Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Logo Revista Latinoamericana de Investigación en Matemática Educativa

Artículos

Vol. 27 No. 1 (2024): Marzo

USO DE UM ARTEFATO COMPUTACIONAL PARA EXPLORAR A COVARIAÇÃO: UM ESTUDO DAS GÊNESES INSTRUMENTAIS DE LICENCIANDOS EM MATEMÁTICA

DOI
https://doi.org/10.12802/relime.24.2714
Submitted
January 31, 2025
Published
2024-03-31

Abstract

This article presents highlighted results of a study that investigated the effects of using a computational artifact on students’ covariational reasoning and its relationship with the informatics transposition of the concept of covariation in this artifact. The methodology consisted of a multiple case study of the instrumental genesis of pre-service mathematics teachers who explored situations involving covariation with GeoGebra. The instrumented use of tools that support the quantification of variation dynamically connected with the function representations contributed to a covariational interpretation of the graph and the coordination of continuous covariation. On the other hand, restrictions were related to the representation of variation by dynamic segments in situations of negative variation and the influence of schemes based on a view of function as correspondence and on a static view of the graph.

References

  1. Aranda, C., & Callejo, M. L. (2017) Construcción de la función integral y razonamiento covariacional: dos estudios de casos. Bolema, 31(58), 777-798. https://doi.org/10.1590/1980-4415v31n58a13
  2. Artigue, M. (2002). Learning mathematics in a CAS environment: the genesis of a reflection about instrumentation and the dialectics between technical and conceptual work. The International Journal of Computers for Mathematics Learning, 7, 245-274. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022103903080.
  3. Balacheff, N. (1993). La transposition informatique, un nouveau problème pour la didactique. En M. Artigue, R. Gras, C. Laborde, P. Tavignot, & N. Balacheff (Eds.). Vingt ans de Didactique des Mathématiques en France (pp. 364-370). La Pensée Sauvage.
  4. Balacheff, N. (1994). Didactique et intelligence artificielle. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 14, 9-42. https://telearn.hal.science/hal-00190648
  5. Carlson, M., Sally Jacobs, Coe, E., Sean Larsen, & Hsu, E. (2002). Applying covariational reasoning while modeling dynamic events: a framework and a study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(5), 352–378. https://doi.org/10.2307/4149958
  6. Castillo-Garsow, C. C. (2012). Continuous quantitative reasoning. In R. Mayes, R. Bonillia, L. L. Hatfield & S. Belbase (Eds.), Quantitative reasoning: Current state of understanding. (Vol. 2, pp. 55–73). University of Wyoming. https://wilkins.math.ksu.edu/~bennett/onlinehw/qcenter/2012cqr.pdf
  7. Clement, J. (2000) Analysis of clinical interviews: foundations and model viability. In Lesh, R. & Kelly, A. Handbook of research methodologies for science and mathematics education (pp. 341-385). Lawrence Erlbaum.
  8. Confrey, J., & Smith, E. (1994). Exponential functions, rates of change, and the multiplicative unit. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2-3), 135–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf012 73661
  9. Ellis, A. B., Ozgur, Z., Kulow, T., Dogan, M. F., & Amidon, J. (2016). An exponential growth learning trajectory: students’ emerging understanding of exponential growth through covariation. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 18(3), 151–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2016.1183090
  10. Giraldo, V., Carvalho, L. M., & Tall, D. (2002). Conflitos teórico-computacionais e a formação da imagem conceitual de derivada. In L. M. Carvalho & L. C. Guimarães (Eds.), História e Tecnologia no Ensino da Matemática. (Vol. 1, pp. 153-164). http://www.warwick.ac.uk/staff/David.Tall/pdfs/dot2003b-giraldo-carv-rj.pdf
  11. Gitirana, V., & Lucena, R. (2021). Orquestração instrumental on-line. Educação Matemática Pesquisa: Revista Do Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados Em Educação Matemática, 23(3), 362–398. https://doi.org/10.23925/1983-3156.2021v23i3p362-398
  12. Goldin, G. (2000). A scientific perspective on structured, task-based interviews in mathematics education research. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education (pp. 517-545). Taylor & Francis Group.
  13. Johnson, H. L., & McClintock, E. (2018). A link between students’ discernment of variation in unidirectional change and their use of quantitative variational reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 97(3), 299–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9799-7
  14. Kujala, S., & Mäntylä, M. (2000). Studying users for developing usable and useful products. In Proceedings of 1st Nordic Conference on Computer-Human Interaction. https://www.nordichi.net/Proceedings2000/Papers/06Study.pdf
  15. Lagrange, J-B. (2014) A functional perspective on the teaching of algebra: current challenges and the contribution of technology. The International Journal For Technology in Mathematics Education. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01740456.
  16. Lagrange, J., & Psycharis, G. (2014) Investigating the potential of computer environments for the teaching and learning of functions: a double analysis from two research traditions. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19, 255–286 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-013-9211-3.
  17. Lima, E. L., Carvalho, P. C. P., Wagner, E., & Morgado, A. C. (2005). A Matemática do Ensino Médio. (8ª ed., Vol. 1). SBM.
  18. Malik, M. A. (1980) Historical and pedagogical aspects of the definition of function, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 11, (4), 489-492. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.10 80/0020739800110404
  19. Meira, L. (1994) Análise microgenética e videografia: ferramentas de pesquisa em psicología cognitiva. Temas psicológicos, 2(3), 59-71. http://pepsic.bvsalud.org/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1413-389X1994000300007&lng=pt&nrm=iso
  20. Moore, K. C. (2014) Quantitative reasoning and the sine function: the case of Zac. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(1), 102-138. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.45.1.0102
  21. Moore, K. C., & Thompson, P. W. (2015) Shape thinking and students’ graphing activity. In Proceedings of the 18th Meeting of the MAA Special Interest Group on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. (pp. 782-789). https://pat-thompson.net/PDFversions/2015MooreShapeThinking.pdf
  22. Ndlovu, M., Wessels, D., & De Villiers, M. (2011) An instrumental approach to modelling the derivative in Sketchpad. Pythagoras, 32(2), 1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v32 i2.52
  23. Rabardel, P. (1995) Les hommes et les technologies : Approche cognitive des instruments contemporains. Armand Colin
  24. Silva, C. T. J. (2022). O uso de um artefato computacional como suporte ao raciocínio covariacional em função (Tese de Doutorado). Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Recife, Brasil.
  25. Silva, C. T. J., & Gitirana, V. (2023). Abordagem covariacional de função: aspectos do ensino, aprendizagem e possibilidades das tecnologias digitais. Zetetike, 31, e023026–e023026. https://doi.org/10.20396/zet.v31i00.8664258
  26. Thompson, P. W. (1994) Images of rate and operational understanding of the fundamental theorem of calculus. Educational Studies in Mathematics , 26, 229-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273664
  27. Thompson, P. W., Hatfield, N., Yoon, H., Joshua, S., & Byerley, C. (2017) Covariational reasoning among U.S. and South Korean secondary mathematics teachers. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 48, 95-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.08.001.
  28. Thompson, P. W., & Carlson, M. P. (2017). Variation, covariation, and functions: Foundational ways of thinking mathematically. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 421-456). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://patthompson.net/PDFversions/2016ThompsonCarlsonCovariation.pdf
  29. Trouche, L. (2005). Construction et conduite des instruments dans les apprentissages mathématiques: nécessité des orchestrations. Recherches en didactique des Mathématiques. 25 (1), 91-138. https://revue-rdm.com/2005/construction-et-conduite-des-instruments-dansles-apprentissages-mathem atiques-necessite-des-orchestrations/
  30. Vergnaud, G. (2009). The theory of conceptual fields. Human Development, 52, 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1159/000202727.
  31. Yin, R. K. (2015). Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. (5ª ed). Bookman.
  32. Zengin, Y. (2018) Examination of the constructed dynamic bridge between the concepts of differential and derivative with the integration of GeoGebra and the ACODESA method. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 99, 311–333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-018-9832-5.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.