| dc.description.abstract | In recent years, the field of mathematics education has witnessed a significant emphasis on
argumentation and proof (Valenta & Enge, 2020), with educational textbooks emerging as
indispensable resources for both teachers and students alike (Ahl et al., 2015). The
implementation of Norway's new curriculum, Kunnskapsløftet 2020, underscores the
importance of argumentation, reasoning, and proving as core elements within mathematics
education (Kunnskapsdepartementet, 2019). Similarly, the inclusion of argumentation and proof
in the Japanese curriculum (Isoda, 2010) renders the comparison of these two countries'
approaches particularly intriguing.
This master's study delves into the presentation and approach of argumentation and proofrelated topics, such as the sum of three consecutive numbers, the Pythagorean theorem, the sum
of two even/odd numbers, and the sum of three angles in a triangle, within mathematics
textbooks used in grades 5-9 in Japan and Norway. Through a comparative analysis, the study
aims to discern the differences and similarities in the strategies adopted by these two countries'
mathematical textbooks.
The contents and design of mathematical textbooks play a vital role for students and teachers in
classroom practice (Ahl et al., 2015), and ongoing discussions among researchers regarding the
meaning of proof (Stylianides, 2007; Ball et al., 2002; Jeannotte & Kieran, 2017) highlights the
importance of the approach taken within the textbooks, influencing both teachers and students’
perspectives and comprehension of proof and argumentation. The presentation and structure of
tasks related to argumentation and proof, as well as the language (representations) used, may
play a role in shaping these perceptions.
In conducting this study, a document analysis methodology developed by Bowen (2009),
supported by a framework established by Miyakawa and Shinno (2021), was employed. A
comprehensive examination was undertaken, encompassing a total of 38 mathematical
textbooks sourced from three publishers in each country. The findings reveal notable disparities
in the treatment of proof between Japanese and Norwegian textbooks, with Japanese textbooks
having more opportunities for proving. However, the Japanese textbooks exhibit a more uniform
structure, particularly in grades 8-9, Norwegian textbooks display greater variability. Despite
these differences, both countries' textbooks initially adopt an empirical approach before
transitioning to a more deductive approach, albeit the Japanese more heavily than the
Norwegian textbooks. Additionally, differences in the function of tasks were observed, with
Norway emphasizing a more discovery-oriented function compared to the more illuminated
function evident in Japanese mathematical textbooks. Both countries shared the use of
verification, albeit with some differences.
This comparative analysis offers valuable insight into the diverse approaches to argumentation
and proof within mathematics textbooks in Japan and Norway. By identifying both differences
and similarities, educators can gain valuable insights, which ultimately may enhance student
learning. | |
