Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning Integrals Based on Adding Up Pieces Across a Unit on Integration

  • Published:
International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 06 May 2024

This article has been updated

Abstract

Recent research on integration has shown the importance of quantities-based meanings for integrals. However, this research body is still in need of detailed empirical accounts of how students develop such understandings across an entire unit on integration. This paper contributes by providing one such account, based on a quantities-based orientation called adding up pieces (AUP). Our study examines how three separate pairs of students learned definite integrals and integral functions within interview settings over four consecutive interview-lessons, meant to correspond to four consecutive in-class sessions. The first interview developed the partition, target quantity, and sum structure for definite integral, which were solidified in the second interview. The third and fourth interviews extended this AUP structure to a variable upper bound, output, and function structure for integral functions in preparation for the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (FTC).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

We do not have permissions to share the data under our Institutional Review Board (IRB) Authorization Agreement IRB agreement.

Change history

References

  • Amos, N. R., & Heckler, A. F. (2015). Student understanding of differentials in introductory physics. In A. Churukian, D. Jones, & L. Ding (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2015 Physics Education Research Conference (pp. 35–38). American Association of Physics Teachers. https://doi.org/10.1119/perc.2015.pr.004

  • Berry, J. S., & Nyman, M. A. (2003). Promoting students’ graphical understanding of the calculus. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 481–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2003.09.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bezuidenhout, J., & Olivier, A. (2000). Students' conceptions of the integral. In T. Nakahara & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 73–80). IGPME.

  • Chhetri, K., & Martin, J. (2014). Model-of to model-for in the context of Riemann sum. In T. Fukawa-Connelly, G. Karakok, K. Keene, & M. Zandieh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 471–479). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • Chhetri, K., & Oehrtman, M. (2015). The equation has particles! How calculus students construct definite integral models. In T. Fukawa-Connelly, N. E. Infante, K. Keene, & M. Zandieh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 418–424). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Confrey, J., & Maloney, A. P. (2015). A design research study of a curriculum and diagnostic assessment system for a learning trajectory on equipartitioning. ZDM--The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47, 919–932. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0699-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dray, T., & Manogue, C. A. (2010). Putting differentials back into calculus. The College Mathematics Journal, 41(2), 90–100. https://doi.org/10.4169/074683410X480195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellis, A. B., Ely, R., Singleton, B., & Tasova, H. I. (2020). Scaling-continuous variation: Supporting students’ algebraic reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 104, 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09951-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. (2010). Nonstandard student conceptions about infinitesimals. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(2), 117–146. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.41.2.0117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. (2017). Definite integral registers using infinitesimals. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 48, 152–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R. (2019). Teaching calculus with (informal) infinitesimals. In J. Monaghan, E. Nardi, & T. Dreyfus (Eds.), Proceedings of the conference on calculus in upper secondary and beginning university mathematics (pp. 91–95). MatRIC.

  • Ely, R. (2020). Teaching calculus with infinitesimals and differentials. ZDM--The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 53(3), 591–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01194-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ely, R., & Ellis, A. B. (2018). Scaling-continuous variation: A productive foundation for calculus reasoning. In A. Weinberg, C. Rasmussen, J. Rabin, & M. Wawro (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 1180–1188). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • Ely, R., & Samuels, J. (2019). "Zoom in infinitely": Scaling-continuous covariational reasoning by calculus students. In A. Weinberg, D. Moore-Russo, H. Soto, & M. Wawro (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 180–187). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • González-Martín, A. S. (2021). The use of integrals in engineering programmes: A praxeological analysis of textbooks and teaching practices in strength of materials and electricity and magnetism courses. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 7, 211–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-021-00135-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravemeijer, K. (1999). How emergent models may foster the constitution of formal mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(2), 155–177. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl0102_4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, P. (2000). Kinematics and graphs: Students’ difficutlies and CBLs. The Mathematics Teacher, 93(5), 414–417. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.93.5.0414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, W. L., & Sealey, V. (2019). Riemann summary: An investigation of how instructors summarize group work activities to build the structure of the Riemann sum. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 918–923). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • Hass, J., Heil, C., Bogacki, P., Weir, M. D., & Thomas, G. B. (2020). University calculus: Early transcendentals (4th ed.). Pearson.

  • Hu, D., & Rebello, N. S. (2013a). Understanding student use of differentials in physics integration problems. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 9(2), article #020108. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.020108

  • Hu, D., & Rebello, N. S. (2013b). Using conceptual blending to describe how students use mathematical integrals in physics. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 9(2), article #020118. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.9.020118

  • Jones, S. R. (2013). Understanding the integral: Students’ symbolic forms. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(2), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.12.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. R. (2015a). Areas, anti-derivatives, and adding up pieces: Integrals in pure mathematics and applied contexts. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 38, 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. R. (2015b). The prevalence of area-under-a-curve and anti-derivative conceptions over Riemann-sum based conceptions in students’ explanations of definite integrals. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 46(5), 721–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2014.1001454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. R. (2017). An exploratory study on student understanding of derivatives in real-world, non-kinematics contexts. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 45, 95–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2016.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S. R. (2019). What education research related to calculus derivatives and integrals implies for chemistry instruction and learning. In M. Towns, K. Bain, & J. Rodriguez (Eds.), It's just math: Research on students’ understanding of chemistry and mathematics (pp. 187–212). American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2019-1316.ch012

  • Jones, S. R., & Ely, R. (this issue). Approaches to integration based on quantitative reasoning: Adding up pieces and accumulation from rate. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 9(1).

  • Jones, S. R., Lim, Y., & Chandler, K. R. (2017). Teaching integration: How certain instructional moves may undermine the potential conceptual value of the Riemann sum and the Riemann integral. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(6), 1075–1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9731-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, S.R. & Stevens, B.N. (2022). Combining Sealey, Von Korff & Rebello, Jones, and Swidan & Yerushalmy into a Comprehensive Decomposition of the “Integral with Bounds” Concept. In S. Karunakaran and A. Higgins (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th annual conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 779–788). Boston, MA.

  • Katz, V. J. (2009). A history of mathematics (3rd ed.). Pearson Education.

  • Keisler, H. J. (2011). Elementary calculus: An infinitesimal approach (2nd ed.). Dover Publications.

  • Kouropatov, A., & Dreyfus, T. (2013). Constructing the integral concept on the basis of the idea of accumulation: Suggestions for a high school curriculum. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44(5), 641–651. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.798875

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouropatov, A., & Dreyfus, T. (2014). Learning the integral concept by constructing knowledge about accumulation. ZDM--The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 46(4), 533–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0571-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemirovsky, R., & Rubin, A. (1992). TERC working paper: Students’ tendency to assume resemblances between a function and its derivative (pp. 2–92). Cambridge: TERC Communications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, D., & Rebello, N. S. (2011). Students' difficulties with integration in electricity. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 7(1), article #010113. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.7.010113

  • Oehrtman, M. (2004). Approximation as a foundation for understanding limit concepts. In D. McDougall & J. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 95–102). PME-NA.

  • Oehrtman, M. (2008). Layers of abstraction: Theory and design for the instruction of limit concepts. In M. P. Carlson & C. L. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics education (pp. 65–80). Mathematical Association of America.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Oehrtman, M. (2009). Collapsing dimensions, physical limitation, and other student metaphors for limit concepts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(4), 396–426. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.40.4.0396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oehrtman, M., & Simmons, C. (this issue). Emergent quantitative models for definite integrals. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 9(1).

  • Patton, M. G. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pina, A., & Loverude, M. E. (2019). Presentation of integrals in introductory physics textbooks. In Y. Cao, S. Wolf, & M. B. Bennett (Eds.), 2019 PERC Proceedings (pp. 446–451). AAPT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, E. B., Thompson, J. R., & Mountcastle, D. B. (2007). Student understanding of the physics and mathematics of process variables in PV diagrams. AIP Conference Proceedings, 951, 168–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prediger, S., Gravemeijer, K., & Confrey, J. (2015). Design research with a focus on learning processes: An overview on achievements and challenges. ZDM--The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47, 877–891. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0722-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasslan, S., & Tall, D. O. (2002). Definitions and images for the definite integral concept. In A. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 89–96). IGPME.

  • Robinson, A. (1961). Non-standard analysis. Nederlandse Akademies van Weternschappen Proceedings, 64 and Indagationes Mathematicae, 23, 432–440.

  • Roundy, D., Dray, T., Manogue, C. A., Wagner, J., & Weber, E. (2015). An extended theoretical framework for the concept of the derivative. In T. Fukawa-Connelly, N. E. Infante, K. Keene, & M. Zandieh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 919–924). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational perspectives. Cambridge University Press.

  • Schermerhorn, B. P., & Thompson, J. R. (2019a). Physics students’ construction and checking of differential volume elements in an unconventional spherical coordinate system. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 15(1), Article #10112. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010112

  • Schermerhorn, B. P., & Thompson, J. R. (2019b). Physics students’ construction of differential length vectors in an unconventional spherical coordinate system. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 15(1), Article #010111. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.15.010111

  • Sealey, V. (2006). Definite integrals, Riemann sums, and area under a curve: What is necessary and sufficient? In S. Alatorre, J. L. Cortina, M. Sáiz, & A. Méndez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 46–53). PMENA.

  • Sealey, V. (2014). A framework for characterizing student understanding of Riemann sums and definite integrals. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 33(1), 230–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.12.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sealey, V., & Oehrtman, M. (2007). Calculus students' assimilation of the Riemann integral into a previously established limit structure. In T. Lamberg & L. Wiest (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th annual meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 78–84). PME-NA.

  • Simmons, C., & Oehrtman, M. (2017). Beyond the product structure for definite integrals. In A. Weinberg, C. Rasmussen, J. Rabin, M. Wawro, & S. Brown (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 912–919). SIGMAA on RUME.

  • Stewart, J., Clegg, D., & Watson, S. (2021). Single variable calculus: Early transcendentals (9th ed.). Cengage.

  • Swidan, O. (2011). How did the indefinite integral function become an accumulation function? In B. Ubuz (Ed.), Proceedings of the 35th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 233–240). PME.

  • Swidan, O. (2020). A learning trajectory for the fundamental theorem of calculus using digital tools. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 51(4), 542–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1593531

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swidan, O., & Yerushalmy, M. (2014). Learning the indefinite integral in a dynamic and interactive technological environment. ZDM--The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 46(4), 517–531. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0583-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swidan, O., & Yerushalmy, M. (2016). Conceptual structure of the accumulation function in an interactive and multiple-linked representational environment. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 2(1), 30–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-015-0020-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tall, D. O. (1980). Looking at graphs through infinitesimal microscopes, windows and telescopes. The Mathematical Gazette, 64, 22–49. https://doi.org/10.2307/3615886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. W. (1994). Images of rate and operational understanding of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2–3), 229–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. W., & Ashbrook, M. (2019). Calculus: Newton, Leibniz, and Robinson meet technology. Retrieved June 28, 2021 from http://patthompson.net/ThompsonCalc/

  • Thompson, P. W., Byerley, C., & Hatfield, N. (2013). A conceptual approach to calculus made possible by technology. Computers in the Schools, 30, 124–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.768941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. W., & Dreyfus, T. (2016). A coherent approach to the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus using differentials. In R. Göller, R. Biehler, & R. Hochsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Didactics of Mathematics in Higher Education as a Scientific Discipline (pp. 355–359). KHDM.

  • Thompson, P. W., & Silverman, J. (2008). The concept of accumulation in calculus. In M. P. Carlson & C. L. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics (pp. 43–52). Mathematical Association of America.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Von Korff, J., & Rebello, N. S. (2012). Teaching integration with layers and representations: A case study. Physical Review Special Topics: Physics Education Research, 8(1), article #010125. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.8.010125

  • Von Korff, J., & Rebello, N. S. (2014). Distinguishing between “change” and “amount” infinitesimals in first-semester calculus-based physics. American Journal of Physics, 82(7), 695–705. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4875175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walen, S., Williams, S. R., & Barton, H. (1999). Dollars and sense: A case of distributed cognition. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 11(1), 54–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yerushalmy, M., & Swidan, O. (2012). Signifying the accumulation graph in a dynamic and multi-representation environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80, 287–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-011-9356-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, 84602, USA

    Brinley N. Stevens & Steven R. Jones

Authors
  1. Brinley N. Stevens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven R. Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Steven R. Jones.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

There are no known conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

The original version of this article was published and the authors have found errors that need to be corrected. Figure 8 was duplicated as what is currently Figure 9, when it should have been a different figure. Additionally, Figures 9 and 10 were reversed in order (what is Figure 10 should be Figure 9, and vice versa).

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Stevens, B.N., Jones, S.R. Learning Integrals Based on Adding Up Pieces Across a Unit on Integration. Int. J. Res. Undergrad. Math. Ed. 9, 118–148 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-022-00204-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-022-00204-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation