Reconstruction of a Collaborative Mathematical Learning Process
- 258 Downloads
The study focused on the interaction between two secondary school students while they were working on computerized mathematical investigation tasks related to probability theory. The aim was to establish how such interaction helped the students to learn from one another, and how it may have hindered their learning process. The assumption was that interaction is beneficial for students if they can perform certain key activities, namely showing, explaining, justifying, and reconstructing their work. Both students attained mathematical level raising. However, the student who explained frequently and criticized himself attained more mathematical level raising than the student who did not explain her work frequently or criticize herself.
Keywordscollaborative learning process model mathematical level raising computer simulation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Boer, W., Bouwman, J., Van Dijk, B., Van der Eijk, E., Van de Giessen, C., De Goede, W. et al.: 1998, Moderne Wiskunde 7e Editie havo Bovenbouw Wiskunde A1 en B1-deel 1 [Modern Mathematics], Wolters-Noordhoff bv, Groningen.Google Scholar
- Dekker, R.: 1994, ‘Graphs, small groups and the process of level raising’, in A. Antibi (ed.), Représentations graphique et symbolique de la maternelle à l'université, Tome 1, Université Paul Sabatier, Toulouse, pp. 184–189.Google Scholar
- Dekker, R., Elshout-Mohr, M. and Wood, T.: 2001, ‘Working together on assignments: Multiple analysis of learning events’, in J.V.D. Linden and P. Renshaw (eds.), Dialogic Learning: Shifting Perspectives to Learning, Instruction, and Teaching, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 145–170.Google Scholar
- Freudenthal, H.: 1973, Mathematics as an Educational Task, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
- Kieran, C. and Dreyfus, T.: 1998, ‘Collaborative versus individual problem solving: Entering another's universe of thought’, in A. Olivier and K. Newstead (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 3, PME, Stellenbosch, pp. 112–119.Google Scholar
- Pijls, M.H.J.: 2001, Whoopy Trainer (Version 1.0) [computer software], Antropi V.O.F., Almere.Google Scholar
- PRINT: (1998), Reports of meetings with teachers that participated in the project ‘Project Invoering Nieuwe Technologieën’.Google Scholar
- Prent: (1999), Reports of meetings with teachers that participated in the project ‘Praktische Opdrachten en Nieuwe Technologieën’.Google Scholar
- Sfard, A.: 2003, ‘Communicational conflict and learning agreement: What turns obstacles to mathematical communication into effective triggers for learning?’, Proceedings of the 10th European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, Cooperativa Libraria Editrice Università di Padova, Padova, pp. 85–86.Google Scholar
- Van Hiele, P.M.: 1986, Structure and Insight, Academic Press, Orlando.Google Scholar
- Webb, N.M.: 1991, ‘Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups’, Journal of Research in Mathematics Education 22(5), 360–389.Google Scholar