Research in Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Integrating Digital Technology into Elementary Mathematics: Three Theoretical Perspectives

  • Received : 2020.09.09
  • Accepted : 2020.09.27
  • Published : 2020.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this article, the author's intent is to begin a conversation centered on the question: How was the integration of digital technology into elementary mathematics classrooms framed? In the first part of the discussion, the author provides a historical perspective of the development of theoretical perspectives of the integration of digital technology in learning mathematics. Then, the author describes three theoretical perspectives of the role of digital technology in mathematics education: microworlds, instrumental genesis, and semiotic mediation. Last, based on three different theoretical perspectives, the author concludes the article by asking the reader to think differently.

Keywords

References

  1. Artigue, M. (2002). Learning mathematics in a CAS environment: The genesis of a reflection about instrumentation and the dialectics between technical and conceptual work. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 7(3), 245-274. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022103903080
  2. Arzarello, F., & Robutti, O. (2008). Framing the embodied mind approach within a multimodal paradigm. In L. English, M. Bartolini Bussi, G. Jones, R. Lesh, & D. Tirosh (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 720-749, 2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ:Erlbaum.
  3. Bartolini Bussi, M. G., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classroom: Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. In L. English, M. Bartolini Bussi, G. Jones, R. Lesh & D. Tirosh (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 746-783, 2nd ed.). Mahwah: Erlbaum.
  4. Battista, M. T. (2008). Development of the shape makers geometry microworld: design principles and research. In G. Blume & M. K. Heid (Eds.), Research on technology and the teaching and learning of mathematics: Cases and perspectives (Vol. 2, pp. 131-156). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.
  5. Bussi, M. G. B., & Baccaglini-Frank, A. (2015). Geometry in early years: sowing seeds for a mathematical definition of squares and rectangles. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47(3), 391-405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0636-5
  6. Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1990). The effects of Logo on children's conceptualizations of angle and polygons. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(5), 356-371. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.21.5.0356
  7. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Washington: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School officers.
  8. Dick, T. P., & Hollebrands, K. F. (2011). Focus in high school mathematics: Technology to support reasoning and sense making. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  9. Dodge, T., Barab, S., Stuckey, B., Warren, S., Heiselt, C., & Stein, R. (2008). Children's sense of self: Learning and meaning in the digital age. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(2), 225-249.
  10. Drijvers, P., Kieran, C., & Mariotti, M. A. (2010). Integrating technology into mathematics education: Theoretical perspectives. In C. Hoyles & J.-B. Lagrange (Eds.), Mathematics education and technology-rethinking the terrain (pp. 89-132). New York: Springer.
  11. Freiman, V., Polotskaia, E., & Savard, A. (2017). Using a computer-based learning task to promote work on mathematical relationships in the context of word problems in early grades. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 49(6), 835-849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-017-0883-3
  12. Howland, J. L., Jonassen, D. H., & Marra, R. M. (2011). Meaningful learning with technology. Boston, MA: Pearson.
  13. Hoyles, C. (1993). Microworlds/Schoolworlds: The transformation of an innovation. In C. Keitel and K. Ruthven (Eds.), Learning through computers: Mathematics and educational technology (pp. 1-17). Verlag, Berlin: Springer.
  14. Hoyles, C., & Healy, L. (1997). Unfolding meanings for reflective symmetry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 2(1), 27-59. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009721414546
  15. Jones, K. (1998). Theoretical frameworks for the learning of geometrical reasoning. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics. Geometry Working Group, 18(1 & 2), 29-34.
  16. Kaput, J. (1992). Technology and mathematics education. In D. Grouws (Ed.), A handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 515-556). New York, NY: Macmillan.
  17. Kaur, H. (2015). Two aspects of young children’s thinking about different types of dynamic triangles: prototypicality and inclusion. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47(3), 407-420. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0658-z
  18. Konold, C., Harradine, A., & Kazak, S. (2007). Understanding distributions by modeling them. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 12(3), 217-230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-007-9123-1
  19. Kynigos, C., Koutlis, S., & Hadzilacos, T. (1997). Mathematics with component oriented exploratory software. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 2(3), 229-250. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009744718575
  20. Mariotti, M. A. (2009). Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective: The role of the teacher. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 41(4), 427-440. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0199-z
  21. Maschietto, M., & Soury-Lavergne, S. (2013). Designing a duo of material and digital artifacts: the pascaline and Cabri Elem e-books in primary school mathematics. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(7), 959-971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0533-3
  22. Moreno-Armella, L., Hegedus, S. J., & Kaput, J. J. (2008). From static to dynamic mathematics: Historical and representational perspectives. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9116-6
  23. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (Ed.). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics (Vol. 1). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  24. Ng, O. L., & Sinclair, N. (2015). Young children reasoning about symmetry in a dynamic geometry environment. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47(3), 421-434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0660-5
  25. Nivens, R. A., & Otten, S. (2017). Assessing journal quality in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(4), 348-368. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.48.4.0348
  26. Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings: Learning cultures and computers (Vol. 17). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
  27. Noss, R., Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1997). The construction of mathematical meanings: Connecting the visual with the symbolic. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33(2), 203-233. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002943821419
  28. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Cambridge: Perseus Books.
  29. Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. Constructionism, 36(2), 1-11.
  30. Pea, R. (1987). Cognitive technologies for mathematics education. In A.H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 89-122). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  31. Preece, J., Rogers, Y., & Sharp, H. (2015). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
  32. Roschelle, J., Noss, R., Blikstein, P., & Jackiw, N. (2017). Technology for learning mathematics. In J. Cai (Ed.) The compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 273-296). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  33. Soury-Lavergne, S., & Maschietto, M. (2015). Articulation of spatial and geometrical knowledge in problem solving with technology at primary school. ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47(3), 435-449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0694-3
  34. Taylor, R. (Ed.). (1980). The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee (pp. 1-10). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
  35. Thompson, P. W. (1992). Notations, conventions, and constraints: Contributions to effective uses of concrete materials in elementary mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 123-147. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.23.2.0123
  36. Trouche, L. (2004). Managing the complexity of human/machine interactions in computerized learning environments: Guiding students’ command process through instrumental orchestrations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9(3), 281-307. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-004-3468-5
  37. Verillon, P., & Rabardel, P. (1995). Cognition and artifacts: A contribution to the study of though in relation to instrumented activity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10(1), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03172796
  38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  39. Zbiek, R. M., Heid, M. K., Blume, G. W., & Dick, T. P. (2007). Research on technology in mathematics education: The perspective of constructs. In F. Lester (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 1169-1207). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.