# Ferris wheels and filling bottles: a case of a student’s transfer of covariational reasoning across tasks with different backgrounds and features

- 494 Downloads
- 3 Citations

## Abstract

Using an actor-oriented perspective on transfer, we report a case of a student’s transfer of covariational reasoning across tasks involving different backgrounds and features. In this study, we investigated the research question: How might a student’s covariational reasoning on Ferris wheel tasks, involving attributes of distance, width, and height, influence a student’s covariational reasoning on filling bottle tasks, involving attributes of volume and height? The student transferred covariational reasoning that she employed on Ferris wheel tasks to filling bottle tasks; yet, her covariational reasoning on filling bottle tasks was less advanced. When designing a sequence of tasks intended to engender students’ covariational reasoning, we recommend that researchers begin by using situations consisting of “simpler” attributes, such as height and distance, which students may more readily conceive of as being possible to measure. By taking into account students’ conceptions of task features, researchers can promote transfer of complex forms of mathematical reasoning, such as covariational reasoning.

## Keywords

Variational Reasoning Individual Quantity Ninth Grade Student Smooth Image Covariational Reasoning## Notes

### Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by a Faculty Development Grant from the University of Colorado Denver. Opinions, findings, and conclusions are those of the authors. We thank Patrick Thompson and Reviewers for their comments on previous versions of this manuscript.

## References

- 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Castillo-Garsow, C. (2012). Continuous quantitative reasoning. In R. Mayes & L. L. Hatfield (Eds.),
*Quantitative reasoning and mathematical modeling: A driver for STEM integrated education and teaching in context*(Vol. 2, pp. 55–73). Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming College of Education.Google Scholar - Castillo-Garsow, C., Johnson, H. L., & Moore, K. C. (2013). Chunky and smooth images of change.
*For the Learning of Mathematics, 33*(3), 31–37.Google Scholar - Confrey, J., & Smith, E. (1995). Splitting, covariation, and their role in the development of exponential functions.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26*(1), 66–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Ellis, A. B., Özgür, Z., Kulow, T., Dogan, M. F., & Amidon, J. (2016). An exponential growth learning trajectory: Students’ emerging understanding of exponential growth through covariation.
*Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 18*(3), 151–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Ellis, A. B., Özgür, Z., Kulow, T., Williams, C., & Amidon, J. (2015). Quantifying exponential growth: Three conceptual shifts in coordinating multiplicative and additive growth.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 39*, 131–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Johnson, H. L. (2012). Reasoning about variation in the intensity of change in covarying quantities involved in rate of change.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31*(3), 313–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Johnson, H. L. (2013). Designing covariation tasks to support students reasoning about quantities involved in rate of change. In C. Margolinas (Ed.),
*Task design in mathematics education. Proceedings of ICMI Study 22*(Vol. 1, pp. 213–222). Oxford.Google Scholar - Johnson, H. L. (2014). A role of context in constructivist model building: What problem is the learner solving?
*Constructivist Foundations, 9*(3), 339–341.Google Scholar - Johnson, H. L. (2015a). Secondary students’ quantification of ratio and rate: A framework for reasoning about change in covarying quantities.
*Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 17*(1), 64–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Johnson, H. L. (2015b). Task design: Fostering secondary students’ shifts from variational to covariational reasoning. In K. Beswick, T. Muir & J. Wells (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the 39th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education*(Vol. 3, pp. 129–136). Hobart, Tasmania: University of Tasmania.Google Scholar - Kaput, J. J., & Roschelle, J. (1999). The mathematics of change and variation from a millenial perspective: New content, new context. In C. Hoyles, C. Morgan & G. Woodhouse (Eds.),
*Rethinking the mathematics curriculum*(pp. 155–170). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar - Lobato, J. (2003). How design experiments can inform a rethinking of transfer and vice versa.
*Educational Researcher, 32*(1), 17–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lobato, J. (2008). When students don’t apply the knowledge that you think they have, rethink your assumptions about transfer. In M. P. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.),
*Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics education*(pp. 289–304). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lobato, J. (2012). The actor-oriented transfer perspective and its contributions to educational research and practice.
*Educational Psychologist, 47*(3), 232–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Marton, F. (2015).
*Necessary conditions of learning*. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar - Moore, K. C. (2014). Quantitative reasoning and the sine function: The case of Zac.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45*(1), 102–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Moore, K. C., & Carlson, M. P. (2012). Students’ images of problem contexts when solving applied problems.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31*(1), 48–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Moore, K. C., Paoletti, T., & Musgrave, S. (2013). Covariational reasoning and invariance among coordinate systems.
*The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32*(3), 461–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Moore, K. C., Silverman, J., Paoletti, T., & LaForest, K. (2014). Breaking conventions to support quantitative reasoning.
*Mathematics Teacher Education, 2*(2), 141–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Oehrtman, M., Carlson, M. P., & Thompson, P. W. (2008). Foundational reasoning abilities that promote coherence in students’ function understanding. In M. P. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.),
*Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics education*(pp. 27–42). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Saldanha, L., & Thompson, P. W. (1998). Re-thinking covariation from a quantitative perspective: Simultaneous continuous variation. In S. B. Berenson, K. R. Dawkins, M. Blanton, W. N. Coloumbe, J. Kolb, K. Norwood & L. Stiff (Eds.),
*Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the Psychology of Mathematics Education North American Chapter*(Vol. 1, pp. 298–303). Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University.Google Scholar - Shell Centre for Mathematical Education (University of Nottingham). (1985).
*The language of functions and graphs: An examination module for secondary schools*. Nottingham, UK: JMB/Shell Centre for Mathematical Education.Google Scholar - Sierpinska, A. (2004). Research in mathematics education through a keyhole: Task problematization.
*For the Learning of Mathematics, 24*(2), 7–15.Google Scholar - Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),
*The SAGE handbook of qualitative research*(pp. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.Google Scholar - Stalvey, H. E., & Vidakovic, D. (2015). Students’ reasoning about relationships between variables in a real-world problem.
*Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 40*, 192–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Thompson, P. W. (1993). Quantitative reasoning, complexity, and additive structures.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25*, 165–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Thompson, P. W. (1994). The development of the concept of speed and its relationship to concepts of rate. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.),
*The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics*(pp. 181–234). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar - Thompson, P. W. (2002). Didactic objects and didactic models in radical constructivism. In K. Gravemeijer, R. Lehrer, B. van Oers & L. Verschaffel (Eds.),
*Symbolizing, modeling, and tool use in mathematics education*. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar - Thompson, P. W. (2011). Quantitative reasoning and mathematical modeling. In S. A. Chamberlain & L. L. Hatfield (Eds.),
*New perspectives and directions for collaborative research in mathematics education: Papers from a planning conference for wisdom^e*(Vol. 1, pp. 33–56). Laramie, WY: University of Wyoming College of Education.Google Scholar - Thompson, P. W., & Carlson, M. P. (2017). Variation, covariation and functions: Foundational ways of mathematical thinking. In J. Cai (Ed.),
*Compendium for research in mathematics education*(pp. 421–456). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar - Watson, A. (2016).
*Parameters for practice and research in task design in mathematics education*. Paper presented at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Hamburg, Germany.Google Scholar - Yin, R. K. (2006). Case study methods. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli & P. B. Elmore (Eds.),
*Handbook of complementary methods in education research*(pp. 111–122). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar