Students’ understanding of axial and central symmetry
Keywords:axial symmetry, central symmetry, circle, geometrical concepts, line segment, rhomboid
The paper focuses on students’ understanding of the concepts of axial and central symmetries in a plane. Attention is paid to whether students of various ages identify a non-model of an axially symmetrical figure, know that a line segment has two axes of symmetry and a circle has an infinite number of symmetry axes, and are able to construct an image of a given figure in central symmetry. The results presented here were obtained by a quantitative analysis of tests given to nearly 1,500 Czech students, including pre-service mathematics teachers. The paper presents the statistics of the students’ answers, discusses the students’ thought processes and presents some of the students’ original solutions. The data obtained are also analysed with regard to gender differences and to the type of school that students attend. The results show that students have two principal misconceptions: that a rhomboid is an axially symmetrical figure and that a line segment has just one axis of symmetry. Moreover, many of the tested students confused axial and central symmetry. Finally, the possible causes of these errors are considered and recommendations for preventing these errors are given.
Ada, T. and Kurtuluş, A. (2010) ‘Students’ misconceptions and errors in transformation geometry’, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, Vol. 41, No. 7, pp. 901–909. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2010.486451
Adolphus, T. (2011) ‘Problems of Teaching and Learning of Geometry in Secondary Schools in Rivers State, Nigeria’, International Journal of Emerging Sciences, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 143–152.
Aktaş, G. S. and Ünlü, M. (2017) ‘Understanding of Eight Grade Students about Transformation Geometry: Perspectives on Students’ Mistakes’, Journal of Education and Training Studies, Vol. 5, No. 5, pp. 103–119. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i5.2254
Brand, B. R., Glasson, G. E. and Green, A. M. (2010) ‘Sociocultural Factors Influencing Students’ Learning in Science and Mathematics: An Analysis of the Perspectives of African American Students’, School Science and Mathematics, Vol. 106, No. 5, pp. 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18081.x
Budínová, I. (2018) ‘Vytváření představ základních geometrických pojmů u žaků prvního
stupně zakladní školy: trojúhelník a kruh’, Učitel matematiky, Vol. 26, No. 1, pp. 1–11.
Ebbinghaus, H. (1913) Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology. New York: Teachers College.
Emanovský P. and Gonda D. (2020) ‘Mathematical Calculations within Physics Lessons and Their Popularity Among Learners’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 204–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2020.130404
Ganley, C. M. and Lubienski S. T. (2016) ‘Mathematics confidence, interest, and performance: Examining gender patterns and reciprocal relations’, Learning and Individual Differences, Vol. 47, pp. 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.01.002
Gazárková, D., Melicharová, S. and Vokřínek, R. (2013) Matematika pro střední školy, 3. díl: Planimetrie – Pracovní sešit, Brno: Didaktis.
Geçici, M. E. and Aydın, M. (2020) ‘Determining the geometry problem posing performances of eighth grade students in different problem posing situations’, International Journal of Contemporary Educational Research, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 1–17. https://doi.org/10.33200/ijcer.575063
Gray, E. M. and Tall, D. O. (1994) ‘Duality, Ambiguity, and Flexibility: A “Proceptual” View of Simple Arithmetic’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 116–140. https://doi.org/10.2307/749505
Hacısalihoğlu-Karadeniz, M., Baran, T., Bozkuş, F. and Gündüz, N. (2015) ‘Difficulties of prospective elementary mathematics teachers’ regarding to reflection symmetry’, Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 117–138. https://doi.org/10.16949/turcomat.71538
Hacısalihoğlu-Karadeniz, M. H., Kaya, T. B. and Bozkuş, F. (2017) ‘Explanations of prospective middle school mathematics teachers for potential misconceptions on the concept of symmetry’, International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 71–82. https://dx.doi.org/10.26822/iejee.2017131888
Halas, Z., Robová, J., Moravcová, V. and Hromadová, J. (2019) ‘Pupils’ concepts of the trapezoid at the end of lower secondary level education’, Open Education Studies, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1515/edu-2019-0013
Halas, Z., Moravcová, V., Robová, J. and Hromadová, J. (2020) ‘Are students able to identify an image of a straight line in rotation?’, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2020), Prague, pp. 69–75.
Hejný, M. (2000) ‘Budování geometrických proceptů’, 7. setkání učitelů všech typů a stupňů škol, Mariánské Lázně, pp. 11–17.
Hejný, M. (2012) ‘Exploring the Cognitive Dimension of Teaching Mathematics through Scheme-oriented Approach to Education’, Orbis Scholae, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 41−55. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2015.39
Herendiné-Kónya, E. (2008) ‘Geometrical transformations and the concept of cycling ordering’, in Maj, B. Pytlak, M. and Swoboda, E. (ed.) Supporting Independent Thinking Through Mathematical Education, Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, pp. 102–108.
Hiebert, J. and Lefevre, P. (1986) ‘Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis’, in Hiebert, J. (ed.) Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 1–27.
Hollebrands, K.F. (2004) ‘High School Students’ Intuitive Understandings of Geometric Transformations’, Mathematics Teacher, Vol. 97, No. 3, pp. 207–214.
Fryer, R. G. and Levitt, S. D. (2010) ‘An empirical analysis of the gender gap in mathematics’, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 210–240. https://doi.org/10.1257/app.2.2.210
Jagoda, E. (2008) ‘Building the concept of line symmetry’, in Maj, B. Pytlak, M. and Swoboda, E. Supporting Independent Thinking Through Mathematical Education, Rzeszów: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego, pp. 109–120.
Jirotková, D. (2017) ‘Building of schema of geometrical concepts’, Proceedings of the 14th International Conference Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2017), Prague, pp. 153–160.
Kaplan, A. and Öztürk, M. (2014) ‘Analysis of 2nd-8th Grade Students’ Thinking Approaches Toward Understand the Concept of Symmetry’, Elementary Education Online, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 1502–1515.
Kambilombilo, D. and Sakala, W. (2015) ‘An Investigation into the Challenges In-Service Student Teachers Encounter in Transformational Geometry, “Reflection and Rotation”. The Case of Mufulira College of Education’, Journal of Education and Practice, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 139–149.
Köse, N. Y. and Özdaş, A. (2009). ‘How do the fifth grade primary school students determine the line of symmetry in various geometrical shapes using Cabri Geometry software?’, Elementary Education Online, Vol. 8, No. 1, 159–175.
Leikin, R., Berman, A. and Zaslavsky, O. (2000) ‘Learning through Teaching: The case of Symmetry’, Mathematics Education Research Journal, Vol. 12, No. 1, pp. 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217072
Lobato, J. and Ellis, A. B. (2002) ‘The Focusing Effect of Technology: Implications for Teacher Education’, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 297–314.
Maaz, K., Trautwein, U., Lüdtke, O. and Baumert, J. (2008) ‘Educational transitions and differential learning environments: How explicit between-school tracking contributes to social inequality in educational outcomes’, Child Development Perspectives, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 99–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2008.00048.x
Martinková, P., Hladká, A. and Potužníková, E. (2020) ‘Is academic tracking related to gains in learning competence? Using propensity score matching and differential item change functioning analysis for better understanding of tracking implications’, Learning and Instruction, Vol. 66, pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101286
Mayberry, J. (1983) ‘The Van Hiele Levels of Geometric Thought in Undergraduate Preservice Teachers’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 14, No. 1, pp. 58−69. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/748797
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (2007) Rámcový vzdělávací program pro gymnázia. [Framework Educational Programme for Secondary General Schools]. Prague: VÚP.
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (2017). Rámcový vzdělávací program pro základní vzdělávání. [Framework Educational Programme for Basic Education]. Prague: NÚV.
Mirna, M. (2018) ‘Errors Analysis of Students in Mathematics Department to Learn Plane Geometry’, IOP Conference. Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Vol. 335, No. 1, 012116, pp. 1–4. http://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/335/1/012116
Moravcová, V. and Hromadová, J. (2020) ‘Straight line or line segment? Students’ concepts and their thought processes’, Teaching Mathematics and Computer Science, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 327-336. http://doi.org/10.5485/TMCS.2020.0497
Moravcová, V., Robová, J., Hromadová, J. and Halas, Z. (2019). ‘The development of the concept of axial symmetry in pupils and students’, Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education (ERIE 2019), Prague, pp. 351–357.
Odvárko, O. and Kadleček, J. (2011) Matematika pro 6. ročník základní školy : Úhel, trojúhelník, osová souměrnost, krychle a kvádr. Prague: Prometheus.
Pont, B., Figueroa, D. T., Zapata, J. and Fraccola, S. (2013) Education Policy Outlook: Czech Republic, Paris: OECD Publishing.
Rendl, M. and Vondrová, N. (2013) Kritická místa matematiky na základní škole očima učitelů, Prague: Charles university.
Rittle-Johnson, B. and Alibali, M. W. (1999) ‘Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other?’, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 91, No. 1, pp. 175–189. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0618.104.22.168
Rittle-Johnson, B. and Schneider, M. (2015) ‘Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics’, in Kadosh, R. C. and Dowker, A. (ed.) The Oxford handbook of numerical cognition, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 1 102–1 118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199642342.013.014
Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R. S. and Alibali, M. W. (2001) ‘Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: An iterative process’, Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 93, No. 2, pp. 346–362. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0622.214.171.1246
Robová, J., Moravcová, V., Halas, Z. and Hromadová, J. (2019) ‘Žákovské koncepty trojúhelníku na začátku druhého stupně vzdělávání’, Scientia in educatione, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.1211
Shulman, L. S. (1986) ‘Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching’, Educational Researcher, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 4–14. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X015002004
Smith, S. E. and Walker, W. J. (1988) ‘Sex differences on New York State Regents examinations: Support for the differential course-taking hypothesis’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 19, No. 1, pp. 81–85. https://doi.org/10.2307/749112
Son, J.-W. (2006) ‘Investigating preservice teachers′ understanding and strategies on a student′s errors of reflective symmetry’, Proceedings 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Prague: PME, pp. 145–152.
Star, J. R. (2005) ‘Reconceptualizing procedural knowledge’, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 404–411. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/30034943
Škoda, J. and Doulík, P. (2011) Psychodidaktika, Prague: Grada Publishing.
Tall, D., Gray, E., Bin Ali, M., Crowley, L., DeMarois, P., McGowen, M., Pitta, D., Pinto, M., Thomas, M. and Yusof, Y. (2001) ‘Symbols and the bifurcation between procedural and conceptual thinking’, Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 81−104. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150109556452
Thaqi, X., Giménez, J. and Rosich, N. (2011) ‘Geometrical Transformations as Viewed by Prospective Teachers’, Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Rszeszów: University of Rzeszów, ERME, pp. 578–587.
Tichá, M. (2013) ‘Modernizace vyučování matematice v letech 1965−1985’, Orbis Scholae, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 119−130. https://doi.org/10.14712/23363177.2018.37
Tirosh, D., Tsamir, P., Tabach, M., Levenson, E. and Barkai, R. (2011) ‘Geometrical knowledge and geometrical self-efficacy among abused and neglected kindergarten children’, Scientia in educatione, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 23–36. https://doi.org/10.14712/18047106.52
van Hiele, P. M. (1986) Structure and insight, New York: Academic press.
Vondra, J. (2013) Matematika pro střední školy, 3. díl: Planimetrie, Brno: Didaktis.
Vondrová, N., Rendl, M., Havlíčková, R., Hříbková, L., Páchová, A. and Žalská, J. (2015) Kritická místa matematiky v řešení žáků, Prague: Karolinum.
Wang, M. and Degol, J. L. (2017) ‘Gender Gap in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM): Current Knowledge, Implications for Practice, Policy, and Future Directions’, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 29, pp. 119–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9355-x
Xistouri, X. and Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2011) ‘Elemetary students’ Transformational Geometry Abilities and Cognitive Style’, Proceedings of the Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Rszeszów: University of Rzeszów, ERME, pp. 568–577.
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2021 Vlasta Moravcová, Jarmila Robová, Jana Hromadová, Zdeněk Halas
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors declare with this manuscript intended for publication to ERIES Journal that:
- all co-authors agree with the publication of the manuscript even after amendments arising from peer review;
- all co-authors agree with the posting of the full text of this work on the web page of ERIES Journal and to the inclusion of references in databases accessible on the internet;
- no results of other researchers were used in the submitted manuscript without their consent, proper citation, or acknowledgement of their cooperation or material provided;
- the results (or any part of them) used in the manuscript have not been sent for publication to any other journal nor have they already been published (or if so, that the relevant works are cited in this manuscript);
- submission of the manuscript for publication was completed in accordance with the publishing regulations pertaining to place of work;
- experiments performed comply with current laws and written consent of the Scientific Ethics Committee / National Animal Care Authority (as is mentioned in the manuscript submitted);
- grant holders confirm that they have been informed of the submitted manuscript and they agree to its publication.
Authors retain copyright and grant ERIES Journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the published work with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. Moreover, authors are able to post the published work in an institutional repository with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in ERIES Journal. In addition, authors are permitted and encouraged to post the published work online (e.g. institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.