is being replaced by "gadget tricks", that are supposed to aid in student understanding but is probably detrimental over the long hall.

I think formal proofs can begin as early as the 6th or 7th grade. However, many students will need heavy scaffolding on the teacher's part to be successful at first. I think activities can be designed for K-6 that nurtures mathematical discovery and teaches one to think mathematically, but when it comes down to it, it's a lot easier for a teacher to run a game of "Around the World" to teach students their times tables for 2-3 weeks straight.
 
  • #10
I know that when I was 7 or 8 I could probably have handled some simple proofs. I did math quite a bit and learned basic algebra skills by figuring out how to play the math games you got to play if you finished your work early. I really enjoyed algebra and worked on it(with my teachers and parents and books) until 6th grade when I had to repeat the same material in a so-called 'advanced' math class. I got bored and stopped until college only going up to algebra 2 in high school, and now I will be taking my first graduate course next year as a junior.

That being said, I know that not everyone has an affinity for math and that some people are even put off by proofs after they learn how to do them and drop the major; so, how certain are you that younger kids who have questionable enthusiasm for mathematics would latch onto proofs? I think that if we could have more extracurricular math besides competitions, where interested students can learn a more rigorous version of what is presented in class and not be scared away by the competition aspect(anyone should be allowed to join, no classroom competitions, save that for the math team), then we could certainly bring in those with inclination to see what mathematics is really about.
 
  • #11
Tobias Funke said:
Do high schools in the US even do proofs anymore? It doesn't even have to be formal proof, but some kind of "mathematical reasoning", to use a tired phrase, is necessary. Students are so used to being fed rule after rule that they completely shut down when they're asked to think. This happens even in AP calculus with strong students. Why are volumes of revolution so hard for them? Because there's multiple steps and no simple formula to just plug things into. We're really doing a disservice to students.
It happened to me today when trying to explain the exponent rules. Students couldn't understand why I wrote out (5^5)/(5^2) as (5x5x5x5x5)/(5x5), canceled, and got 5^3. They asked why I didn't just tell them that the answer was 5^3 instead of trying to explain why. They also couldn't understand why I crossed out two fives from top and bottom (they're in 9th grade).
Even worse is that it seems to be acceptable and normal for entering high school students to not be able to work with fractions! Why is there no national outrage over this? Just about anything short of proving that every vector space has a basis in the 3rd grade seems worth trying.


My first experience with formal proofs was 7th grade geometry...I hated it. Maybe it was how it was taught, or maybe it was the book, but when I got to high school AP Calculus (BC), proofs took on a whole new meaning. I couldn't necessarily write them, but I could interpret them. I went from no grasp of proofs, to applying them in one year. This probably had something to do with me being motivated and wanting to learn. But my point is that it can be done.
I am saddened that middle school's have "Advanced Algebra" that is really only doing the kids a disservice. Not being able to work with fractions?! In High School?!

I found this article on the Web. I'm sure some people have already read this, but I think it fits well with what is being talked about, so I'm going to post the link. http://www.maa.org/devlin/LockhartsLament.pdf" [Broken]
It's kind of long, but it is the best article I've ever read that describes the current condition of the American Math system in public schools.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
It's somewhat standard to get proofs in h.s. geometry (9th or 10th grade). However, 2 years ago I tutored a kid in this subject and his teacher never had them do proofs.

So I guess it depends on what school system you're in, and maybe on whether you are in the "honors track" for math.
 
  • #13
IIRC, my first encounter with proofs was probably 7th grade in introductory algebra.

In 10th grade, geometry and trigonometry included many proofs, but the methods were based on what was studied in 7-9th grades.

I would have like to learn more about analytical geometry and linear algebra early. I was introduced to matrices as early as 6th grade.

I found the flow of mathematics and science was sporatic and disjoint. I would have preferred to be allowed to learn when I was ready, but the educational system wasn't structured for me.
 
  • #14
I believe they used to encounter proofs in grade 10, in a geometry course that lasted a year. Most schools don't do that anymore, and proofs are usually only briefly seen in a grade 11-12 geometry course that lasts a semester.

I'm not so much for exposing young students to proofs as I am for exposing them to logic. Instead of teaching say, history and science in elementary school (where most students are too young to appreciate it), a basic course in logic should supersede. Kids should be taught about double negatives, conditional statements, etc. Then again, its difficult to say whether they would understand it. I Know most schools actually teach the proof of pythogaras' theorem, but virtually no one understands it.
 
  • #15
khemix said:
I'm not so much for exposing young students to proofs as I am for exposing them to logic. Instead of teaching say, history and science in elementary school (where most students are too young to appreciate it), a basic course in logic should supersede. Kids should be taught about double negatives, conditional statements, etc. Then again, its difficult to say whether they would understand it. I Know most schools actually teach the proof of pythogaras' theorem, but virtually no one understands it.

I disagree with the idea of not teaching science to elementary students. Kids have a natural curiosity about the world around them and like to ask questions. This can easily lead to scientific inquiry in the classroom. In my experiences as a former science teacher, I see that students tend to dislike science more as they get older.

Students in elementary school have the ability to think logically, but usually in concrete terms, so a course in logic may be too abstract depending on the content and target audience. Here is a link to a general overview of Piaget's learning theory and stages of cognitive development: http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/piaget/index.htm [Broken]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
buffordboy23 said:
I disagree with the idea of not teaching science to elementary students. Kids have a natural curiosity about the world around them and like to ask questions. This can easily lead to scientific inquiry in the classroom. In my experiences as a former science teacher, I see that students tend to dislike science more as they get older.

Students in elementary school have the ability to think logically, but usually in concrete terms, so a course in logic may be too abstract depending on the content and target audience. Here is a link to a general overview of Piaget's learning theory and stages of cognitive development: http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/piaget/index.htm [Broken]

I'm surprised you'd defend science and not history, as I was expecting more criticism for removing a history course which at least gives young students culture.

A lot of this is from personal experience, but any science I did in elementary school hardly inspired curiosity. What I remember doing was some very basic chemistry and physics, which was both too shallow to be of any taste, and the teacher was not qualified to answer our questions. Astronomy on the other hand I really enjoyed, and the study of rocks, but that was only grades 3 and 4. Highschool grade 9 is when I got a real taste for science.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
pentazoid said:
I think a lot of people hate mathematics because they don't understand how the equations were derived .

I think it's more like people forgot the equations they memorized the night before, and they don't know how to derive it.
 
  • #18
khemix said:
I'm surprised you'd defend science and not history, as I was expecting more criticism for removing a history course which at least gives young students culture.

I just now had a chance to read your response. Don't get me wrong. I think history is important too, because of the reasons you mentioned and more. My window of perspective in the educational world was science, so I know now how important the structuring of the K-12 science curriculum is rather than the history curriculum.

The OP's post falls under the general category of how we can improve mathematics education. It's funny that you mentioned the removal of certain elementary school subjects to achieve this end, since I know that some school districts in the U.S. have previously done so to focus on mathematics. Why did they do this? Because of their students' poor performance on high-stakes standardized tests and the negative consequences that would follow.

In my opinion, this is not the answer. The thinking is somewhat analogous to throwing more and more money into education in the hopes that achievement scores will rise. Elementary subjects are the foundation of higher learning, so we must not sacrifice them. It's unfortunate that your science teacher was not qualified to teach science (although they may or may not have their teaching certificate), but this is one part of the problem, which also pertains to mathematics education. From my experience as a student and as a teacher, I see that much of mathematics education is based upon memorization. This does not lead to true understanding of the subject. Moreover, not exposing students to proofs and similar methods of mathematical thinking in their K-12 education is a great disservice to our students, because this is the central force that drives our discoveries in mathematics and students don't recognize and appreciate that.
 
  • #19
Math is not for everyone. People should get out of the mentality its the schools fault. Schools provide all the proofs and motivations if you actually read the textbook. If not there are excellent resources in public libraries.
 
  • #20
Students should be given proofs as soon as possible. Starting from elementary arithmetic.

I remember in like 3rd/4th grade my teacher told us

a/b>c/d
If
ad>bc

At the time, that seemed revolutionary to me. I asked her why that works, and she didn't answer me.

I hate her.
 
  • #21
Howers said:
Math is not for everyone. People should get out of the mentality its the schools fault. Schools provide all the proofs and motivations if you actually read the textbook. If not there are excellent resources in public libraries.

Well, most people's math problems start early. Earlier than the age when a student can be expected to read a textbook on his own (this is probably up to about 20 years old now). And in any case, lots of texts don't provide decent proofs or explanations or lots of teachers skip them, and the student isn't at the level to wade through them on his own.

I don't think a lot of basic things are ever explained, and if they were, the student would realize that they're incredibly clever and beautiful. How many teachers take the time to explain why "carrying", "borrowing", and the long division algorithm work? Not too many I think. How many teachers truly understand them themselves? I don't think I'd like to know. Insufficient teacher knowledge and training are serious problems.

I'm not conveniently forgetting the fact that even after explanations and attempts to convey what's actually going on to students, many of them forget or just don't care, but this happens at the high school level for me. I wonder how much of that mentality is due to their previous schooling.
 
  • #22
Pinu7 said:
I remember in like 3rd/4th grade my teacher told us

a/b>c/d
If
ad>bc

At the time, that seemed revolutionary to me. I asked her why that works, and she didn't answer me.

That's interesting that your teacher provided you with a theorem that contained abstract symbols for numbers in the third/fourth grade. My earliest experience that I can recall was in 7th/8th around the time of algebra.

I think simple theorems like this can be used as tools for mathematical discovery in the elementary grades. As an example, consider the theorem "If a, b, c are positive numbers such that a > b, then ac > bc." Instead of actually presenting the theorem verbatim to the students, the teacher can provide the scaffolding for the students to start thinking in this direction. For example, the teacher has the students pick any two numbers, where one number is larger than the other (say 7 and 5), and then chooses another third number (say 4) and shows the result: 7*4 = 28 and 5*4 = 20, since 28 > 20 this means 7*4 > 5*4. The teacher may ask the class after a few more examples if this (the idea in the theorem but in words) is always true? The class can then try to find "counter-examples", and while doing so they are reinforcing their multiplication and comparison skills, and likely subtraction skills (28 is 8 more than 20). The class can't seem to find a counterexample, so they suggest that the teacher's idea is always true. The teacher then has the class construct a rule for what they just learned; although it lacks true mathematics rigor, mathematical thinking is still employed. Along the way some students may also realize that this rule applies to addition (a+c > b+c for a>b) and by seeing enough examples that ac - bc = nc where n is a positive number.

EDIT: Here's another idea. Question to the class: Starting with a square, how many times do you think you can cut the figure in half and then remove a half and then repeat the process on the figure remaining? The students may suggest a finite number (say 15). The teacher gives each student a square sheet of paper and has them actually go through the process. Eventually, they end up with a piece so small that it seems impossible to cut in half. Now, the teacher comes back and says "imagine if you were really really tiny and had a tiny pair of scissors, do you think you would be able to cut the figure in half again." The students may suggest yes, and suggest the idea that as long as they could keep shrinking themselves and their scissors, there will always be a piece to cut in half. The teacher can have the students represent their work with numbers: How much area of the original square remains after each cut? This example introduces students to the idea of infinity, infinite series, and one-to-one correspondence while employing their current knowledge of areas (each piece is some fractional area of the original) and geometric figures (the figures oscillate between square and rectangle).
 
Last edited:
  • #23
Here's the problem I can see, teaching kids how to solve a problem... teaches them how to solve that problem.

Teaching kids how to construct a problem, and how to derive a proof from it, teaches them how to solve MANY problems.

If I showed a 1st grader two big boxes, one holds three balls, and a smaller closed box. The other has five balls in it. I could ask them, "if both boxes have the same amount of balls, how many are in the closed box?", and I'm pretty sure they'd tell me two.

x+3=5

I could ask them to show me how they got to that answer, and have them explain it. If they guessed, or if they weren't sure, I could demonstrate by having them remove three balls from both sides.

Pow, basic algebraic reasoning, why can't you go further?

Why can't you show a child that asking a question about something they see, can be used to form a hypothesis, and that a hypothesis can be tested with an experiment? That the results of an experiment can be gone over with others to see what information can be gathered, and that there is no limit to the number of times you can do this?

I find it hard to believe that if I basically informed a kid that he now had a basic toolbox with which he could try to understand everything, they wouldn't be excited by the idea, that new power they now possess, not simply having to ask a grown up for an answer, being able to instead try to find an answer on their own is fun!

Why do elementary school kids need culture? They need the basic tools with which to understand the world around them, not etiquette, or a sense of national identity.
 
  • #24
Max™ said:
I could demonstrate by having them remove three balls from both sides.
That wouldn't work with most first graders, you could demonstrate by adding two balls to the missing side but subtracting from both sides is too abstract reasoning. Many of these kids can barely count you know...
Max™ said:
I find it hard to believe that if I basically informed a kid that he now had a basic toolbox with which he could try to understand everything, they wouldn't be excited by the idea, that new power they now possess, not simply having to ask a grown up for an answer, being able to instead try to find an answer on their own is fun!
This isn't true, kids rarely needs help with maths since they rarely needs maths at all except at school. Also maths certainly is not the answer to even a major part of life's questions, it is just exiting if those kinds of things are exiting to you. For example I never asked why the sky was blue or why it was colder in the winter or any other question relating to things like physics or maths, looking through a microscope was the most boring thing ever beaten only by looking through a telescope.

A certain kind of people find those things fascinating but far from everyone and those are just distant applications of maths and not maths in itself.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
Perhaps you're right, perhaps we should keep teaching math and science exactly as we are, it's producing wonderful results.
 
  • #26
buffordboy23 said:
Here's another idea. Question to the class: Starting with a square, how many times do you think you can cut the figure in half and then remove a half and then repeat the process on the figure remaining? The students may suggest a finite number (say 15). The teacher gives each student a square sheet of paper and has them actually go through the process. Eventually, they end up with a piece so small that it seems impossible to cut in half. Now, the teacher comes back and says "imagine if you were really really tiny and had a tiny pair of scissors, do you think you would be able to cut the figure in half again." The students may suggest yes, and suggest the idea that as long as they could keep shrinking themselves and their scissors, there will always be a piece to cut in half. The teacher can have the students represent their work with numbers: How much area of the original square remains after each cut? This example introduces students to the idea of infinity, infinite series, and one-to-one correspondence while employing their current knowledge of areas (each piece is some fractional area of the original) and geometric figures (the figures oscillate between square and rectangle).


I remember in third or forth grade they had use cut out a triangle, then cut all the corners off the triangle and put their tips together. No matter what triangle you made when you put all the corners together they made a straight line. I distinctly remember that glimmer of insight I saw. I still didn't understand why, and almost didn't believe it. But it was right there in from of me.

I don't think I saw proofs again till high school pre-cal. I had a very good math/physics/comp sci teacher all through high school and I remember he showed proofs for nearly every formula we used, but only demanded we learn a couple. I think in that in Manitoba, Canada it is expected that all grade 12 pre-cal students be able to prove the law of cosines; it often comes up on provincial exams. Also, I noticed someone here said they didn't do proof till after intro calc? Well I am not sure about anywhere else but at my university on the first day of intro calc they said you will be expected to be able to prove every theorem used in the course, and believe me they didn't shy away from that promise in the final exam! Every university math test I have ever taken is at least 50% proofs.
 
  • #27
My friend taught his kids that cookies with alcohol in them were bad for them so they should not eat them. The three year old saw the 5 year old eating a cookie and argued if that cookie was not bad for the 5 year old it must not contain alcohol hence would not be bad for her either. Having proved her case she got her cookie.

Proofs are merely valid logical arguments and can begin very early in life.
 
  • #28
First time I saw a proof was in Discrete math 1 and then the next time was Real analysis . I think students should be introduced to proofs as soon as they can handle it.
 
  • #29
╔(σ_σ)╝ said:
First time I saw a proof was in Discrete math 1 and then the next time was Real analysis . I think students should be introduced to proofs as soon as they can handle it.
Are you for real? I have seen derivations for everything we did in maths starting from 7th grade starting with things like the formula for quadratic equations. Also don't they at least teach proof by induction in the calculus sequence?
 
  • #30
When to teach proofs depends on the student. Grade 9 or grade 10 should be the maximum age-range to begin teaching proofs, regardless of the traits of the student - as long as the student is in something like Introductory Algebra or College Preparatory Geometry. Either they adapt to proofs or they do not, but they need to try. For myself, I struggled badly with proofs in Geometry in high school, but later I improved.
 
  • #31
Klockan3 said:
Are you for real? I have seen derivations for everything we did in maths starting from 7th grade starting with things like the formula for quadratic equations. Also don't they at least teach proof by induction in the calculus sequence?

I didn't see induction until Stewarts Calculus book in first year.

Thinking about it we sort of did "proofs" in geometry with similar traingles and congruence. However, it was only given eyeservice and the treatment was very quick. Not only do I not remember how to do them but I also haven't used it since high school.

My high school teacher was like... "here this the quadractic equation it gives you roots to 'stuff ' ". :(
 
  • #32
I teach proofs to my students as soon as they have the tools to do them. For instance in our elementary and intermediate algebra courses, students are taught that parallel lines have the same slope and that perpendicular lines have negative reciprocal slopes. Since these students know nothing of trigonometry, I present these as basic facts. In our college algebra course, they know some trig (at least what the tangent function is and that the tangent of 90 degrees is undefined), so I present the formula for the angle between two lines as a basic fact, and use it to prove the assertions about parallel and perpendicular lines from that. And when we get to precalculus, we do analytic trigonometry and so I prove the formula for the angle between 2 lines.
 
  • #33
I don't exactly know what proofs are even now(I had to prove physics derivations, is that what you're talking about) but I'm sure if I was taught that way as a kid rather than just having random seemingly useless facts thrown at me I'd have learned math a lot better and earlier than taking til Junior year of high school before I finally started to get it.
 
  • #34
I encountered proofs in 8th grade (geometry) but it was taught so rigidly that it just became another 'plug and chug' crap course. conjugates and propositions were taught like arithmetic operators. the other part was that i had no interest in math, which totally destroyed me, but i can 99% of people don't have any interest in it until much later on anyways. then i finished calc in 10th grade, and stopped doing math altogether until college (we only needed 3 years, so i took stat instead).

horrible choice.

what i would have loved was a course describing the properties of numbers, something along a middle school level, and a bit of logic injected in there (basically discrete math for kids). with today's technology, this seems like it'd be appealing.
 
  • #35
Yeah, I like math when I was really young, you know, when it was just adding and subtracting, by 4th grade I started to hate it as I had crappy teachers pretty much every year from that point on until I got sent to a remedial class in 11th grade where I finally got a teacher who taught the reasoning behind why this and that were and what point there was to it, that's when I learned I liked science and math. I think kids can learn a lot more than we give them credit for.
 
<h2>1. What is the ideal age to introduce mathematical proofs to students?</h2><p>The ideal age to introduce mathematical proofs to students is a subject of debate among educators and mathematicians. Some argue that students should be exposed to proofs as early as elementary school, while others believe that high school is the appropriate age. Ultimately, the decision should be based on the individual student's readiness and understanding of basic mathematical concepts.</p><h2>2. Why is it important to teach mathematical proofs to students?</h2><p>Teaching mathematical proofs to students helps develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills. It also allows students to understand the underlying principles and logic behind mathematical concepts, rather than just memorizing formulas and procedures. Additionally, proofs are essential in higher-level mathematics and other fields such as computer science and engineering.</p><h2>3. Are there any prerequisites for learning mathematical proofs?</h2><p>Yes, students should have a solid understanding of basic mathematical concepts such as algebra, geometry, and trigonometry before learning proofs. They should also have a strong foundation in logical reasoning and deductive thinking.</p><h2>4. Can students of all levels and abilities learn mathematical proofs?</h2><p>Yes, students of all levels and abilities can learn mathematical proofs. However, the level of difficulty and complexity of proofs may vary depending on the student's mathematical background and ability. It is essential for teachers to differentiate instruction and provide support for students who may struggle with proofs.</p><h2>5. How can teachers make learning mathematical proofs more engaging for students?</h2><p>Teachers can make learning mathematical proofs more engaging by incorporating hands-on activities, real-world examples, and technology into their lessons. They can also encourage students to work collaboratively and provide opportunities for them to apply their knowledge in creative ways. Additionally, providing meaningful feedback and praise can motivate students to continue learning and improving their skills in proofs.</p>

1. What is the ideal age to introduce mathematical proofs to students?

The ideal age to introduce mathematical proofs to students is a subject of debate among educators and mathematicians. Some argue that students should be exposed to proofs as early as elementary school, while others believe that high school is the appropriate age. Ultimately, the decision should be based on the individual student's readiness and understanding of basic mathematical concepts.

2. Why is it important to teach mathematical proofs to students?

Teaching mathematical proofs to students helps develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills. It also allows students to understand the underlying principles and logic behind mathematical concepts, rather than just memorizing formulas and procedures. Additionally, proofs are essential in higher-level mathematics and other fields such as computer science and engineering.

3. Are there any prerequisites for learning mathematical proofs?

Yes, students should have a solid understanding of basic mathematical concepts such as algebra, geometry, and trigonometry before learning proofs. They should also have a strong foundation in logical reasoning and deductive thinking.

4. Can students of all levels and abilities learn mathematical proofs?

Yes, students of all levels and abilities can learn mathematical proofs. However, the level of difficulty and complexity of proofs may vary depending on the student's mathematical background and ability. It is essential for teachers to differentiate instruction and provide support for students who may struggle with proofs.

5. How can teachers make learning mathematical proofs more engaging for students?

Teachers can make learning mathematical proofs more engaging by incorporating hands-on activities, real-world examples, and technology into their lessons. They can also encourage students to work collaboratively and provide opportunities for them to apply their knowledge in creative ways. Additionally, providing meaningful feedback and praise can motivate students to continue learning and improving their skills in proofs.

Similar threads

  • STEM Educators and Teaching
4
Replies
136
Views
5K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
27
Views
5K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
24
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • STEM Educators and Teaching
Replies
19
Views
1K
Back
Top