In traditional mathematics lectures the instructor normally writes the definitions, theorems, and proofs covered on the board, and gives informal oral explanations that help to make sense of them. The students have to take notes. However, there are serious problems concerning students’ note-taking in traditional mathematics lectures. Students often cannot think about the information presented during the lecture as they are busy writing. Making sense of the content later is also difficult because many students do not include the lecturer’s oral explanations in their notes. One approach to addressing these problems can be the use of guided notes: a modified version of the instructor’s notes with certain blanks the students have to fill in during the lecture. We investigated to what extent guided notes can support students in their note-taking in mathematics lectures in a study using a mixed-method design. This study provides on the one hand quantitative data suggesting that guided notes are perceived as beneficial by many students for several aspects of their note-taking. On the other hand, it offers qualitative data illustrating how the use of guided notes can influence these aspects. The results indicate in particular that the use of guided notes can address some of the problems concerning students’ note-taking in traditional mathematics lectures, while it can also lead to new problems that one needs to be aware of.

Does reading a mathematical proof for validation engender different behaviors from reading it for comprehension? Experts and novices each read two mathematical proofs under different sets of instructions: they were asked to understand one proof, and to assess the validity of the other. Their eye movements were recorded while they read and were analyzed to investigate possible differences in attention allocation, in cognitive demand and in the mathematical reading process. We found negligible differences in reading behaviors under the two sets of instructions, and we discuss the implications of this for theoretical development, research methodology and pedagogical practice.

No abstract

Mathematics Learning Support Centres are becoming more and more common in higher education both internationally and in Germany. Whereas it is clear that their quality largely depends on a functioning interaction in consultations, little is known about how such consultations proceed in detail. On the basis of models from the literature and recorded support sessions (N = 36), we constructed a process model that divides consultations into four ideal–typical phases. In the individual consultations, forward or backward leaps occur, but overall the model seems to describe the data well. A high intercoder reliability shows that it can be applied consistently on real data by different researchers. An analysis of the consultations between students and tutors shows that both mainly work on past attempts or thoughts of the students to solve the exercise or problems and on concrete strategies to solve a problem within the session. In contrast, very little time is dedicated to summarizing and reflecting the solution. The data allows for a more in-depth discussion of what constitutes quality in advising processes and how it might be further explored. Practically, the model may structure support sessions and help in focussing on different goals in different phases.

No abstract