Search

Most students practice abductive reasoning in solving mathematical problems that encourage creativity. This study analyses the process of making conjectures based on abductive reasoning. This study used a qualitative design and involved 106 undergraduate mathematics students enrolled in the mathematics course Introduction to Ring. We analyzed the students' conjectures on two mathematics problems. The study was completed by grouping the types of conjectures made by students and then investigating each student's explanation of each conjecture. The results suggested two types of conjectures practised by students, namely creativity in investigating the converse of the proposition and creativity in dividing into cases.

When students solve an algebra problem, students try to deduce the facts in the problem. This step is imperative, students can draw conclusions from the facts and devise a plan to solve the problem. Drawing conclusions from facts is called reasoning. Some kinds of reasoning are deductive, inductive, and abductive. This article explores the characteristics of some types of abductive reasoning used by mathematics education students in problem-solving related to using facts on the problems. Fifty-eight students were asked to solve an algebra problem. It was found that the student's solutions could be grouped into four types of abductive reasoning. From each group, one student was interviewed to have more details on the types. First, the creative conjectures type, the students can solve the problems and develop new ideas related to the problems; second, fact optimization type, the students make conjecture of the answer, then confirm it by deductive reasoning; third, factual error type, students use facts outside of the problems to solve it, but the facts are wrong; and fourth, mistaken fact type, the students assume the questionable thing as a given fact. Therefore, teachers should encourage the students to use creative conjectures and fact optimization when learning mathematics.

Our question is what ring R which all modules over R are determined, up to isomorphism, by their endomorphism rings? Examples of this ring are division ring and simple Artinian ring. Any semi simple ring does not satisfy this property. We construct a semi simple ring R but R is not a simple Artinian ring which all modules over R are determined, up to isomorphism, by their endomorphism rings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]