# Comparative Study of Three Approaches to Teaching Rates

Chapter

## Abstract

This chapter has a special aim and organization. It presents the comparative study of three different approaches to the same theme of proportional reasoning, in particular of the concept of the rate. The idea for the study is related to the Chinese Keli lesson study method (Huang & Bao, 2006), whose one of the approaches is the observation of two classes taught by different instructors and presenting different approaches to the same theme (CTRAS 5, 2013) followed by the discussion comparing the instructional approaches.

## Keywords

Lesson Plan Mathematics Education Research Proportional Reasoning Rate Sequence Teaching Rate
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## References

- Adi, H., & Pulos, S. (1980). Individual differences and formal operational performance of college students.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 11*(2), 150–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Anderson, J. R. (1990).
*Cognitive psychology and its implications*. New York, NY: WH Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.Google Scholar - Arnon, I., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Oktaç, A., Fuentes, S. R., Trigueros, M., & Weller, K. (2013).
*APOS theory: A framework for research and curriculum development in mathematics education.*Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar - Berk, D., Taber, S. B., Gorowara, C. C., & Poetzl, C. (2009). Developing prospective elementary teachers’ flexibility in the domain of proportional reasoning.
*Mathematical Thinking and Learning*,*11*(3), 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Bailin, S. (1987). Critical and creative thinking.
*Informal logic, 9*(1).Google Scholar - Caddle, M. C., & Brizuela, B. M. (2011). Fifth graders’ additive and multiplicative reasoning: Establishing connections across conceptual fields using a graph.
*The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 30*(3), 224–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Christou, C., & Philippou, G. (2001). Mapping and development of intuitive proportional thinking.
*The Journal of Mathematical Behavior*,*20*(3), 321–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Cifarelli, V. V. (1998). The development of mental representations as a problem solving activity.
*The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17*(2), 239–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Cobb, P. (2011) Chapter 2 Introduction: Part I Radical constructivism. In E. Yackel, K. Gravemeijer, & A. Sfard (Eds.),
*A journey in mathematics education research: insights from the work of Paul Cobb, Mathematics education library 48*(pp. 9–17). Dordrecht, Heidelberg, London, & New York, NY: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar - Cobb, P., & Steffe, L. P. (2010). The constructivist researcher as teacher and model builder. In
*A journey in mathematics education research*(pp. 19–30). Netherlands: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - CTRAS 5. (Conference of Teaching-Research for All Students, 2013), Fujiow, ChinaGoogle Scholar
- Czarnocha, B., Dubinsky, E., Prabhu, V., & Vidakovic, D. (1999). One theoretical perspective in undergraduate mathematics education research. In
*Proceedings PME Conference*, Vol. 1 (pp. 1–95).Google Scholar - Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (Ed.),
*Advanced mathematical thinking*(pp. 95–126). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar - Fernandez, C., Llinares, S., Modestou, M., & Gagatsis, A. (2010). Proportional reasoning: How task variables influence the development of students’ strategies from primary to secondary school.
*Acta Didactica Universitatis Comenianae Mathematics, ADUC*,*10*, 1–18.Google Scholar - Glasersfeld, E. V. (1998, September).
*Scheme theory as a key to the learning paradox*. Paper presented at the 15th Advanced Course, Archives Jean Piaget, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar - Goodson-Espy, T. (1998). The roles of reification and reflective abstraction in the development of abstract thought: Transitions from arithmetic to algebra.
*Educational studies in mathematics, 36*(3), 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Huang, R., & Bao, J. (2006). Towards a model for teacher professional development in China: Introducing KELI.
*Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9*, 279–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958).
*The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence*. New York, NY: Basic Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking.
*Educational Researcher, 28*(2), 16–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Lamon, S. (2007). Rational numbers and proportional reasoning: Towards a theoretical framework for research. In F. K. Lester, Jr. (Ed.),
*Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning*. Greenwich CT; Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar - Lo, J. J., & Watanabe, T. (1997). Developing ratio and proportion schemes: A story of a fifth grader.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education*,*28*(2), 216–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Mariotti, M., A. (2009) Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective: the role of the teacher.
*ZDM Mathematics Education, 41*, 427–440.Google Scholar - Norton, A., & D’Ambrosio, B. S. (2008). ZPC and ZPD zones of teaching and learning.
*Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 39*(3), 220–246.Google Scholar - Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008).
*Critical and creative thinking*. Dillon Beach, CA: The Foundation for Critical Thinking Press. Retrieved January 2015, www.criticalthinking.orgGoogle Scholar - Piaget, J., & Garcia, R. (1991).
*Toward a logic of meaning*(Trans.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. (Original work published 1987)Google Scholar - Presmeg, N. (2003). Creativity, mathematizing, and didactizing: Leen Streefland’s work continues.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 54*(1), 127–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Richardson, V. (2003). Constructivist pedagogy.
*Teachers College Record, 105*(9), 1623–1640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22*,1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Sfard, A. (1992). Operational origins of mathematical objects and the quandary of reification-the case of function.
*The Concept of Function: Aspects of Epistemology and Pedagogy*,*25*, 59–84.Google Scholar - Sfard, A., & Linchevski, L. (1994). The gains and pitfalls of reification: The case of algebra.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics*,*26*, 191–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Simon, M. A., Tzur, R., Heinz, K., & Kinzel, M. (2004). Explicating a mechanism for conceptual learning: Elaborating the construct of reflective abstraction.
*Journal for Research in Mathematics Education*,*35*, 305–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Singh, P. (2000). Understanding the concepts of proportion and ratio constructed by two grade six students.
*Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43*, 271–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In R. Lesh & A. E. Kelly (Eds.),
*Research design in mathematics and science education*(pp. 267–307). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar - Tall, D., Thomas, M., Davis, G., Gray, E., & Simpson, A. (2000). What is the object of the encapsulation of a process?
*Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 18*(2), 1–19.Google Scholar - Treffinger, D. J. (1995). Creative problem solving: Overview and educational implications.
*Educational Psychology Review*,*7*(3), 301–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar - Vergnaud, G. (1983). Multiplicative structures. In R. Lesh & M. Landau (Eds.),
*Acquisition of mathematics concepts and processes*(pp. 127–174). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar - Vergnaud, G. (1994). Multiplicative conceptual field: what and why. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.),
*The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics*(pp. 41–59). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar - Vygotsky, L. S. (1997).
*Thought and language – Revised edition*(10th ed.). Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

## Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2016