The Korea Society Of Educational Studies In Mathematics

Current Issue

Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics - Vol. 31, No. 2

[ Original Article ]
Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics - Vol. 31, No. 2, pp.131-152
Abbreviation: JERM
ISSN: 2288-7733 (Print) 2288-8357 (Online)
Print publication date 31 May 2021
Received 25 Mar 2021 Revised 30 Apr 2021 Accepted 30 Apr 2021

A Case Study on Learning Proofs of the Pythagorean Theorem through Diagramming: Based on the Châteletean Perspective
Jeong-Won Noh1 ; Kyeong-Hwa Lee2, ; Sung-Jae Moon3
1Graduate Student, Seoul National University, South Korea
2Professor, Seoul National University, South Korea
3Lecturer, Gyeongin National University of Education, South Korea

Correspondence to : Kyeong-Hwa Lee,

Copyright © The Korea Society of Educational Studies in Mathematics
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


This study aims to reveal how diagramming in the everyday mathematics classroom supports students’ mathematical learning, based on the Châteletean perspective. To this end, we analyzed the diagramming of two 9th grade students who participated in the task of proving the Pythagorean theorem through diagrams in a geometry lesson. In particular, we focused on the epistemic distance as well as the material directness between the students and the diagrams. As a result, the students discovered mathematical ideas while they engaged in direct or indirect diagramming; they actualized virtual mathematical objects and relationships that were not visible in the given diagrams. During diagramming, the epistemic distance between the students and the diagrams was also dynamically changing. The findings suggest that diagramming in mathematics classrooms is not just a static representational activity, but an indeterminate and mobile engagement, which materially interacts with diagrams at varying degrees of epistemic distance.

Keywords: diagram, diagramming, Châteletean perspective, inclusive materialism, materiality, indeterminacy, epistemic distance


No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article wasr eported.

1. Arcavi, A. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational studies in mathematics, 52(3), 215-241.
2. Arzarello, F. (2006). Semiosis as a multimodal process. Revista Latinoamericana de Investigación en Matemática Educativa RELIME, 9(Extraordinario 1), 267-299.
3. Bussi, M. B., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classroom: Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. Handbook of international research in mathematics education, 746-783.
4. Châtelet, G. (2000). Figuring Space: Philosophy, Mathematics, and Physics. (R. Shore & M. Zagha, Trans.). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
5. Chen, C. L., & Herbst, P. (2013). The interplay among gestures, discourse, and diagrams in students’ geometrical reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(2), 285-307.
6. Cho, Y. H., Cho, C. K., & Ko, E. S. (2013). Analysis on Geometric Problem Solving without Diagrams of Middle School Students. School Mathematics, 15(2), 389-404.
7. Conlin, L. D., & Scherr, R. E. (2018). Making space to sensemake: Epistemic distancing in small group physics discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 36(4), 396-423.
8. de Freitas, E. (2012). The diagram as story: Unfolding the event-structure of the mathematical diagram. For the Learning of Mathematics, 32(2), 27-33.
9. de Freitas, E. (2016). Material encounters and media events: what kind of mathematics can a body do?. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 91(2), 185-202.
10. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2012). Diagram, gesture, agency: Theorizing embodiment in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1), 133-152.
11. de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge University Press.
12. Duval, R. (1995). Geometrical pictures: Kinds of representation and specific processings. In Exploiting mental imagery with computers in mathematics education (pp. 142-157). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
13. Edwards, L. D. (2009). Gestures and conceptual integration in mathematical talk. Educational studies in mathematics, 70(2), 127-141.
14. Fischbein, E. (1993). The theory of figural concepts. Educational studies in mathematics, 24(2), 139-162.
15. Gibson, D. (1998). Students’ use of diagrams to develop proofs in an introductory analysis course. In A. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education: III (Vol. 7, pp. 284-307). Washington, DC: American Mathematical Society.
16. Herbst, P. (2004). Interactions with diagrams and the making of reasoned conjectures in geometry. ZDM, 36(5), 129-139.
17. Herbst, P., & Brach, C. (2006). Proving and doing proofs in high school geometry classes: What is it that is going on for students?. Cognition and Instruction, 24(1), 73-122.
18. Iori, M. (2017). Objects, signs, and representations in the semio-cognitive analysis of the processes involved in teaching and learning mathematics: A Duvalian perspective. Educational studies in mathematics, 94(3), 275-291.
19. Iwamoto, T. (2006). Many Proofs of Pythagorean Theorem.
20. Knoespel, K. (2000). Diagrammatic writing and the configuration of space. Introduction to Gilles Châtelet. Figuring space: Philosophy, mathematics, and physics. (R. Shore & M. Zagha, Trans.). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
21. Kwon, S. I., & Yim, J. H. (2007). Crossing the Gap between Elementary School Mathematics and Secondary School Mathematics: The Case of Systems of Linear Equations. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 17(2), 91-109.
22. Lee, D. H., & Lee, K. H. (2010). How the Mathematically Gifted Cope with Ambiguity. School Mathematics, 12(1), 79-95.
23. Lee, K. H. (2015). Mathematical creativity. Seoul: Kyungmoonsa.
24. Lee, K. H., Noh, J. W., & Moon, S. J. (2020). Supporting Students’ Argumentation Structure Construction using Indeterminacy of Diagram. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 2020 Special Issue, 199-211.
25. Menz, P. M. (2015). Unfolding of diagramming and gesturing between mathematics graduate student and supervisor during research meetings. Ph.D dissertation, Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University.
26. Merleau-Ponty, M. (2004). Excerpt from Phenomenology of perception. (K. Paul, Trans.). In T. Baldwin (Ed.), Basic Writings. New York: Routledge.
27. Moon, S. J., & Lee, K. H. (2020). Deleuzian actualizations of the multiplicative concept: a study of perceptual flow and the transformation of learning assemblages. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 104, 221-237.
28. Moon, S. J., Lee, K. H., & Noh, J. W. (2020). A Case Study on the Design anPdr actice of Mathematical Class in the Perspective of Inclusive Materialism. School Mathematics, 22(1), 19-49.
29. Na, G. S. (2009). Teaching Geometry Proof with focus on the Analysis. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 19(2), 185-206.
30. Nemirovsky, R., & Ferrara, F. (2009). Mathematical imagination and embodied cognition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 159-174.
31. Noh, J. W., & Lee, K. H. (2016). Deleuze’s Epistemology and Mathematics Learning. School Mathematics, 18(3), 733-747.
32. Noh, J. W., Lee, K. H., & Moon, S. J. (2019). A Case Study on the Learning of the Properties of Quadrilaterals through Semiotic Mediation - Focusing on Reasoning about the Relationships between the Properties. School Mathematics, 21(1), 197-214.
33. Palatnik, A., & Dreyfus, T. (2019). Students’ reasons for introducing auxiliary lines in proving situations. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 55, #100679.
34. Radford, L. (2008). Diagrammatic thinking: Notes on Peirce's semiotics and epistemology. PNA, 3(1), 1-18.
35. Radford, L. (2009). Why do gestures matter? Sensuous cognition and the palpability of mathematical meanings. Educational studies in mathematics, 70(2), 111-126.
36. Radford, L. (2010). The eye as a theoretician: Seeing structures in generalizing activities. For the learning of mathematics, 30(2), 2-7.
37. Reinholz, D. L., & Pilgrim, M. E. (2021). Student sensemaking of proofs at various distances: the role of epistemic, rhetorical, and ontological distance in the peer review process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 106(2), 211-229.
38. Roth, W. M. (2011). Passibility: At the limits of the constructivist metaphor. Dordrecht: Springer.
39. Roth, W. M., & Lawless, D. (2002). Scientific investigations, metaphorical gestures, and the emergence of abstract scientific concepts. Learning and instruction, 12(3), 285-304.
40. Ryu, H. A., & Chang, K. Y. (2009). Porcess of Visualization in 2D-Geometric Problem Solving among Secondary School Students. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics 19(1), 143-161.
41. Sinclair, N., de Freitas, E., & Ferrara, F. (2013). Virtual encounters: The murky and furtive world of mathematical inventiveness. ZDM, 45(2), 239-252.
42. Sinclair, N., Moss, J., Hawes, Z., & Stephenson, C. (2018). Learning through and from drawing in early years geometry. In Visualizing Mathematics (pp. 229-252). Springer, Cham.
43. Stylianou, D. A. (2002). On the interaction of visualization and analysis: the negotiation of a visual representation in expert problem solving. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(3), 303-317.
44. Thom, J. S., & McGarvey, L. M. (2015). The act and artifact of drawing(s): observing geometric thinking with, in, and through children’s drawings. ZDM, 47(3), 465-481.
45. Thom, J. S., & Roth, W. M. (2011). Radical embodiment and semiotics: Toward a theory of mathematics in the flesh. Educational studies in mathematics, 77(2), 267-284.
46. Yim, J. H., & Park, K. M. (2002). A Study on Teaching How to Draw Auxiliary Lines in Geometry Proof. School Mathematics, 4(1), 1-13.