Research on combinatorics education is sparse when compared with other fields in mathematics education. This research attempted to contribute to the dearth of literature by examining students' reasoning about enumerative combinatorics problems and how students conceptualize the set of elements being counted in such problems, called the solution set. In particular, the focus was on the stable patterns of reasoning, known as ways of thinking, which students applied in a variety of combinatorial situations and tasks. This study catalogued students' ways of thinking about solution sets as they progressed through an instructional sequence. In addition, the relationships between the catalogued ways of thinking were explored. Further, the study investigated the challenges students experienced as they interacted with the tasks and instructional interventions, and how students' ways of thinking evolved as these challenges were overcome. Finally, it examined the role of instruction in guiding students to develop and extend their ways of thinking. Two pairs of undergraduate students with no formal experience with combinatorics participated in one of the two consecutive teaching experiments conducted in Spring 2012. Many ways of thinking emerged through the grounded theory analysis of the data, but only eight were identified as robust. These robust ways of thinking were classified into three categories: Subsets, Odometer, and Problem Posing. The Subsets category encompasses two ways of thinking, both of which ultimately involve envisioning the solution set as the union of subsets. The three ways of thinking in Odometer category involve holding an item or a set of items constant and systematically varying the other items involved in the counting process. The ways of thinking belonging to Problem Posing category involve spontaneously posing new, related combinatorics problems and finding relationships between the solution sets of the original and the new problem. The evolution of students' ways of thinking in the Problem Posing category was analyzed. This entailed examining the perturbation experienced by students and the resulting accommodation of their thinking. It was found that such perturbation and its resolution was often the result of an instructional intervention. Implications for teaching practice are discussed.

This dissertation describes an investigation of four students' ways of thinking about functions of two variables and rate of change of those two-variable functions. Most secondary, introductory algebra, pre-calculus, and first and second semester calculus courses do not require students to think about functions of more than one variable. Yet vector calculus, calculus on manifolds, linear algebra, and differential equations all rest upon the idea of functions of two (or more) variables. This dissertation contributes to understanding productive ways of thinking that can support students in thinking about functions of two or more variables as they describe complex systems with multiple variables interacting. This dissertation focuses on modeling the way of thinking of four students who participated in a specific instructional sequence designed to explore the limits of their ways of thinking and in turn, develop a robust model that could explain, describe, and predict students' actions relative to specific tasks. The data was collected using a teaching experiment methodology, and the tasks within the teaching experiment leveraged quantitative reasoning and covariation as foundations of students developing a coherent understanding of two-variable functions and their rates of change. The findings of this study indicated that I could characterize students' ways of thinking about two-variable functions by focusing on their use of novice and/or expert shape thinking, and the students' ways of thinking about rate of change by focusing on their quantitative reasoning. The findings suggested that quantitative and covariational reasoning were foundational to a student's ability to generalize their understanding of a single-variable function to two or more variables, and their conception of rate of change to rate of change at a point in space. These results created a need to better understand how experts in the field, such as mathematicians and mathematics educators, thinking about multivariable functions and their rates of change.