Logo Revista Latinoamericana de Investigación en Matemática Educativa

Artículos

Vol. 29 (2026): Publicación continua

A construção de uma prova visual em trigonometria – o modelo RBC+C e o GeoGebra

DOI :
https://doi.org/10.12802/relime.2026.29.e678
Publiée
septembre 4, 2026

Résumé

Cette étude analyse la manière dont deux étudiantes de première année d’un Cours Technique Supérieur Professionnel construisent une démonstration visuelle de l’identité trigonométrique du sinus de la somme de deux angles. Les modèles AiC et RBC+C sont adoptés à l’aide de GeoGebra. Une étude qualitative à visée interprétative est menée auprès de deux étudiantes, dans le contexte d’un cours de mathématiques. Les données empiriques comprennent les productions écrites et orales des étudiantes, les dialogues entre les étudiantes et l’enseignant, ainsi que les notes écrites de celui-ci. Les actions épistémiques mobilisées sont analysées à partir de sous-catégories élaborées pour cette étude. Les résultats montrent que les actions R, B et C ont évolué de manière articulée, conduisant à l’émergence de l’action C. L’action R a favorisé le processus d’abstraction, tandis que l’articulation entre R et B a constitué l’axe central de la construction. GeoGebra a soutenu la construction de la démonstration visuelle.

Références

  1. Amado, N., Sanchez, J., & Pinto, J. (2015). A Utilização do Geogebra na demonstração matemática em sala de aula: o estudo da reta de Euler. Bolema: Boletim de Educação Matemática, 29, 637-657. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v29n52a11
  2. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1994). Investigação qualitativa em educação: uma introdução à teoria e aos métodos. Porto Editora.
  3. Borwein, P., & Jörgenson, L. (1997). Visible structures in number theory. CECM – Simon Fraser University. http://www.cecm.sfu.ca/~loki/Papers/Numbers/node3.html
  4. Davydov, V. V. (1990). Types of generalization in instruction: logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school curricula. Soviet studies in mathematics education (Vol. 2). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  5. Davies, A., Veličković, P., Buesing, L., Blackwell, S., Zheng, D., Tomašev, N., Tanburn, R., Battaglia, P., Blundell, C., Juhász, A., Lackenby, M., Williamson, G., Hassabis, D., & Kohli, P. (2021). Advancing mathematics by guiding human intuition with AI. Nature, 600, 70–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04086-x
  6. Dreyfus, T., Hershkowitz, R., & Schwarz, B. B. (2015). The nested epistemic actions model for abstraction in context: theory as methodological tool and methodological tool as theory. In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs, C. Knipping, & N. Presmeg (Eds.), Approaches to qualitative research in mathematics education: examples of methodology and methods (pp. 185–217). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9181-6_8
  7. Dreyfus, T., & Kidron, Y. (2006). Interacting parallel constructions: A solitary learner and the bifurcation diagram. Recherches en didactique des mathématiques, 26(3), 295-336. https://revue-rdm.com/2006/interacting-parallel-constructions/
  8. Dreyfus, T. (1991). On the status of visual reasoning in mathematics and mathematics education. In F. Furinghetti (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 33–48). PME.
  9. Francis, G. (1996). Mathematical visualization: standing at the crossroads. CECM – Simon Fraser University. http://www.cecm.sfu.ca/projects/PhilVisMath/vis96panel.html
  10. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Reidel.
  11. Gonçalves, J. V. (1937). Compêndio de álgebra e trigonometria: para os anos 4.º, 5.º e 6.º do curso dos liceus. Livraria Cruz.
  12. Hanna, G. (2000). Proof and its classroom role: a survey. In M. I. Coelho & J. M. Matos (orgs.), Ensino e aprendizagem da geometria (pp.75-105). SEM & SPCE.
  13. Hadamard, J. (1945). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton University Press.
  14. Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: epistemic actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 195–222. https://doi.org/10.2307/749673
  15. Kirsh, D., & Maglio, P. (1994). On distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic action. Cognitive Science, 18(4), 513-549. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(94)90007-8
  16. Lopes, M. M. (2011). Contribuições do software GeoGebra no ensino e aprendizagem de trigonometria. In Anais da XIII Conferência Interamericana de Educação Matemática. https://xiii.ciaem-redumate.org/index.php/xiii_ciaem/xiii_ciaem/paper/view/2577
  17. Lopes, M. M. (2013). Sequência didática para o ensino de trigonometria usando o software GeoGebra. Bolema: Boletim de Educação Matemática, 27 (47), 631-644. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-636X2013000400010
  18. Mason, J. (1991). Mathematical problem solving: open, closed and exploratory in the UK. ZDM, 23(1), 14-19.
  19. Nelsen, R. (1993). Proofs without words – exercises in visual thinking. The Mathematical Association of America.
  20. Palais, R. S. (1999). The visualization of mathematics: toward a mathematical exploratorium. Notices of the AMS, 46(6), 647-658.
  21. Peters, M., Santos, C. E. R., Oliveira, E. G., Melo, A. M., & Pröscholdt, G. (2023). GeoGebra e materiais manipuláveis facilitando a aprendizagem de trigonometria. Contribuciones a las Ciencias Sociales, 16(9), 15681–15697. https://doi.org/10.55905/revconv.16n.9-114
  22. Pimenta, C. (2016). A construção do conhecimento no desenvolvimento do pensamento algébrico [Tese de doutoramento, Universidade da Beira Interior]. uBibliorum. http://hdl.handle.net/10400.6/4196
  23. Pimenta, C., & Saraiva, M. (2019). As ações epistémicas na construção do novo conhecimento matemático e no desenvolvimento do pensamento algébrico. Quadrante, 28(1), 27–53. https://doi.org/10.48489/quadrante.22976
  24. Pinheiro, L. de J., & Carneiro, F. O. R. (2023). Trigonometria no Ensino Médio: uma proposta de ensino por meio da História da Matemática. Revista Baiana de Educação Matemática, 4(01), e202308. https://doi.org/10.47207/rbem.v4i01.16209
  25. Saraiva, M. (1992). O computador na aprendizagem da Geometria: Uma experiência com alunos do 10.º ano de escolaridade. Quadrante, 1(1), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.48489/quadrante.22615
  26. da Silva Santiago, P. V., & Santana, J. R. (2024). Proposta para o ensino de Geometria: sólidos no GeoGebra. Debates em Educação, 16(38), e15862-e15862. https://doi.org/10.28998/2175-6600.2024v16n38pe15862
  27. Stylianides, G., Stylianides, A., & Moutsios-Rentzos, A. (2024). Proof and proving in school and mathematics education research: a systematic review. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 56, 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01518-y
  28. Tabach, M., & Trgalová, J. (2020). Teaching mathematics in the digital era: standards and beyond. In Y. Ben-David Kolikant, D. Martinovic, & M. Milner-Bolotin (Eds.), STEM teachers and teaching in the digital era (pp. 245–264). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29396-3_12
  29. Toomer, G. J. (Ed.). (1998). Ptolemy's Almagest. Princeton University Press.
  30. Valori, G., Albanese, V., Adamuz-Povedano, N., & Gómez-Torres, E. (2024). Effectiveness of paper folding and GeoGebra on students’ geometric thinking and visualization. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology, 12(5), 1395-1414. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.4477
  31. Van Brummelen, G. (2009). The mathematics of the heavens and the earth: the early history of trigonometry. Princeton University Press.
  32. Yang, K. (2012). Structures of cognitive and metacognitive reading strategy use for reading comprehension of geometry proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(3), 307-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9350-1
  33. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

Téléchargements

Les données de téléchargement ne sont pas encore disponibles.