What students' learning of representations tells us about constructivism

Journal of Mathematical Behavior

Volumn 19, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 481-502

  Elby, Andrew ^a  

^a Bldg 142   (United States)

Author keywords

Conceptual change; Constructivism; Misconceptions; P prims; Representations

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034358353     PISSN: 07323123     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0732-3123(01)00054-2     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Carey, S. (1992). The origin and evolution of everyday concepts. In: R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive Models of Science (vol. XV, pp. 89-128). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
2. Churchland, P. S., & Sejnowski, T. J. (1992). The Computational Brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. diSessa, A. (1982). Unlearning aristotelian physics: A study of knowledge-based learning. Cognitive Science, 6, 37-75.
4. diSessa, A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10 (2/3), 105-225.
5. diSessa, A., & Sherin, B. (2001). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19 (4), 385-398.
6. Friedman, J. S., & diSessa, A. A. (1999). What students should know about technology: The case of scientific visualization. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8 (3), 175-195.
7. Halloun, I. A., & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53 (11), 1043-1056.
8. Hammer, D. (1996a). Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5 (2), 97-127.
9. Hammer, D. (1996b). More than misconceptions: Multiple perspectives on student knowledge and reasoning, and an appropriate role for education research. American Journal of Physics, 64 (10), 1316-1325.
10. Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15 (4), 485-529.
11. Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (in press). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer, & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal Epistemology: The Psychology of Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Janvier, C. & Université Du Québec À Montréal, Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche sur l'apprentissage et le développement en éducation. (1987). Problems of Representation in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Hillsdale, NJ: Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. M. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1-64.
14. Maloney, D. P., & Siegler, R. S. (1993). Conceptual competition in physics learning. International Journal of Science Education, 15 (3), 283-296.
15. McCloskey, M. (1983a). Intuitive physics. Scientific American, 249, 122.
16. McCloskey, M. (1983b). Naive theories of motion. In: D. Gentner, & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental Models (pp. 299-324). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. McCloskey, M., Carramazza, A., & Green, B. (1980). Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces: Naive beliefs about the motion of objects. Science, 210, 1139-1141.
18. McDermott, L. C. (1984). Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics. Physics Today, 37, 24-32.
19. McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55, 505-513.
20. Samarapugnavan, A., & Wiers, R. W. (1997). Children's thoughts on the origin of species: A study of explanatory coherence. Cognitive Science, 21 (2), 147-177.
21. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In: D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 334-370). New York: Macmillan.
22. Sherin, B. (2001). How students invent representations of motion: A genetic account. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19 (4), 399-441.
23. Smith, J., diSessa, A., & Roschelle, J. (1993/1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3 (2), 115-163.
24. Steinberg, R. N., & Sabella, M. S. (1997). Performance on multiple-choice diagnostics and complementary exam problems. Physics Teacher, 35 (3), 150-155.
25. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In: L. H. T. West, & A. L. Pines (Eds.), Cognitive Structure and Conceptual Change (pp. 211-231). New York: Academic Press.
26. Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In: R. A. Duschl, & R. J. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Psychology, and Educational Theory and Practice (pp. 147-176). Albany: State University of New York Press.
27. Thornton, R. (1987). Tools for scientific thinking: Microcomputer-based laboratories for physics teaching. Physics Education, 22, 230-238.
28. Thornton, R. (1995). Conceptual dynamics: Changing student views of force and motion. In: C. Tarsitani, C. Bernardini, & M. Vincentini (Eds.), Thinking Physics for Teaching. London: Plenum.
29. Tirosh, D., Stavy, R., & Cohen, S. (1998). Cognitive conflict and intuitive rules. International Journal of Science Education, 20 (10), 1257-1269.
30. Tytler, R. (1998). The nature of students' informal science conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 20 (8), 901-927.