• Ivy KidronEmail author


Processes of knowledge construction are investigated. A learner is constructing knowledge about the notion of limit in the definition of the horizontal asymptote. The analysis is based on the dynamically nested epistemic action model for abstraction in context. Different tasks are offered to the learner. In her effort to perform the different tasks, the learner encounters a situation of conflict between her concept image of the horizontal asymptote and the concept definition. The model of abstraction in context is used to analyze two new constructions of knowledge for the learner, which permit her to reconsider her concept image and to conceptually understand the definition of the horizontal asymptote.


abstraction in context concept definition concept image construction of knowledge horizontal asymptote limit tend to 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arcavi, A. (2003). The role of visual representations in the learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52, 215–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Cornu, B. (1991). Limits. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 153–166). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
  3. Cottril, J. & Dubinsky, E. (1996). Understanding the limit concept: Beginning with a coordinated scheme. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15, 167–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dana Picard, T. & Kidron, I. (2008). Exploring the phase space of a system of differential equations: Different mathematical registers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 695–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis, R. B. & Vinner, S. (1986). The notion of limit: Some seemingly unavoidable misconception stages. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5, 281–303.Google Scholar
  6. Davydov, V. V. (1990). Soviet studies in mathematics education: Vol. 2. In J. Kilpatrick (Ed.), Types of generalization in instruction: Logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school curricula (J. Teller, Trans.). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Original work published in 1972).Google Scholar
  7. Dreyfus, T., Hershkowitz, R. & Schwarz, B. B. (2001). Abstraction in context II: The case of peer interaction. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 1(3/4), 307–368.Google Scholar
  8. Dreyfus, T. & Kidron, I. (2006). Interacting parallel constructions: A solitary learner and the bifurcation diagram. Recherches en didactique des mathématiques, 26(3), 295–336.Google Scholar
  9. Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eisenberg, T. & Dreyfus, T. (1993). The guide and the asymptote. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 12(1), 40–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fischbein, E. (1999). Intuitions and schemata in mathematical reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 38, 11–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gray, E. & Tall, D. (1994). Duality, ambiguity and flexibility: A proceptual view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 116–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Heid, K. M. (1988). Resequencing skills and concepts in applied calculus using the computer as a tool. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 19(1), 3–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B. & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kidron, I. (2003). Polynomial approximation of functions: Historical perspective and new tools. The International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8, 299–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kidron, I. (2008). Abstraction and consolidation of the limit procept by means of instrumented schemes: The complementary role of three different frameworks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(3), 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kidron, I. & Zehavi, N. (2002). The role of animation in teaching the limit concept. The International Journal for Computer Algebra in Mathematics Education, 9(3), 205–227.Google Scholar
  18. Pontecorvo, C. & Girardet, H. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 365–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Roh, K. H. (2008). Students’ images and their understanding of definitions of the limit of a sequence. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(3), 217–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ron, G., Dreyfus, T. & Hershkowitz, R. (2010). Partially correct constructs illuminate students’ inconsistent answers. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75, 65–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schwarz, B. B., Dreyfus, T. & Hershkowitz, R. (2009). The nested epistemic actions model for abstraction in context. In B. B. Schwarz, T. Dreyfus & R. Hershkowitz (Eds.), Transformation of knowledge through classroom interaction (pp. 11–41). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Schwarz, B. B. & Hershkowitz, R. (1995). Argumentation and reasoning in a technology-based class. In J. F. Lehman & J. D. Moore (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th annual meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 731–735). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  23. Sierpinska, A. (1985). Obstacles épistémologiques relatifs à la notion de limite. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 6(1), 5–68.Google Scholar
  24. Tall, D. (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
  25. Tall, D. & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limit and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 151–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Vinner, S., & Hershkowitz, R. (1980). Concept images and common cognitive paths in the development of some simple geometrical concepts. Proceedings of the 4th annual meeting for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 177–184). Berkeley, CA: Psychology of Mathematics Education.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Applied MathematicsJerusalem College of TechnologyJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations