Error analysis in teaching combinatorics: the development of prospective teachers’ confidence and problem-solving skills
https://doi.org/10.5485/TMCS.2026.16199
Authors
View
Keywords
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Zoltán Paulovics, Csaba Csapodi, Zoltán Lóránt Nagy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
How To Cite
Abstract
This study investigates the pedagogical potential of error analysis in the teaching of combinatorics within mathematics teacher education. Building on previous research that highlights the role of incorrectly worked sample solutions in cognitive, metacognitive, and affective learning processes, we conducted a mixed-methods study with prospective mathematics teachers at Eötvös Loránd University. Quantitative results from Likert-scale questionnaires (n = 26) indicate that regular analysis of incorrectly worked solutions substantially enhanced participants’ self-confidence, strengthened their problem-solving skills, and positively shaped their attitudes toward future teaching practice. Complementary qualitative data, analyzed through grounded theory, revealed five interrelated categories – self-reflection and confidence, discernment, deeper understanding, methodological surplus, and combinatorial surplus – that together explain the mechanisms through which error analysis supports professional growth. The findings suggest that systematic analysis of conceptual errors not only improves problem-solving competence but also fosters self-confidence, self-reflection, and teaching-related attitudes. By comparing our emergent model of error-analysis thinking with Schoenfeld’s problem-solving framework, we argue that “discernment” constitutes a distinctive and central dimension of error-based learning. The study contributes both theoretically, by refining models of mathematical problem solving, and practically, by offering concrete recommendations for integrating error analysis into mathematics teacher education curricula.
Subject Classification: 97C30, 97K20, 97D40, 97C70, 97C99
References
- Adams, D. M., McLaren, B. M., Durkin, K., Mayer, R. E., Rittle-Johnson, B., Isotani, S., & van Velsen, M. (2014). Using erroneous examples to improve mathematics learning with a web-based tutoring system. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 401–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.053
- Borasi, R. (1996). Reconceiving mathematics instruction: A focus on errors. Ablex Publishing.
- Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13 (2), 145–182. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1302_1
- Corbin, J. M., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13, 3–21.
- Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2014). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
- Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage.
- Curry, L. A. (2004). The effects of self-explanations of correct and incorrect solutions on algebra problem-solving performance. In K. Forbus, D. Gentner, & T. Regier (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 26, p. 1548). Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Eizenberg, M. M., & Zaslavsky, O. (2004). Students’ verification strategies for combinatorial problems. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6 (1), 15–36.
- Große, C. S., & Renkl, A. (2007). Finding and fixing errors in worked examples: Can this foster learning outcomes? Learning and Instruction, 17 (6), 612–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.008
- Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18 (1), 59–82.
- Paulovics, Z., Csapodi, Cs., & Nagy, Z. L. (2023). The impact of incorrect solutions on the attitude and problem-solving abilities of prospective mathematics teachers towards combinatorics. In Thirteenth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME13) (No. 12). Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics.
- Paulovics, Z., & Csapodi, Cs. (2025). Towards understanding the error analysis thinking of prospective mathematics teachers. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 20 (4), Art. ID em0848. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/16678
- Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton University Press.
- Radatz, H. (1980). Students’ errors in the mathematical learning process: A survey. For the Learning of Mathematics, 1 (1), 16–20.
- Renkl, A. (1997). Learning from worked-out examples: A study on individual differences. Cognitive Science, 21 (1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2101_1
- Rushton, S. J. (2018). Teaching and learning mathematics through error analysis. Fields Mathematics Education Journal, 3, Art ID 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40928-018-0009-y
- Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Academic Press.
- Schoenfeld, A. H. (2016). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics (Reprint). Journal of Education, 196 (2), 1–38.
- Siegler, R. S. (2002). Microgenetic studies of self-explanation. In N. Granott, & J. Parziale (Eds.), Microdevelopment. Transition Processes in Development and Learning (pp. 31–58). Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511489709.002
- Skemp, R. R. (1987). The Psychology of Learning Mathematics. Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. M. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage.
- Taherdoost, H. (2022). Designing a questionnaire for a research paper: A comprehensive guide to design and develop an effective questionnaire. Asian Journal of Managerial Science, 11 (1), 8–16.
- Törner, G. (2002). Mathematical beliefs – A search for a common ground: Some theoretical considerations on structuring beliefs, some research questions, and some phenomenological observations. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen, & G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A hidden variable in mathematics education? (pp. 73–94). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
- Van Gog, T., Rummel, N., & Renkl, A. (2019). Learning how to solve problems by studying examples. In J. Dunlosky, & K. A. Rawson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of cognition and education (pp. 183–208). Cambridge University Press.
- VanLehn, K. (1999). Rule-learning events in the acquisition of a complex skill: An evaluation of cascade. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8 (1), 71–125. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0801_3
- Willig, C. (2013). Introducing qualitative research in psychology (3rd ed.). Open University Press.
