DESIGNING A LEARNING ENVIRONMENT WITH SOME SOPHISMS: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR TEACHERS TO PIQUE STUDENTS' INTEREST AND IMPROVE THEIR ENGAGEMENT IN MATHS SESSIONS

Öz

The exploration of mathematics often involves encountering extraordinary challenges, intricate puzzles, sophisticated mental games, paradoxes, and thought-provoking sophisms. Delving into captivating examples has the potential to engage, enlighten, and inspire students, fostering a drive for discovery. This research paper aims to elucidate some intriguing mathematical sophisms and their implications within the realm of mathematics education. Several factors impact the establishment of an evolving educational setting for teaching mathematics from a humanistic viewpoint. The methodology adopted in this paper is a multi-case study that involves showcasing specific examples, highlighting these characteristics, and implementing mathematical concepts without strictly adhering to their assumptions, which can lead to logical inconsistencies. Students frequently need help with topics such as dividing an equation by zero or extracting a nonnegative square root. The tactics and stages of erroneous thinking that give rise to sophisms are intricately linked to various mathematical principles, including square roots, trigonometry, equations, differentiation, logarithms, geometry, binomial expansion, and integration. The requirements for developing a healthy learning environment with cheerful sensations are undoubtedly expressed. As a result, these emotions will stimulate students' thinking, link with their cognitive interests, and aid them in their future undertakings. This exploration delves into sophisms associated with each of these mathematical notions. It is our aspiration that those with an interest in mathematics will perceive the concepts presented in this article as a catalyst for future mathematical research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Critical thinking
• engagement
• learning-environment
• misconception
• sophisms
• STEM education

Kaynakça

1. Arslan, S. (2010). Traditional instruction of differential equations and conceptual learning. Teach. Math. Its Appl. Int. J., 29, 94–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrq001
2. Attard, C. (2012). Engagement with mathematics: what does it mean and what does it look like? Aust. Prim. Math. Classr., 17, 9–13.
3. Barrows, H.S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Dir. Teach. Learn., 68, 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.37219966804
4. Byers, W. (2007). How mathematicians think: using ambiguity, contradiction, and paradox to create mathematics. Princeton University Press.
5. Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018).Comparative analysis of the impact of traditional versus innovative learning environment on student attitudes and learning outcomes. Stud. Educ. Eval., 58, 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.003
6. Castro, B. P. & Pereira, A. A. S. (2020). Educação matemática no ensino fundamental: matemática de caráter prático nos anos iniciais. Revista Científica UNIFAGOC, 1, 140-150.
7. da Silva, C. J., & de Albuquerque Soares, W. (2023). Common mistakes due to mathematical sophistry. Seven Editora. https://doi.org/10.56238/tfisdwv1-114
8. Ellis, J., Kelton, M.L.,& Rasmussen, C.(2014). Student perceptions of pedagogy and associated persistence in calculus. ZDM, 46, 661–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0577-z

9. Freeman, S., Eddy, S., McDonough, M., Smith, M., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 111, 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111
10. Ganchev, I. (1999). Main activities in math class. IF Module.
11. Hamzeh, E.(2009). Lebanese middle school students’ attitudes toward mathematics as a subject and toward mathematics teachers. Unpublished. Master’s Thesis, Lebanese American University, Beirut, Lebanon.
12. Hmelo-Silver, C.E.(2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educ. Psychol. Rev., 16, 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
13. Joutsenlahti, J., & Perkkilä, P. (2019). Sustainability development in mathematics education: A case study of what kind of meanings do prospective class teachers find for the mathematical symbol “2/3”?. Sustainability, 11(2), 457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020457
14. Karakasheva, L. (2016). About positive emotions in mathematics training, Proceedings of the Shumen University, (pp. 522-526).
15. Karakasheva, L. (2017). Creating a learning environment which triggers positive emotion in the process of teaching mathematics at school. Proceedings of University of Ruse, 56(1), 19–23.
16. Kleiner, I and Movshovitz-Hadar, N.(1994). The role of paradoxes in the evolution of mathematics, American Mathematical Monthly, 101(10), 963–974.
17. Klingler, K.L.(2012). Mathematic strategies for teaching problem solving: The influence of teaching mathematical problem solving strategies on students’ attitudes in middle school. Unpublished. Master’s Thesis, Central Florida University, Orlando, FL, USA.
18. Klymchuk, S., & Sangwin, C. (2021). Provocations in mathematics: teachers’ attitudes. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 21(10). https://doi.org/10.33423/jhetp.v21i10.4639
19. Klymchuk, S.,& Staples, S. (2013). Paradoxes and sophisms in calculus. MAA.
20. Kondratieva, M.(2009). Geometrical sophisms and understanding of mathematical proofs, ICMI Study 19 Conference Proceedings, National Taiwan Normal University, Vol. 2, (pp. 3–8).
21. Lambros, A.(2002). Problem-based learning in k-8 classrooms: A teacher’s guide to implementation. Thousand Oaks.
22. Lugosi, E.,& Uribe, G.(2022). Active learning strategies with positive effects on students’ achievements in undergraduate mathematics education. Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol., 53, 403–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2020.1773555
23. Мадера, А. Г. (2003). Математические софизмы: Правдоподобные рассуждения, приводящие к ошибочным утверждениям [Mathematics sophistication: Plausible reasoning leading to erroneous statements]. Просвещение [Education Series].
24. Michalewicz, Z., & Michalewicz, M.(2008). Puzzle-based learning. Hybrid Publishers.
25. Nedaei, M., Radmehr, F., & Drake, M.(2019). Exploring engineering undergraduate students’ attitudes toward mathematical problem posing. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract., 145, 04019009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000418
26. Priestley, W. M. (1998). Calculus: A liberal art, Springer-Verlag.
27. Radmehr, F. & Vos, P. (2020). Issues and challenges of 21st century assessment in mathematics education. In L. Leite, E. Oldham, A. S. Afonso, F. Viseu, L. Dourado, H. Martinho (Eds.), Science and mathematics education for 21st century citizens: challenges and ways forward (pp. 437‒462). Nova Science Publishers.
28. Rezvanifard, F., Radmehr, F., & Drake, M. (2023). Perceptions of Lecturers and Engineering Students of Sophism and Paradox: The Case of Differential Equations. Educ. Sci., 13, 354. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13040354
29. Sarouphim, K.M., & Chartouny, M. (2017). Mathematics education in Lebanon: Gender differences in attitudes and achievement. Educ. Stud. Math., 94, 55–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-0169712-9
30. Winberg, C., Adendorff, H., Bozalek, V., Conana, H., Pallitt, N., Wolff, K., Olsson, T., & Roxå, T. (2019). Learning to teach STEM disciplines in higher education: A critical review of the literature. Teach. High. Educ., 24, 930–947. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1517735
31. Yankulova, Y. (2016). Pedagogical psychology. Paradigma Publications.
32. Yew, E.H.,& Goh, K.(2016). Problem-based learning: An overview of its process and impact on learning. Health Prof. Educ., 2, 75–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpe.2016.01.00