Advertisement

From Experiences in a Dynamic Environment to Written Narratives on Functions

  • Samuele Antonini
  • Anna Baccaglini-Frank
  • Giulia LisarelliEmail author
Article
  • 38 Downloads

Abstract

This study focusses on high school students’ written discourse about their experiences in a dynamic interactive digital environment in which functions were represented in one dimension, as dynagraphs, that are digital artifacts in which the independent variable can be acted upon and its movement causes the variation of the dependent variable. After the introduction of the notion of Dynamic Interactive Mediators within the theory of Commognition, we analyze and classify students’ written productions describing their experience with the dynagraphs. We present this classification as a tool of analysis that allows us to gain insight into how their writing reflects the temporal and dynamic dimensions of their experience with the dynagraphs. This tool is used to analyze 11 excerpts; finally, epistemological, cognitive and didactic implications of this tool are discussed.

Keywords

Covariation Commognition Dynagraph Dynamic interactive mediator Function Narrative 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Nathalie Sinclair for her support in developing the activities described in this paper, and for all the fruitful conversations she has engaged in with us, together with David Pimm. This study has been partially supported by Gruppo Nazionale per le Strutture Algebriche, Geometriche e le loro Applicazioni (GNSAGA) of the Italian Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica “Francesco Severi”.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Mariotti, M. A. (2010). Generating conjectures in dynamic geometry: The maintaining dragging model. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(3), 225–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Carlson, M. P. (1998). A cross-sectional investigation of the development of the function concept. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education. III. CBMS issues in mathematics education (pp. 114–162). Providence: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  3. Carlson, M. P. & Oehrtman, M. (2005). Key aspects of knowing and learning the concept of function. Research Sampler 9. MAA Notes.Google Scholar
  4. Carlson, M. P. Jacobs, S., Coe, E., Larsen, S., & 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.Google Scholar
  5. Colacicco, G., Lisarelli, G., & Antonini, S. (2017). Funzioni e grafici in ambienti digitali dinamici. Didattica della Matematica: dalla ricerca alle pratiche d’aula, 2, 7–25.Google Scholar
  6. Falcade, R., Laborde, C., & Mariotti, M. A. (2007). Approaching functions: Cabri tools as instruments of semiotic mediation. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(3), 317–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goldenberg, E. P., Lewis, P., & O’Keefe, J. (1992). Dynamic representation and the development of an understanding of functions. In G. Harel & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), The Concept of Function: Aspects of Epistemology and Pedagogy, 25. MAA Notes.Google Scholar
  8. Healy, L., & Sinclair, N. (2007). If this is your mathematics, what are your stories? International Journal of Computers for Mathematics Learning, 12(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kaput, J. (1992). Patterns in students' formalization of quantitative patterns. In G. Harel & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy, 25. Washington D.C.: MAA.Google Scholar
  10. Lavie, I., Steiner, A., & Sfard, A. (2018). Routines we live by: From ritual to exploration. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1–24.Google Scholar
  11. Lisarelli, G. (2017). Exploiting potentials of dynamic representations of functions with parallel axes. In Proceedings of the 13 th international conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching (Vol. 1, pp. 144–150). Lyon: ICTMT.Google Scholar
  12. Lisarelli, G. (2018). How dragging mediates discourse about functions. In E. Bergqvist, M. Österholm, C. Granberg, & L. Sumpter (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd conference of the IGPME (Vol. 3, pp. 323–330). Umeå: PME.Google Scholar
  13. Lisarelli, G., Antonini, S., & Baccaglini-Frank, A. (in press). Capturing ‘time’: Characteristics of students’ written discourse on dynagraphs. In U. T. Jankvist, M. van den Heuvel–Panhuizen, & M. Veldhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11 th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. Utrecht: Freundenthal Group & Freundenthal Institute, Utrecht University and ERME.Google Scholar
  14. Mason, J., & Pimm, D. (1984). Generic examples: Seeing the general in the particular. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(3), 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Monk, S., & Nemirovsky, R. (1994). The case of Dan: Student construction of a functional situation through visual attributes. In E. Dubinsky, A. H. Schoenfeld, & J. Kaput (Eds.), Research in collegiate mathematics education. I. CBMS issues in mathematics education (pp. 139–168). Providence: American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
  16. Ng, O. (2016). Comparing calculus communication across static and dynamic environments using a multimodal approach. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Sinclair, N., Healy, L., & Reis Sales, C. (2009). Time for telling stories: Narrative thinking with dynamic geometry. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 41(4), 441–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Thompson, P. W. (1994). Images of rate and operational understanding of the fundamental theorem of calculus. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 229–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mathematics “F. Casorati”University of PaviaPaviaItaly
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversity of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations