Scholarlink

<p>Concreteness and abstraction are key in educational research in mathematics, both when discussing the nature of mathematics in itself, but also when exploring how to learn and teach mathematics. However, while the terms <i>concrete</i> and <i>abstract</i> are often used in the field, they are not always used with the same meaning. For example, the word <i>concrete</i> can be used to mean <i>specific</i>, <i>relatable</i>, <i>visual</i>, and <i>tangible</i>, while the word <i>abstract</i> can be used as <i>general</i>, <i>rigorous</i>, <i>vague</i>, and <i>symbolic</i>. While several scholars have emphasized the need for a multidimensional and fine-grained framework to articulate these differences in meaning, we further argue that it is crucial to precisely define how the terms <i>concrete</i> and <i>abstract</i> are actually used by the research community. Towards this goal, we offer three contributions. First, we empirically and systematically identify the various meanings of <i>concrete</i> and <i>abstract</i> used in the literature. Second, we offer a data-informed taxonomy to organize this semantic landscape and support research inquiry. And third, we offer templates for the design of future mathematics education interventions and studies.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Concreteness and Abstraction in Mathematics Education: A Taxonomy of the Semantic Landscape

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月17日

查看全文
  • Julia Chatain,
  • Charlotte Müller,
  • Keny Chatain,
  • Leon Calabrese,
  • Manu Kapur

摘要

Concreteness and abstraction are key in educational research in mathematics, both when discussing the nature of mathematics in itself, but also when exploring how to learn and teach mathematics. However, while the terms concrete and abstract are often used in the field, they are not always used with the same meaning. For example, the word concrete can be used to mean specific, relatable, visual, and tangible, while the word abstract can be used as general, rigorous, vague, and symbolic. While several scholars have emphasized the need for a multidimensional and fine-grained framework to articulate these differences in meaning, we further argue that it is crucial to precisely define how the terms concrete and abstract are actually used by the research community. Towards this goal, we offer three contributions. First, we empirically and systematically identify the various meanings of concrete and abstract used in the literature. Second, we offer a data-informed taxonomy to organize this semantic landscape and support research inquiry. And third, we offer templates for the design of future mathematics education interventions and studies.