Advertisement

On Understanding the Notion of Limits and Infinitesimal Quantities

  • Revathy ParameswaranEmail author
Article

Abstract

In this paper we explore the influence of students’ personalized notion of ‘small’ numbers based on real life experiences on their understanding of limits. Tests were conducted on two samples of students. The first sample, consisting of students in the XII grade, had been taught limits using an informal approach (i.e., without recourse to the \( \in - \delta \) definition) and the second sample, consisting of first year undergraduates, had been taught the formal \( \in - \delta \) definition of limits. Our research points out that most students in both samples round off to zero such ‘small numbers’ while evaluating limits wherever such numbers might occur because they perceive limit as a process of approximation.

Key words

approximations formal and informal definitions graphical representations limits 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asiala, M., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E. & Schwingendorff, K.E. (1997). The development of students’ graphical understanding of the derivative. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16, 399–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bachelard, G. (1938). La formation de l’esprit scientifique. Paris: J. Vrin (Reprinted 1980).Google Scholar
  3. Barnard, A.D. & Tall, D.O. (1997). Cognitive units connections and mathematical proof. Proceedings of the 21st PME Conference, Lahti, Finland, 2, 41–48.Google Scholar
  4. Berry, J.S. & Nyman, M.A. (2003). Promoting students’ graphical understanding of calculus. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 481–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brousseau, G. (1983). Les obstacles épistémologiques et le problèmes en mathematiques. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 4, 165–198.Google Scholar
  6. Carlson, M. & Oehrtman, M. (2005). Key aspects of knowing and learning the concept of function, research sampler #9. Mathematics Association of America, http://www.maa.org/t_and_l/sampler/research_sampler.html. Accessed 04 July 2006.
  7. Cobb, P., Yackel, E. & Wood, T. (1992). A constructivist alternative to the representational view of mind in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 2–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cornu, B. (1980). Interference des modeles spontanes dan l’apprentissage de las notion de limite. Seminaire de Recherche Pedagogique, 8.Google Scholar
  9. Cornu, B. (1983). Quelques obstacles a l’apprentissage de la notion of de limite. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 4, 236–268.Google Scholar
  10. Cornu, B. (1991). Limits. In D.O. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 153–166). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  11. Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Nichols, D., Schwingendorf, K., Thomas, K. & Vidakovic, D. (1996). Understanding the limit concept: Beginning with a coordinated process schema. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15, 167–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis, R.B. & Vinner, S. (1986). The notion of limit: Some seemingly unavoidable misconception stages. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5, 281–303.Google Scholar
  13. Dreyfus, T. & Vinner, S. (1989). Images and definitions for the concept of function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 356–366.Google Scholar
  14. Ervynck, G. (1981). Conceptual difficulties for first year university students in aquisition for the notion of limit of a function. In L.P. Mendoza & E.R. WIllams (Eds.), Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting, Kingston, Ontario, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 330–333.Google Scholar
  15. Ferrini-Mundy, J. & Graham, K.G. (1991). An overview of the calculus curriculum reform effort: Issues for learning teaching and curriculum development. American Mathematical Monthly, 98, 627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fischbein, E. (1993). The theory of figural concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 139–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  19. Gray, E. & Tall, D.O. (1994). Duality, ambiguity, and flexibility: A proceptual view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 116–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heid, K.M. (1988). Resequencing skills and concepts in applied calculus using the computer as a tool. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19, 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jorgenson, D.L. (1989). Participant observation, a methodology for human studies. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  22. Koirala, H.P. (1997). Teaching of calculus for students’ conceptual understanding. The Mathematics Educator, 2, 52–62.Google Scholar
  23. Li, L. & Tall, D.O. (1993). Constructing different concept images of sequences and limits by programming. Proceedings of PME 17, Japan, 2, 41–48.Google Scholar
  24. Mamona-Downs, J. (1990). Pupils’ interpretation of the limit concept: A comparison between Greeks and English. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Mexico City, 69–76.Google Scholar
  25. Mason, J. & Johnson-Wilder, S. (2004). Fundamental constructs in mathematics education. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  26. Nardi, E. (1996). Novice mathematicians’ encounter with mathematical abstractions: Tensions in concept-image construction and formalisations. PhD Dissertation, Oxford: Oxford University.Google Scholar
  27. Orton, A. (1983). Students’ understanding of integration. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 14, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Robert, A. (1982). L’Acquisition de la notion de convergence des suites numeriques dans l’enseignement superieur. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 3, 307–341.Google Scholar
  29. Sierpinska, A. (1985). Obstacles epistemologiques relatifs a la notion de limite. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 6, 5–67.Google Scholar
  30. Sierpinska, A. (1987). Humanities students and epistemological obstacles related to limits. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 18, 371–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sierpinska, A. (1990). Some remarks on understanding in mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 10, 24–36.Google Scholar
  32. Stewart, J. (1987). Calculus (p. 63). California: Brooks/Cole Publ. Monterey.Google Scholar
  33. Szydlik, J.E. (2000). Mathematical beliefs and conceptual understanding of the limit of a function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31, 258–276.Google Scholar
  34. Tall, D.O. (1980a). Mathematical intuition with special reference to limiting processes. Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on Mathematics Education, Berkeley, 170–176.Google Scholar
  35. Tall, D.O. (1980b). Intuitive infinitesimals in the calculus. Poster presented in Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on Mathematics Education, Berkeley, C5.Google Scholar
  36. Tall, D.O. (1980c). The notion of infinite measuring number and its relevance in the intuition of infinity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 11, 271–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Tall, D.O. (1981). Intuitions of infinity. Mathematics in School, 10, 30–33.Google Scholar
  38. Tall, D.O. (1992). The transition to advanced mathematical thinking: Functions, limits, infinity and proof. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 495–511). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  39. Tall, D.O. & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics, with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Vinner, S. (1983). Concept definition, concept image and the notion of function. International Journal of Mathematics Education in Science and Technology, 14, 293–305.Google Scholar
  41. von Glasersfeld, E. (1983). Learning as a constructive activity. Proceedings of the fifth PME-NA, Montreal, vol. 1, 41–69.Google Scholar
  42. von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). Learning as a constructive activity. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 3–17). Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum.Google Scholar
  43. von Glasersfeld, E. (1991). Abstraction, representation and reflection. In L. Steffe (Ed.), Epistemological foundations of mathematical experience (pp. 45–67). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  44. Williams, S. (1991). Models of limit held by college students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22, 219–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Williams, S. (2001). Predications of the limit concept: An application of repertory grids. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 341–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate StudentChennai Mathematical InstituteSiruseriIndia

Personalised recommendations