Overlooked Logic: A Narrative Inquiry into Why Geometry Teachers Avoid Teaching Proofs

Mathematical proofs are fundamental to developing logical reasoning, yet many geometry teachers avoid teaching them. This study explores the reasons behind this avoidance through a narrative inquiry, examining the perspectives of secondary school teachers. Grounded in Constructivist Learning Theory and Shulman’s Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) Framework, the study identifies key challenges that contribute to the omission of proofs in geometry instruction. Findings reveal that teacher-related factors—such as lack of preparation, low confidence, and negative past experiences—significantly impact teachers’ willingness to teach proofs. Curriculum and institutional constraints, including time limitations and an emphasis on procedural problem-solving over reasoning, further discourage proof instruction. Additionally, student-related factors, such as perceived difficulty and resistance to logical reasoning, contribute to teachers’ reluctance. The study also highlights a strong need for professional development, with teachers expressing interest in training programs and innovative teaching strategies to make proofs more engaging and accessible. These findings align with existing literature, emphasizing that teachers require both content knowledge and pedagogical strategies to effectively teach proofs. The study suggests curriculum reforms, professional development initiatives, and instructional innovations as potential solutions. Addressing these barriers can help reintegrate proofs into geometry education, fostering critical thinking and mathematical reasoning skills among students. Ultimately, this study underscores the importance of strengthening teachers’ pedagogical knowledge and institutional support to ensure that proofs remain a core component of mathematical learning, bridging the gap between computational skills and conceptual understanding.