Publication Date



Learning how to prove is known to be difficult for undergraduate students. Understanding students’ growth in the multiple arenas that make up proving is crucial for supporting them. Across four interviews over a semester, I examine one student who showed growth in his reasoning but whose proofs were still incorrect, yet he showed high levels of positive affect including confidence throughout. Investigating this single-subject case serves as an example of the interplay between development and performance. The question of whether we can say this student is a better prover than before––fundamentally, how to weigh reasoning versus affect versus performance––motivates the need for robust frameworks to characterize a student’s progress in proving.





View graphic version