1 The van Hiele Model Matthew C. Robinson, Summer B 2006.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
P.M van Hiele Mathematics Learning Theorist Rebecca Bonk Math 610 Fall 2009.
Advertisements

A Story of Geometry Grade 8 to Grade 10 Coherence
Examining Proofs ©Xtreem Geometry TEKS G.6E.
Agenda. Mathematical Practices 1. Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them. 2. Reason abstractly and quantitatively. 3. Construct viable arguments.
Chapter 8 Introductory Geometry Section 8.3 Triangles, Quadrilateral and Circles.
ACEI Standard 3c. Development of critical thinking, problem solving, performance skills- The following presentation is a geometry lesson for fifth to.
HOW MIGHT WE SUPPORT TEACHERS AS THEY DEEPEN THEIR OWN UNDERSTANDING AND EXPLORE STUDENT THINKING RELATED TO THE K-6 GEOMETRY PROGRESSION? GINI STIMPSON.
Developing Geometric Thinking: Van Hiele’s Levels Mara Alagic.
Shapes and the Coordinate System TEKS 8.6 (A,B) & 8.7 (A,D)
CI 319 Fall 2007 Mara Alagic 1 Developing Geometric Thinking: The Van Hiele Levels Adapted from Van Hiele, P. M. (1959). Development and learning process.
Van Hiele’s Learning Theory Mara Alagic. 2 June 2004 Levels of Geometric Thinking Precognition Level 0: Visualization/Recognition Level 1: Analysis/Descriptive.
The van Hiele levels MA418 – Spring 2010 McAllister.
Developing Geometric Thinking: The Van Hiele Levels Adapted from Van Hiele, P. M. (1959). Development and learning process. Acta Paedogogica Ultrajectina.
TR1413: Discrete Mathematics For Computer Science Lecture 1: Mathematical System.
K-6 Geometry Progression In Practice Content contained is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
The van Hiele Model of Geometric Thought
Postulates and Paragraph Proofs
Bellringer Your mission: Construct a perfect square using the construction techniques you have learned from Unit 1. You may NOT measure any lengths with.
1 Geometry and Spatial Reasoning Develop adequate spatial skills Children respond to three dimensional world of shapes Discovery as they play, build and.
1. An Overview of the Geometry Standards for School Mathematics? 2.
Developing Geometric Reasoning Mary Jane Schmitt August 22–24, 2006 Washington, DC.
Geometric and Spatial Reasoning
Susana Bravo. Why Projects? Project Based Learning is an approach to teaching that involves the use of projects and other hands on tools. It is an alternative.
Developing Geometric Reasoning K-2 Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Class March 14, 2011 Paige Richards and Dana Thome.
Students can identify objects by their overall shape. They need to see many examples and non-examples. Van Hiele Model of Geometric Understanding Level.
Non-Euclidean Geometry Br. Joel Baumeyer, FSC Christian Brothers University.
Geometry Grades K-2. Goals:  Build an understanding of the mathematical concepts within the Geometry Domain  Analyze how concepts of Geometry progress.
1 The van Hiele levels of Geometrical thought in an in-service training setting in South Africa. Ronél Paulsen South Africa
The Problem Students in classes enter at varying levels of understanding Textbooks often introduce concepts in ways that are confusing to students Students.
TIPM3 Second and Third Grade Geometry November 3, 2010.
Tending the Greenhouse Vertical and Horizontal Connections within the Mathematics Curriculum Kimberly M. Childs Stephen F. Austin State University.
GRADE 8 PYTHAGOREAN THEOREM  Understand and apply the Pythagorean Theorem.  Explain a proof of the Pythagorean Theorem and its converse. Here is one.
6.1 WELCOME TO COMMON CORE HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS LEADERSHIP SUMMER INSTITUTE 2015 SESSION 6 29 JUNE 2015 SEQUENCING BASIC RIGID MOTIONS; THE KOU-KU THEOREM.
An Introduction to Chapter 9: Geometric Figures
Van Hiele Levels of understanding shapes in geometry.
D EVELOPMENTAL A PPROACHES TO T EACHING M ATHEMATICS Pep Serow Serow, UNE, 2008.
Geometry and Measurement ECED 4251 Dr. Jill Drake.
Susana Bravo. Why Projects? Project Based Learning is an approach to teaching that involves the use of projects and other hands on tools. It is an alternative.
T1PM3 4 th and 5 th grade Math Institute Focus on Geometry, Measurement and Data & The Eight Mathematical Practice September 27, 2011.
Class 4: Part 1 Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Class April 4, 2011.
PROCESS STANDARDS FOR MATHEMATICS. PROBLEM SOLVING The Purpose of the Problem Solving Approach The problem solving approach fosters the development of.
Common Core Leadership in Mathematics Project, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Understanding Shape in Kindergarten and Grade 1 Common Core.
Geometry EDN 322. NCTM’S STANDARD FOR GEOMETRY  analyze characteristics and properties of two-and three-dimensional geometric objects and develop mathematical.
Using geometric vocabulary with meaning Math Alliance November 16, 2010 Beth Schefelker, Judy Winn, & Melissa Hedges.
Teaching children to reason mathematically Anne Watson Ironbridge 2014 University of Oxford Dept of Education.
Using GSP in Discovering a New Theory Dr. Mofeed Abu-Mosa This paper 1. Connects Van Hiele theory and its levels of geometric thinking with.
 Van Hiele Levels Math Alliance September 14, 2010 Kevin McLeod Chris Guthrie.
Geometry The Van Hiele Levels of Geometric Thought.
Geometry 1 st Grade Geometry Lesson. Content Strand Addressed Geometry Strand Students will: use visualization and spatial reasoning to analyze characteristics.
TIPM3 March 2, 2011 Kindergarten and First Grade.
Geometry in NZC Shape - a teaching progression Sandra Cathcart LT Symposium 2009.
a square  AFEO, a rectangle  LDHE, a rhombus  GDEO,
Using Geoboards. Identify and describe shapes (squares, circles, triangles, rectangles, hexagons, cubes, cones, cylinders, and spheres). This entire cluster.
Geometry standards MATH 124. Kindergarten Identify and describe shapes. CCSS.Math.Content.K.G.A.1 Describe objects in the environment using names of shapes,
ASSESSMENT AND CORRECTION MATHEMATICS EDUCATION: ECED 4251 Rosalind Duplechain, PhD University of West Georgia College of Education Geometry and Measurement.
Foundations of Geometry
CHAPTER 20 Geometric Thinking and Geometric Concepts
K-6 Geometry Progression In Practice
All about parallelograms ….and trapezoids
Developing Geometric Thinking and Spatial Sense
Creating, Describing, and Comparing Shapes
Developing Geometric Thinking: The Van Hiele Levels
CHAPTER 15 Geometry Tina Rye Sloan To accompany Helping Children Learn Math10e, Reys et al. ©2012 John Wiley & Sons  
Levels of Geometric Thinking The van Hiele Levels
Transformations and Congruence
Dr. Lee Wai Heng & Dr. Ng Kok Fu
The Geometer’s Sketchpad
K-6 Geometry Progression In Practice
Presentation transcript:

1 The van Hiele Model Matthew C. Robinson, Summer B 2006

2 Define it …

3 Why do some students think that: This is a right anglebut this is a left angle

4 When is it appropriate to ask for a definition? A definition of a concept is only possible if one knows, to some extent, the thing that is to be defined. Pierre van Hiele

5 Definition? How can you define a thing before you know what you have to define? Most definitions are not preconceived but the finished touch of the organizing activity. The child should not be deprived of this privilege… Hans Freudenthal

6 Developed by Pierre M. van Hiele and his wife Dina van Hiele-Geldof BASIC IDEA: The learner, aided by appropriate instruction and experience, passes through five levels of thinking—the learner cannot achieve a level without passing through the previous levels.

7 Levels of Thinking in Geometry Visual Level (Holistic) Visual Level (Holistic) Descriptive Level (Analytic) Descriptive Level (Analytic) Relational Level (Abstract, Informal Deduction) Relational Level (Abstract, Informal Deduction) Deductive Level Deductive Level Rigor Rigor

8 Levels of Thinking in Geometry Each level has its own network of relations. Each level has its own network of relations. Each level has its own language. Each level has its own language. The levels are sequential and hierarchical. The progress from one level to the next is more dependent upon instruction than on age or maturity. The levels are sequential and hierarchical. The progress from one level to the next is more dependent upon instruction than on age or maturity.

9 Visual Level Characteristics The student –identifies, compares and sorts shapes on the basis of their appearance as a whole. –solves problems using general properties and techniques (e.g., overlaying, measuring). –uses informal language. –does NOT analyze in terms of components.

10 Visual Level Example It turns!

11 Where and how is the Visual Level represented in the translation and reflection activities?

12 Where and how is the Visual Level represented in this translation activity? It slides!

13 Where and how is the Visual Level represented in this reflection activity? It is a flip! It is a mirror image!

14 Descriptive Level Characteristics The student –recognizes and describes a shape (e.g., parallelogram) in terms of its properties. –discovers properties experimentally by observing, measuring, drawing and modeling. –uses formal language and symbols. –does NOT use sufficient definitions. Lists many properties. –does NOT see a need for proof of generalizations discovered empirically (inductively).

15 Descriptive Level Example It is a rotation!

16 Where and how is the Descriptive Level represented in the translation and reflection activities?

17 Where and how is the Descriptive Level represented in this translation activity? It is a translation!

18 Where and how is the Descriptive Level represented in this reflection activity? It is a reflection!

19 Relational Level Characteristics The student –can define a figure using minimum (sufficient) sets of properties. –gives informal arguments, and discovers new properties by deduction. –follows and can supply parts of a deductive argument. –does NOT grasp the meaning of an axiomatic system, or see the interrelationships between networks of theorems.

20 Relational Level Example If I know how to find the area of the rectangle, I can find the area of the triangle! Area of triangle =

21 Deductive Level My experience as a teacher of geometry convinces me that all too often, students have not yet achieved this level of informal deduction. Consequently, they are not successful in their study of the kind of geometry that Euclid created, which involves formal deduction. Pierre van Hiele

22 Deductive Level Characteristics The student –recognizes and flexibly uses the components of an axiomatic system (undefined terms, definitions, postulates, theorems). –creates, compares, contrasts different proofs. –does NOT compare axiomatic systems.

23 Deductive Level Example In ∆ABC, is a median. I can prove that Area of ∆ABM = Area of ∆MBC.

24 Rigor The student –compares axiomatic systems (e.g., Euclidean and non-Euclidean geometries). –rigorously establishes theorems in different axiomatic systems in the absence of reference models.

25 What figure is this? How do you know? -It looks like one or it looks like a door -Four sides, closed, two long sides, two shorter sides, opposite sides parallel, four right angles -It is a parallelogram with right angles. -This can be proven if I know this figure is a parallelogram and that one angle is a right angle.

26 From Usiskin… Which of these are triangles? U V W X a.None of these are triangles b.V only c.W only d.W and X only e.V and W only

27 Memorizing the van Hiele levels is not useful It is useful to It is useful to –Know they exist –Understand that experiences can move students from one level to another –Know that students will not be able to do proof—or other logical activities in high school if they are not “ready”

28 Phases of the Instructional Cycle Information Information Guided orientation Guided orientation Explicitation Explicitation Free orientation Free orientation Integration Integration

29 Information Phase The teacher holds a conversation with the pupils, in well-known language symbols, in which the context he wants to use becomes clear.

30 Information Phase It is called a “rhombus.”

31 Guided Orientation Phase –The activities guide the student toward the relationships of the next level. –The relations belonging to the context are discovered and discussed.

32 Guided Orientation Phase Fold the rhombus on its axes of symmetry. What do you notice?

33 Explicitation Phase –Under the guidance of the teacher, students share their opinions about the relationships and concepts they have discovered in the activity. –The teacher takes care that the correct technical language is developed and used.

34 Explicitation Phase Discuss your ideas with your group, and then with the whole class. –The diagonals lie on the lines of symmetry. –There are two lines of symmetry. –The opposite angles are congruent. –The diagonals bisect the vertex angles. –…

35 Free Orientation Phase –The relevant relationships are known. –The moment has come for the students to work independently with the new concepts using a variety of applications.

36 Free Orientation Phase The following rhombi are incomplete. Construct the complete figures.

37 Integration Phase The symbols have lost their visual content and are now recognized by their properties. Pierre van Hiele

38 Integration Phase Summarize and memorize the properties of a rhombus.

39 What we do and what we do not do… It is customary to illustrate newly introduced technical language with a few examples. It is customary to illustrate newly introduced technical language with a few examples. If the examples are deficient, the technical language will be deficient. If the examples are deficient, the technical language will be deficient. We often neglect the importance of the third stage, explicitation. Discussion helps clear out misconceptions and cements understanding. We often neglect the importance of the third stage, explicitation. Discussion helps clear out misconceptions and cements understanding.

40 What we do and what we do not do… Sometimes we attempt to inform by explanation, but this is useless. Students should learn by doing, not be informed by explanation. Sometimes we attempt to inform by explanation, but this is useless. Students should learn by doing, not be informed by explanation. The teacher must give guidance to the process of learning, allowing students to discuss their orientations and by having them find their way in the field of thinking. The teacher must give guidance to the process of learning, allowing students to discuss their orientations and by having them find their way in the field of thinking.

41 Instructional Considerations Visual to Descriptive Level Visual to Descriptive Level –Language is introduced to describe figures that are observed. –Gradually the language develops to form the background to the new structure. –Language is standardized to facilitate communication about observed properties. –It is possible to see congruent figures, but it is useless to ask why they are congruent.

42 Instructional Considerations Descriptive to Relational Level Descriptive to Relational Level –Causal, logical or other relations become part of the language. –Explanation rather than description is possible. –Able to construct a figure from its known properties but not able to give a proof.

43 Instructional Considerations Relational to Deductive Level Relational to Deductive Level –Reasons about logical relations between theorems in geometry. –To describe the reasoning to someone who does not “speak” this language is futile. –At the Deductive Level it is possible to arrange arguments in order so that each statement, except the first one, is the outcome of the previous statements.

44 Instructional Considerations Rigor Rigor –Compares axiomatic systems. –Explores the nature of logical laws. “Logical Mathematical Thinking”

45 Consequences Many textbooks are written with only the integration phase in place. Many textbooks are written with only the integration phase in place. The integration phase often coincides with the objective of the learning. The integration phase often coincides with the objective of the learning. Many teachers switch to, or even begin, their teaching with this phase, a.k.a. “direct teaching.” Many teachers switch to, or even begin, their teaching with this phase, a.k.a. “direct teaching.” Many teachers do not realize that their information cannot be understood by their pupils. Many teachers do not realize that their information cannot be understood by their pupils.

46 Children whose geometric thinking you nurture carefully will be better able to successfully study the kind of mathematics that Euclid created. Pierre van Hiele

47 NAEP item The following two items were on the 8th grade 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress. The test is given to a random sample of 8th graders across the United States. Think about the items and answer the questions at the bottom of the page. The following two items were on the 8th grade 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress. The test is given to a random sample of 8th graders across the United States. Think about the items and answer the questions at the bottom of the page.

48 Alan says that if a figure has four sides, it must be a rectangle. Gina does not agree. Which of the following figures shows that Gina is correct? Alan says that if a figure has four sides, it must be a rectangle. Gina does not agree. Which of the following figures shows that Gina is correct? A) B) A) B) C) D) C) D) Item #15, NAEP test 2003

49 How do you think students did with this problem? Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in the United States who got the correct answer on this item. Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in the United States who got the correct answer on this item. Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in Ohio who got the correct answer on this item. Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in Ohio who got the correct answer on this item.

50 And the results are……. NationalOhio A)7%3% B)4%3% C)3%2% D)85%90%

51 Item #10, NAEP test 2003 In the figure above, WXYZ is a parallelogram. Which of the following is NOT necessarily true? A) Side WX is parallel to side ZY. B) Side XY is parallel to side WZ. C) The measures of angles W and Y are equal. D) The lengths of sides WX and ZY are equal. E) The lengths of sides WX and XY are equal.

52 How do you think students did with this problem? Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in the United States who got the correct answer on this item. Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in the United States who got the correct answer on this item. Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in Ohio who got the correct answer on this item. Estimate the percent of 8th grade students in Ohio who got the correct answer on this item.

53 And the results are……. NationalOhio A)6%4% B)9%9% C)29%24% D)9%11% E)46%50%