Volume 4, Issue 1 (March 2025)
IJER 2025, 4(1): 155-172 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Jafari A, Haghverdi M, Tehranian A. (2025). Graph Theory Students’ Perceptions of Graph Isomorphism. IJER. 4(1), 155-172. doi:10.22034/4.1.155
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-310-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-310-en.html
1- PHD Student, Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2- Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics, Arak Branch, Islamic Azad University, Arak, Iran. ,Majid.Haghverdi@iau.ac.ir
3- Professor, Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2- Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics, Arak Branch, Islamic Azad University, Arak, Iran. ,
3- Professor, Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Abstract: (1281 Views)
Objective: Graph isomorphism is a central topic in graph theory, yet students often struggle to grasp its underlying principles. This study aimed to explore students' perceptions of graph isomorphism and identify the conceptual metaphors they employ when reasoning about this concept.
Methods: Using a two-stage qualitative research design, the study combined surveys and task-based interviews to collect data. The variation theory framework (Marton & Booth, 2013) was applied to analyze students' understanding and identify critical and superficial features in their reasoning.
Results: The findings revealed that students frequently focus on superficial features, such as the equality of the number of vertices and edges, while overlooking critical features like bijective attributes. Additionally, the conceptual metaphors used by students were categorized into three main themes: Sameness, Sameness/Mapping, and Formal Definition. These metaphors reflect varying levels of conceptual understanding, with some students relying on intuitive notions of similarity and others employing more formal, mathematical definitions.
Conclusions: This study highlights the challenges students face in understanding graph isomorphism and underscores the importance of addressing both superficial and critical features in teaching. By identifying the conceptual metaphors students use, educators can develop targeted instructional strategies to bridge gaps in understanding and promote deeper conceptual learning.
Methods: Using a two-stage qualitative research design, the study combined surveys and task-based interviews to collect data. The variation theory framework (Marton & Booth, 2013) was applied to analyze students' understanding and identify critical and superficial features in their reasoning.
Results: The findings revealed that students frequently focus on superficial features, such as the equality of the number of vertices and edges, while overlooking critical features like bijective attributes. Additionally, the conceptual metaphors used by students were categorized into three main themes: Sameness, Sameness/Mapping, and Formal Definition. These metaphors reflect varying levels of conceptual understanding, with some students relying on intuitive notions of similarity and others employing more formal, mathematical definitions.
Conclusions: This study highlights the challenges students face in understanding graph isomorphism and underscores the importance of addressing both superficial and critical features in teaching. By identifying the conceptual metaphors students use, educators can develop targeted instructional strategies to bridge gaps in understanding and promote deeper conceptual learning.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Studies
Received: 2024/07/5 | Accepted: 2024/10/11 | Published: 2025/03/1
Received: 2024/07/5 | Accepted: 2024/10/11 | Published: 2025/03/1
References
1. Anfara, V. A., Brown, K. M., & Mangione, T. L. (2002). Qualitative analysis on stage: Making the research process more public. Educational Researcher, 31(2), 28-38. [DOI:10.3102/0013189X031007028]
2. Baskoro, I. (2021). Variation theory-based mathematics teaching: The new method in improving higher order thinking skills Journal of Physics: Conference Series; Bristol Vol. 1957, Iss. [DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/1957/1/012016]
3. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
4. Dubinsky, E., Dauterman, J., Leron, U., & Zazkis, R. (1994). On learning fundamental concepts
5. Examples from a study on anesthesiologists' work. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-Being, 2(1), 55-64.
6. Gross, J & Yellen, J & Anderson, M.(2019) Graph theory and Its Applications. [DOI:10.1201/9780429425134]
7. Hausberger, T. (2017). The (homo) morphism concept: Didactic transposition, meta-discourse, and thematisation. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 3(3), 417-443.Doi: 10.1007/s40753-017-0052-7. [DOI:10.1007/s40753-017-0052-7]
8. Kathleen Melhuish (2019). Group theory students' perception of binary operation. . Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51-68. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09925-3. [DOI:10.1007/s10649-019-09925-3]
9. Kieran, C. (1981). Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 317-326. [DOI:10.1007/BF00311062]
10. Knuth, E. J. (2000). Student understanding of the Cartesian connection: An exploratory study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 500-508. DOI:10.2307/749655. [DOI:10.2307/749655]
11. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
12. Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. (1997). The metaphorical structure of mathematics: Sketching out cognitive foundations for a mind-based mathematics. In L. D. English (Ed.), Mathematical reasoning: Analogies, metaphors, and images (pp. 21-89). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.https://escholarship.org/uc/item/5qq7q51z.
13. Larsen, S. (2009). Reinventing the concepts of group and isomorphism: The case of Jessica and Sandra. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 28(2-3), 119-137. [DOI:10.1016/j.jmathb.2009.06.001]
14. Larsen, S. (2013). A local instructional theory for the guided reinvention of the group and isomorphism concepts. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(4), 712-725. [DOI:10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.04.006]
15. Leron, U., Hazzan, O., & Zazkis, R. (1995). Learning group isomorphism: A crossroads of many [DOI:10.1007/BF01274211]
16. Martha W. Alibali , Eric J. Knuth , Shanta Hattikudur , Nicole M. McNeil & Ana C. Stephens (2007) A Longitudinal Examination of Middle School Students' Understanding of the Equal Sign and Equivalent Equations, Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 9:3, 221-247. [DOI:10.1080/10986060701360902]
17. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (2013). Learning and awareness. New York, NY: Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203053690]
18. Marton, F., & Pang, M. F. (2006). On some necessary conditions of learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 193-220. [DOI:10.1207/s15327809jls1502_2]
19. Melhuish, K. (2018). Three conceptual replication studies in group theory. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 49(1), 9-38. [DOI:10.5951/jresematheduc.49.1.0009]
20. Nardi, E. (2000). Mathematics undergraduates' responses to semantic abbreviations, 'geometric images' and multi-level abstractions in group theory. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43(2), 169-189. [DOI:10.1023/A:1012223826388]
21. Neubauer, B. E., Witkop, C. T., & Varpio, L. (2019). How phenomenology can help us learn from the experiences of others. Perspectives on medical education, 8(2), 90-97. [DOI:10.1007/S40037-019-0509-2]
22. Olsen, J., Lew, K., & Weber, K. (2020). Metaphors for learning and doing mathematics in advanced mathematics lectures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 105, 1-17. [DOI:10.1007/s10649-020-09968-x]
23. Rachel L. Rupnow (2021). Conceptual metaphors for isomorphism and homomorphism. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 62.100867. [DOI:10.1016/j.jmathb.2021.100867]
24. Rina Zazkis, Orit Hazzan, Interviewing in mathematics education research: Choosing the questions, The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, Volume 17, Issue 4,1998,Pages 429-439. [DOI:10.1016/S0732-3123(99)00006-1]
25. Rupnow, R. (2017). Students' conceptions of mappings in abstract algebra. In A. Weinberg, C. Rasmussen, J. Rabin, M. Wawro, & S. Brown (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 259-273).
26. Rupnow, R. (2021). Conceptual metaphors for isomorphism and homomorphism: Instructors' descriptions for themselves and when teaching. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 62(2), 100867. [DOI:10.1016/j.jmathb.2021.100867]
27. Schinck, A. G., Neale Jr, H. W., Pugalee, D. K., & Cifarelli, V. V. (2008). Using metaphors to unpack student beliefs about mathematics. School science and mathematics, 108(7), 326-333. [DOI:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2008.tb17845.x]
28. Sezgin Memnun, D. (2015). Secondary School Students' Metaphors about Mathematical Problem and Change of Metaphors according to Grade Levels. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(1), 351-374.
29. Somkunwar R., & Vaze, V.M. (2017). A Comparative Study of Graph Isomorphism Applications. International Journal of Computer Applications, 162(7). [DOI:10.5120/ijca2017913414]
30. Uygun, T., Gökkurt, B., & Usta, N. (2016). Analysis of the Perceptions of the University Students about Mathematics Problem through Metaphor. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 5(2), 536-556. [DOI:10.14686/buefad.v5i2.5000187677]
31. Weber, K. (2001). Student difficulty in constructing proofs: The need for strategic knowledge. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48(1), 101-119. [DOI:10.1023/A:1015535614355]
32. Wood, K. (2013). A design for teacher education based on a systematic framework of variation to link teaching with learners' ways of experiencing the object of learning. International Journal for Lesson and Learning Studies, 2 (1), 56-71. [DOI:10.1108/20468251311290132]
33. Zandieh, M., Ellis, J., & Rasmussen, C. (2016). A characterization of a unified notion of mathematical function: The case of high school function and linear transformation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1-18. [DOI:10.1007/s10649-016-9737-0]
34. Zemlyachenko, V.N., Korneenko, N.M. & Tyshkevich, R.I. Graph isomorphism problem. J Math Sci 29, 1426-1481 (1985). [DOI:10.1007/BF02104746]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
