## Abstract

This paper draws on data from a three-year longitudinal study of secondary school classrooms to examine pedagogical issues in using technology resources in mathematics teaching—in particular, graphics calculators and overhead projection panels that allow screen output to be viewed by the whole class. We theorise four roles for technology in relation to such teaching and learning interactions—master, servant, partner, and extension of self—and illustrate this taxonomy with observational data from five senior secondary mathematics classrooms. Our research shows how technology can facilitate collaborative inquiry during both small group interactions and whole class discussions when students use their calculators and the overhead projection panel to share their mathematical understanding.

### Similar content being viewed by others

## References

Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers. (1996).

*Statement on the use of calculators and computers for mathematics in Australian schools*. Adelaide: Author.Australian Education Council (1991).

*A national statement on mathematics for Australian schools*. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation.Barrett, G., & Goebel, J. (1990). The impact of graphics calculators on the teaching and learning of mathematics. In T. J. Cooney & C. R. Hirsch (Eds.),

*Teaching and learning mathematics in the 1990s*(pp. 205–211). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Demana, F., & Waits, B. K. (1990). Enhancing mathematics teaching and learning through technology. In T. J. Cooney & C. R. Hirsch (Eds.),

*Teaching and learning mathematics in the 1990s*(pp. 212–222). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Geiger, V. (1998). Students’ perspectives on using computers and graphics calculators during mathematical collaborative practice. In C. Kanes, M. Goos, & E. Warren (Eds.),

*Teaching mathematics in new times*(Proceedings of the 21st annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 217–224). Gold Coast, QLD: MERGA.Goos, M. (1998). Technology as a tool for transforming mathematical tasks. In P. Galbraith, W. Blum, G. Booker, & I. Huntley (Eds.),

*Mathematical modelling: Teaching and assessing in a technology rich world*(pp. 103–113). Chichester, England: Horwood.Goos, M., Galbraith, P., & Renshaw, P. (1999). Establishing a community of practice in a secondary mathematics classroom. In L. Burton (Ed.),

*Learning mathematics: From hierarchies to networks*(pp. 36–61). London, England: Falmer.Heid, M. K., Sheets, C., & Matras, M. A. (1990). Computer-enhanced algebra: New roles and challenges for teachers and students. In T. J. Cooney & C. R. Hirsch (Eds.),

*Teaching and learning mathematics in the 1990s*(pp. 194–204). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Jones, P., & McCrae, B. (1996). Assessing the impact of graphics calculators on mathematics examinations. In P. Clarkson (Ed.),

*Technology in mathematics education*(Proceedings of the 19^{th}annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp. 306–313). Melbourne: MERGA.Lesmeister, L. M. (1997). The effect of graphics calculators on secondary mathematics achievement. (MS thesis, University of Houston, 1996).

*Masters Abstracts International, 35*/01, 39.Maldonado, A. R. (1998). Conversations with Hypatia: The use of comptiters and graphics calculators in the formulation of mathematical arguments in college calculus. (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas, 1998).

*Dissertation Abstracts International, 59*/06A, 1955.National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989).

*Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics*. Reston, VA: Author.National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991).

*Professional standards for teaching mathematics*. Reston, VA: Author.Olsen, F. (1999). The promise and problems of a new way of teaching math.

*The Chronicle of Higher Education, 46*(7), 31–35.Penglase, M., & Arnold, S. (1996). The graphics calculator in mathematics education: A critical review of recent research.

*Mathematics Education Research Journal, 8*, 58–90.Portafoglio, A. (1998). The effects of pair collaboration in community college computer calculus laboratories. (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers College, 1998).

*Dissertation Abstracts International, 59*/07A, 2407.Ramsden, P. (1997, June).

*Mathematics in education: Old wine in new bottles or a whole new vineyard?*Paper presented at the Second International Mathematica Symposium, Rovamiemi, Finland.Resnick, L. B., Pontecorvo, C., & Säljö, R. (1997). Discourse, tools, and reasoning. In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Bürge (Eds.),

*Discourse, tools, and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition*(pp. 1–20). Berlin, Germany: Springer.Shneiderman, B., Borkowski, E., Alavi, M., & Norman, K. (1998). Emergent patterns of teaching/learning in electronic classrooms.

*Educational Technology, Research and Development, 4*(4), 23–42.Simmt, E. (1997). Graphics calculators in high school mathematics.

*Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 16*, 269–289.Simonsen, L. M., & Dick, T. P. (1997). Teachers’ perceptions of the impact of graphics calculators in the mathematics classroom.

*Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 16*, 239–268.Stuve M. J. (1997). 48 children, 2 teachers, 1 classroom, and 4 computers: A personal exploration of a network learning environment (Doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1997 [Abstract]. Retrieved 14 March 2000 from Pro Quest-Digital Dissertations (No. AAT 9737263) on the World Wide Web:

__http://wwwlib.umi.com/dissertations/__Templer, R., Klug, D., & Gould, I. (1998). Mathematics laboratories for science undergraduates. In C. Hoyles., C. Morgan., & G. Woodhouse (Eds.),

*Rethinking the mathematics curriculum*(pp 140–154). London, England: Falmer.Tharp, M. L., Fitzsimmons, J. A., & Ayers, R. L. B. (1997). Negotiating a technological shift: Teacher perception of the implementation of graphics calculators.

*Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 16*, 551–575.Thorpe E. T. (1998). Changes in teaching behavior and teacher attitudes toward computer technology: A grounded theory (diffusion of innovation) (Doctoral dissertation, Texas A & M University, 1998) [Abstract]. Retrieved 14 March 2000 from Pro Quest: Digital Dissertations (No. AAT 9817893) on the World Wide Web: http://

__wwwlib.umi.com/dissertations/__Weber, T. E. (1999). Graphing technology and its effect on solving inequalities (Doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1998).

*Dissertation Abstracts International, 60*/01A, 88.Wertsch, J. V. (1985).

*Vygotsky and the social formation of mind*. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

## Author information

### Authors and Affiliations

## Rights and permissions

## About this article

### Cite this article

Goos, M., Galbraith, P., Renshaw, P. *et al.* Reshaping teacher and student roles in technology-enriched classrooms.
*Math Ed Res J* **12**, 303–320 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217091

Issue Date:

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217091