Abstract
Visual representations, such as diagrams, are known to be valuable tools in problem solving and proof construction. However, previous studies have shown that simply having access to a diagram is not sufficient to improve students’ performance on mathematical tasks. Rather, students must actively extract information about the problem scenario from their diagrams for them to be useful. Furthermore, several studies have described the behaviors of mathematicians and students when solving problems and writing proofs, but few have discussed students’ behaviors in the context of proof writing in introductory pointset topology. We present a case study of an undergraduate, Stacey, enrolled in a general topology course. Throughout a semester, we presented Stacey with several proofrelated tasks and examined how and why Stacey used diagrams when working on these tasks. Based on our analysis, we concluded that Stacey’s diagram creation and subsequent use during the construction of a given proof was an effort to identify the key idea of the proof. We describe Stacey’s overall proving behaviors through the lens of a problemsolving framework and present Stacey’s use of diagrams as an aid to discovering the key ideas of proofs in topology.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Data Availability
Not applicable.
References
Alcock, L., & Weber, K. (2010). Undergraduates' example use in proof construction: Purposes and effectiveness. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 3(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/24727466.2010.11790298.
Anderson, J. R. (1978). Arguments concerning representations for mental imagery. Psychological Review, 85(4), 249–277.
Booth, R. D. L., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2000). Visualization in mathematics learning: Arithmetic problemsolving and student difficulties. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 18(2), 169–190.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
Carlson, M. P., & Bloom, I. (2005). The cyclic nature of problem solving: An emergent multidimensional problemsolving framework. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58(1), 45–75.
Clements, K. (1982). Visual imagery and school mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 2(3), 33–39.
Dahlberg, R. P., & Housman, D. L. (1997). Facilitating learning events through example generation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33(3), 283–299.
Dawkins, P. C., & Weber, K. (2016). Values and norms of proof for mathematicians and students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 123–142.
Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 717–741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1064801593489.
Gibson, D. (1998). Students' use of diagrams to develop proofs in an introductory analysis course. Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. III (pp. 284307). American Mathematical Society.
Goldenberg, P., & Mason, J. (2008). Shedding light on and with example spaces. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 183–194. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1064900891433.
Haciomeroglu, E. S., Aspinwall, L., & Presmeg, N. C. (2010). Contrasting cases of calculus students' understanding of derivative graphs. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12, 152–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060903480300.
Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students' proof schemes: Results from exploratory studies. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education. III (pp. 234–283). American Mathematical Society.
Inglis, M., & MejiaRamos, J. P. (2009). The effect of authority on the persuasiveness of mathematical arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 27(1), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802584513.
MamonaDowns, J., & Downs, M. (2010) Necessary realignments from mental argumentation to proof presentation. In V. DurandGuerrier, S. SouryLavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Sixth congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, (pp. 23362345): Institut national de Recherche Pédagogique.
Mason, J. Doing and construing mathematics in screenspace. In B. Southwell, B. Perry, & K. Owens (Eds.), 15th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Sydney, Australia, 1992: MERGA.
Mendelson, B. (2012). Introduction to topology (third ed., Dover books on mathematics): Courier corporation.
Moore, R. C. (1994). Making the transition to formal proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27(3), 249–266.
Pedemonte, B. (2005). Quelques outils pour l’analyse cognitive du rapport entre argumentation et démonstration. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 25(3), 313–348.
Pedemonte, B. (2007). How can the relationship between argumentation and proof be analysed? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66, 23–41.
Pedemonte, B. (2008). Argumentation and algebraic proof. ZDM Mathematics Education, 40, 385–400.
Pedemonte, B., & Buchbinder, O. (2011). Examining the role of examples in proving processes through a cognitive lens: The case of triangular numbers. ZDM Mathematics Education, 43, 257–267.
Pólya, G. (1957). How to solve it (2nd ed.): Princeton University press.
Presmeg, N. C. (1986). Visualization and mathematical giftedness. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 17(3), 297–311.
Presmeg, N. C. (1992). Prototypes, metaphors, metonymies and imaginative rationality in high school. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(6), 595–610.
Raman, M. (2001). Beliefs about proof in collegiate calculus. In R. Speiser, C. a. Maher, & C. N. Walter (Eds.), The 23rd annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol. 1, pp. 592600). ERIC clearinghouse for science, mathematics, and environmental education.
Raman, M. (2003). Key ideas: What are they and how can they help us understand how people view proof? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52, 319–325.
Raman, M. (2004). Epistemological messages conveyed by three highschool and college mathematics textbooks. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23, 389–404.
Selden, A., & Selden, J. (2013). Proof and problem solving at university level. The Mathematics Enthusiast, 10(1), 303–334.
Stylianides, G. J., Stylianides, A. J., & Weber, K. (2017). Research on the teaching and learning of proof: Taking stock and moving forward. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 237266): National Council of teachers of mathematics.
Stylianou, D. A. (2002). On the interaction of visualization and analysis: The negotiation of a visual representation in expert problem solving. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, 303–317.
Weber, K. (2010). Mathematics majors’ perceptions of conviction, validity, and proof. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12, 306–336.
Weber, K., & Alcock, L. (2004). Semantic and syntactic proof productions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56(2/3), 209–234.
Weber, K., & Alcock, L. (2009). Semantic and syntactic reasoning and proving in advanced mathematics classrooms. In M. Blanton, D. Stylianaiou, & E. Knuth (Eds.), The teaching and learning of proof across the K16 curriculum. Routledge.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed., Vol. 5, applied social research methods series). SAGE publications.
Zazkis, D., Weber, K., & MejíaRamos, J. P. (2016). Bridging the gap between graphical arguments and verbalsymbolic proofs in a real analysis context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 93, 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s1064901696983.
Zazkis, R., Dubinsky, E., & Dautermann, J. (1996). Coordinating visual and analytic strategies: A study of students' understanding of the group D_{4}. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 435–457.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
Author information
Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix
Proof Tasks
The proof tasks given in each session are listed below, in the order they were presented to the participants.
Session 1

1.
Prove: Let f : S → T, and let {U_{i}}_{i ∈ I} be a family of subsets of T. Prove that \( {f}^{1}\left(\bigcap \limits_{i\in I}{U}_i\right)={\cap}_{i\in I}{f}^{1}\left({U}_i\right) \).

2.
Disprove: If f : S → T and A and B are subsets of T, then f^{−1}(A ∪ B) ⊆ f^{−1}(A).
Session 2

1.
Disprove: Every relation C that is both symmetric and transitive must be reflexive.

2.
Prove: Let f : A → B be a function. Define a relation ~ on A by setting a_{0}~a_{1} if f(a_{0}) = f(a_{1}). Show that ~ is an equivalence relation.
Session 3

1.
Disprove: Let (x_{1}, y_{1}), (x_{2}, y_{2}) ∈ ℝ^{2}. Then d((x_{1}, y_{1}), (x_{2}, y_{2})) = min {x_{1} − x_{2}, y_{1} − y_{2}} is a metric on ℝ^{2}.

2.
Prove: Let f : (X, d) → (Y, d^{′}) be a function such that there exists a y ∈ Y such that for all x ∈ X, f(x) = y. Prove that f is continuous.
Session 4

1.
Prove: Let \( \left(X,\mathcal{T}\right) \) be a topological space. Prove that ∅, X are closed sets, that a finite union of closed sets is a closed set, and an arbitrary intersection of closed sets is a closed set.
Session 5

1.
Disprove: Let \( \left(X,\mathcal{T}\right) \) be a topological space, and let A ⊆ X. Define the boundary of A, Bdry(A), by \( Bdry(A)=\overline{A}\cap \overline{C(A)} \). Then Bdry(A) is both open and closed in X.

2.
Prove: A subset A of a topological space \( \left(X,\mathcal{T}\right) \) is said to be dense in X if \( \overline{A}=X \). Prove that if for each open set \( O\in \mathcal{T} \) we have A ∩ O ≠ ∅, then A is dense in X.
Session 6

1.
Disprove: Let \( \left({X}_1,{\mathcal{T}}_1\right),\left({X}_2,{\mathcal{T}}_2\right),\dots, \left({X}_n,{\mathcal{T}}_n\right) \) be topological spaces. Then the set \( \prod \limits_{i=1}^n{X}_i \), together with the collection \( \mathcal{T} \) of all subsets of \( \prod \limits_{i=1}^n{X}_i \) of the form O_{1} × O_{2} × … × O_{n}, where each O_{i} is open in X_{i}, is a topological space.

2.
Prove: Let \( \left(X,\mathcal{T}\right),\left(Y,\mathcal{T}^{\prime}\right) \) be topological spaces. If A is closed in X and B is closed in Y, then A × B is closed in X × Y.
Session 7

1.
Disprove: Let \( \left(X,\mathcal{T}\right) \) be a topological space. Let A ⊆ X. If D is a connected subspace of X that intersects both A and C_{X}(A), then D ∩ Bdry(A) = ∅.

2.
Prove: Let \( \left(X,\mathcal{T}\right) \) be a topological space. A separation of X is a pair U, V of disjoint open subsets of X whose union is X. X is connected if no separation of X exists. If the sets C, D form a separation of X and if Y is a connected subspace of X, then either Y ⊆ C or Y ⊆ D.
Session 8

1.
Disprove: ℝ in the cofinite topology is Hausdorff.
Session 9

1.
Prove: If Y is a compact subspace of the Hausdorff space X, and if x_{0} is a point of X that is not in Y, then there exist disjoint open sets U and V containing x_{0} and Y, respectively.
Appendix B
Demographic Survey
On Stacey’s demographic survey, she selfreported that she was a Mathematics major with minors in Arabic Studies and in English. Stacey indicated that she had completed the following mathematics courses prior to enrolling in the current course in general topology:

Plane Trigonometry

PreCalculus with Trigonometry

Calculus I (Limits and Differential Calculus)

Calculus II (Integral Calculus, Sequences, and Series)

Multivariable Calculus

Introduction to Proof

Introduction to Linear Algebra
Appendix C
Coded Transcript Excerpt From Session 5.
The transcript excerpt below is the Prove task from Session 5. Speaker identifiers were abbreviated in the SPEAKER column: I is the Facilitator (Interviewer), S is Stacey, and T is Tom.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gallagher, K., Infante, N.E. A Case Study of Undergraduates’ Proving Behaviors and Uses of Visual Representations in Identification of Key Ideas in Topology. Int. J. Res. Undergrad. Math. Ed. (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753021001496
Accepted:
Published:
Keywords
 Topology
 Key ideas
 Proof
 Visual representation
 Diagrams