Designing Spreadsheet-Based Tasks for Purposeful Algebra

Abstract

We describe the design of a sequence of spreadsheet-based pedagogic tasks for the introduction of algebra in the early years of secondary schooling within the Purposeful Algebraic Activity project. This design combines two relatively novel features to bring a different perspective to research in the use of spreadsheets for the learning and teaching of algebra: the tasks which are purposeful for pupils and contain opportunities to appreciate the utility of algebraic ideas, and careful matching of the affordances of the spreadsheet to the algebraic ideas which are being introduced. Examples from two tasks are used to illustrate the design process. We then present data from a teaching programme using these tasks to highlight connections between aspects of the task design and the construction of meanings for variable.

Keywords

algebra spreadsheets task design variable 

References

  1. Ainley, J. 2000

    Constructing purposeful mathematical activity in primary classrooms

    Tikly, C.Wolf, A. eds. The Maths We Need NowBedford Way PapersLondon
    Google Scholar
  2. Ainley, J. and Pratt, D. (2002). Purpose and utility in pedagogic task design. In A. Cockburn and E. Nardi (Eds), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2 (pp. 17–24). UK.Google Scholar
  3. Ainley, J., Pratt, D. and Hansen, A. (forthcoming). Connecting engagement and focus in pedagogic task design. British Educational Research JournalGoogle Scholar
  4. Ainley, J., Wilson, K. and Bills, L. (2003). Generalising the context and generalising the calculation. In N.A. Pateman, B.J. Dougherty and J. Zilliox (Eds), Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2 (pp. 9–16). Honolulu.Google Scholar
  5. Ainley, J., Bills, L. and Wilson, K. (2005). Purposeful task design and the emergence of transparency. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.Google Scholar
  6. Brousseau, G. 1997Balacheff, N.Cooper, M.Sutherland, R.Warfield, V. eds. Theory of Didactical SituationsKluwer Academic PublishersDordrecht(Edited and translated by )Google Scholar
  7. Carraher, D., Schliemann, A. and Brinzuela, B. (2001). Can young students operate on unknowns? In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1 (pp. 130–140). Netherlands.Google Scholar
  8. Cooper, C., Dunne, M. 2000Assessing Children’s Mathematical KnowledgeOpen University PressBuckinghamGoogle Scholar
  9. Dettori, G., Garuti, R., Lemut, E. 2001

    From arithmetic to algebraic thinking by using a spreadsheet

    Sutherland, R.Rojano, T.Bell, A.Lins, R. eds. Perspectives on School AlgebraKluwerDordrecht
    Google Scholar
  10. Filloy, E., Rojano, T. 1989Solving equations: The transition from arithmetic to algebraFor the Learning of Mathematics91925Google Scholar
  11. Harel, G. 1998Two dual assertions: The first on learning and the second on teaching (or vice versa)American Mathematical Monthly105497507Google Scholar
  12. Herscovics, N., Linchevski, L. 1994A cognitive gap between arithmetic and algebraEducational Studies in Mathematics275978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kieran, C. 1996

    The changing face of school algebra

    Alsina, C.Alvares, J.M.Hodgson, B.Laborde, C.A., Pérez eds. Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress on Mathematics Education: Selected LecturesS.A.E.M.Seville271290‘Thales’
    Google Scholar
  14. Nunes, T., Schliemann, A.D., Carraher, D.W. 1993Street Mathematics and School MathematicsCambridge University PressCambridgeGoogle Scholar
  15. Radford, L. 2000Signs and meanings in students’ emergent algebraic thinking: A semiotic analysisEducational Studies in Mathematics42237268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Radford, L. 2002The seen, the spoken and the writtenA semiotic approach to the problem of objectification of mathematical knowledge. For the Learning of Mathematics221423Google Scholar
  17. Radford, L. 2003Gestures, speech and the sprouting of signs: A semiotic-cultural approach to students’ types of generalizationMathematical Thinking and Learning53770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Radford, L., Bardini, C. and Sabena, C. (2005). Perceptual semiosis and the microgenesis of algebraic generalizations. Proceedings of the 4th congress of the European society for Research in Mathematics Education. Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  19. Schliemann, A. (1995). Some concerns about bringing everyday mathematics to mathematics education. In L. Meira and D. Carraher (Eds), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1 (pp. 45–60). Brazil.Google Scholar
  20. Stacey, K. and MacGregor, M. (1997). Multiple referents and the shifting meanings of unknowns in students’ use of algebra. In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 4 (pp. 190–197). Finland.Google Scholar
  21. Sutherland, R. 1991Some unanswered research questions on the teaching and learning of algebraFor the Learning of Mathematics114046Google Scholar
  22. Sutherland, R. (1993). Project AnA–the gap between arithmetic and algebra (R000232132). Final report to ESRC. Institute of Education, University of London.Google Scholar
  23. Sutherland, R., Rojano, T. 1993A spreadsheet approach to solving algebra problemsJournal of Mathematical Behaviour12353383Google Scholar
  24. Tabach, M. and Friedlander, A. (2004). Levels of student responses in a spreadsheet-based environment. In M. Johnsen Høines and A.B. Fuglestad (Eds), Proceedings of the Twenty Eighth Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2 (pp. 423–430). Bergen University College.Google Scholar
  25. Ursini, S. and Trigueros, M. (2001). A model for the uses of variable in elementary algebra. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 4 (pp. 335–342). Netherlands.Google Scholar
  26. Wilson, K., Ainley, J. and Bills, L. (2004). Spreadsheet generalising and paper and pencil generalising. In M. Johnsen Høines and A. B. Fuglestad (Eds), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 4 (pp. 441–448). Norway.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of EducationUniversity of WarwickCoventryUK
  2. 2.School of Education and Lifelong LearningUniversity of East AngliaNorwichUK

Personalised recommendations