Abstract

Education develops human capital. Teachers, especially, should possess the knowledge and skills to deliver on their mandates. Mathematics teaching is key to sustainable human capital development. Therefore, prospective mathematics teachers should demonstrate proficiency in the language of mathematics for learning and knowledge transfer. As a consequence, a study was conducted to evaluate Bachelor of Education students’ mathematics understanding and use of specific mathematical terms (“prime number” and “parallelogram”) as well as the two basic symbols (the “equal” and “plus” signs). The study involved 256 third-year first-semester students taking mathematics as one of their teaching subjects in secondary education. The study examined the definitions of these terms/symbols and students’ ability to apply them in various contexts. A written open-ended mathematics test was administered. The results revealed mixed levels of comprehension across different concepts. All participants understood the basic meanings of the “equal” and “plus” signs; however, the majority did not recognize the broader applications of these concepts in mathematical reasoning. For instance, while a majority (66.8%) of students could identify that “=” denotes equivalence, they often failed to provide an example applying it correctly in relational thinking. Similarly, “+” was universally recognized as an operator for addition, but no students demonstrated usage in abstract algebraic expressions. In contrast, conceptual understanding varied significantly between the two mathematical terms studied. The majority (69.1%) accurately defined a “prime number,” showcasing strong foundational knowledge in number theory. However, understanding geometric terminology proved weaker; 71.1% of students exhibited misconceptions or incomplete definitions regarding a “parallelogram.” This disparity highlights potential gaps in geometry education compared to arithmetic-centered topics. These findings highlight the need for enhanced instructional strategies emphasizing relational symbol usage and comprehensive geometry education. Addressing these gaps could improve overall mathematical literacy among undergraduates, equipping them with a more robust conceptual framework for the workplace.