Abstract:
This case study describes and investigates the instructional practices of Grades 1
to 5 teachers and the levels of geometry thinking of the learners, according to the
Van Hiele model, with a view to determining whether there is a match between the
instructional practice and the learners’ level of thinking. The instructional practices
of the teachers were observed and analysed, and their learners’ levels of geometry
thinking were accessed through a Van Hiele test. The results suggest that there is
not a simple relationship between the phases of learning, as described by Crowley
in 1987, and geometric development in terms of the Van Hiele levels. It is, however,
possible to explain the geometric development to a limited extent in terms of the Van
Hiele levels of the observed teaching activities. Although the presence of activities on
an appropriate level does not guarantee growth in terms of the Van Hiele model, the
absence thereof results in stagnation. The instructional practices in primary schools
in all Grades should span geometry experiences on all the levels, because the previsualisation
level and Van Hiele Level 1 thinking are still evident up to Grade 5.
