Choosing Mathematical Examples: Routine but Not an Easy Task

Faridah Sulaiman, Mohini Mohamed


Choosing examples for the purpose of teaching mathematics is routine tasks done by every mathematics teachers. Examples are an important medium used by mathematics teachers as a communication device to discuss mathematical content with their students (Leindhart, 2001). Through examples, students build their understanding about mathematical ideas. In spite of the important role played by mathematical examples, the knowledge about mathematical exemplification is not formally taught to the teachers. It has to be built by the teachers through their teaching experience (Zaslavsky & Zodik, 2007). The purpose of this study is to capture this knowledge. We study six Excellent Mathematics Teachers teaching practices using pre-active notes, observation and interview in order to know the things that influence their choice of examples.  Findings show that although choosing examples is a routine task, but it seems that it is not an easy one.


Examples; exemplification; mathematics teaching; expert teacher; Mathematical knowledge for teaching

Full Text:



Artzt, A. F., Armour-Thomas, E. & Curcio, F. R. 2008. Becoming a Reflective Mathematics Teacher. 2nd ed. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Atkinson, R. K., Derry, S. J., Renkl, A., & Wortham, D. 2000. Learning from Examples: Instructional Principles From The Worked Examples Research. Review of Educational Research. 70(1): 181–214.

Ball, D. L. & Bass, H. 2003. Towards a Practice-Based Theory Of Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching. In B. Davis & E. Simmt (Eds.). Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group Edmonton: Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group. 3–14.

Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2009, February). With an Eye on the Mathematical Horizon: Knowing Mathematics for Teaching to Learners’ Mathematical Future. Paper presented at the 2009 Curtis Centre Mathematics and Teaching Conference, University of California at Los Angeles.

Ball, D. L., Hill, H.C. & Bass, H. 2005. Knowing Mathematics for Teaching: Who Knows Mathematics Well Enough to Teach Third Grade and How Can We Decide? American Educator. 29(1): 14–17, 20–22, 43–46.

Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H. & Phelps, G. 2008. Content Knowledge for Teaching: What Makes it Special? Journal of Teacher Education. 59(5): 389–407. doi:101177/0022487108324554.

Bills, L., Dreyfuss, T., Mason, J., Tsamir, P., Watson, A. & Zaslavsky, O. 2006. Exemplification in Mathematics Education. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká & N. Stehliková (Eds.). Proceedings of 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Prague: Psychology of Mathematics Education. 1: 126–154.

CDC. 2006. Integrated Curriculum for Secondary Schools: Curriculum Specifications Additional Mathematics Form 5. Putrajaya: Ministry of Education Malaysia.

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R. & Stigler, J. W. 2002. A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession: What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One? Educational Researcher. 31(5): 3–15.

Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. 2005. Effects of Teachers’ Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching on Student Achievement. American Educational Research Journal. 42(2): 371–406.

Kennedy, M. M. 2002. Knowledge and Teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. 8(3): 354–370. doi: 10-1080/135406002100000495.

KPM. 2006. Terma Rujukan Konsep Guru Cemerlang. Kuala Lumpur: Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.

Leinhardt, G. 2001. Instructional Explanations: A Commonplace for Teaching and Location for Contrast. In V. Richardson (Ed.). Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching. 4th ed. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association. 333–357.

Pass, F. G. W. C. & Merrienboer, J. J. G. V. 1994. Variability of Worked Examples and Transfer of Geometrical Problem-Solving Skills: A Cognitive-load Approach. Journal of Educational Psychology. 86(1): 122–133.

Quilci, J. L. & Mayer, R. E. 1996. Role of Examples in How Students Learn to Categorize Statistics Word Problems. Journal of Educational Psychology. 88(1): 144–161.

Reed, S. & Bolstad, C. A. 1991. Use of Examples and Procedures in Problem Solvings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition. 17(4): 753–766.

Rowland, T. 2008. The Purpose, Design and Use of Examples in the Teaching of Elementary Mathematics. Educational Studies of Mathematics. 6: 149–163. doi:10.1007/s10649-008-9148y.

Shulman, L. S. 1986. Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher. 15(2): 4–14.

Trafton, J. G. & Reiser, B. J. 1993. The Contribution of Studying Examples and Solving Problems to Skills Acquisition. In M. Polson (Ed.). Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1017–1022.

Watson, A. & Mason, J. 2002. Extending Example Spaces as a Learning/Teaching Strategy In Mathematics. In A. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Norwich: University of East Angelia. 2:377–385.

Watson, A. & Mason, J. 2005. Mathematics as a Constructive Activity: Learners Generating Examples. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zaslavsky, O. & Zodik, I. 2007. Mathematics Teachers’ Choices of Examples that Potentially Support or Impede Learning. Research in Mathematics Education. 9(1): 143–155. doi:10.1080/14794800008520176.

Zaslavsky, O., Harel, G. & Manaster, A. 2006. A Teacher’s Treatment of Examples as Reflection of Her Knowledge-Base. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká & N. Stehliková (Eds.). Proceedings of 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: Prague: Psychology of Mathematics Education. 1: 457–464.

Zodik, I. & Zaslavsky, O. 2008. Characteristics of the Teachers’ Choice of Examples in and for the Mathematics Classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 69: 165–182. doi:10.1007/s10649-008-9140-6.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright © 2012 Penerbit UTM Press, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Disclaimer : This website has been updated to the best of our knowledge to be accurate. However, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia shall not be liable for any loss or damage caused by the usage of any information obtained from this web site.
Best viewed: Mozilla Firefox 4.0 & Google Chrome at 1024 × 768 resolution.