Understanding qualitative calculus: A structural synthesis of learning research

International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning

Volumn 7, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 167-215

  Stroup, Walter M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH   (United States)

Author keywords

Calculus; Computer simulation; Modeling; Piaget; Qualitative calculus; Rate

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER GRAPHICS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

QUALITATIVE CALCULUS;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 0036907602     PISSN: 13823892     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1021147132127     Document Type: Article

References (92)

1. Artigue, M. (1991). Analysis. in D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking. Boston: Kluwer Adademic Publishers.
2. Barclay, W.L. (1986a). A graph is worth how many words? Classroom Computer Learning (Feb.): 46-50.
3. Barclay, W.L. (1986b). Graphing Misconceptions and Possible Remedies Using Microcomputer-based Labs. National Educational Computing Conference (NECC): NECC.
4. Bell, A. and Janvier, C. (1981). The interpretation of graphs representing situations. For the learning of mathematics 2(1): 34-42.
5. Booth, L. (1981). Graphs in mathematics and science. Mathematics in School 10(4): 205.
6. Boyer, C. (1969). The history of calculus. Historical Topics for the Mathematics Classroom, 31st Yearbook, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1969.
7. Brekke, G. (1988). Graphical Interpretation: A Study of Pupils' Understanding. Shell Centre.
8. Brasell, H. (1987). The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic representations of distance and velocity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24(4): 385-395.
9. Buckingham, D. and Shultz, T.R. (2000). The developmental course of distance, time, and velocity concepts: A generative connectionist model. Journal of Cognition and Development 1: 305-345.
10. Chen, D. and Stroup, W. (1993). General systems theory: Toward a conceptual framework for science and technology education for all. Journal of Science Education and Technology 2(3): 447-459.
11. Clement, J. (1985). Misconceptions in Graphing. Noordwijkerhout, The Netherlands: IGPME.
12. Clement, J., Mokros, J.R. and Schultz, K. (1985). Adolescents' Graphing Skills: a descriptive analysis. AERA.
13. Collins, J.D. (1991). Communicating with graphs: are you sure? Mathematics in School 20(2): 18-19.
14. Confrey, J. and Smith, E. (1989). Alternative representations of ratio: The Greek concept of anthyphairesis and modern decimal notation. In D.E. Herget (Ed.), The History and Philosophy of Science in Science Teaching.
15. Confrey, J. and Smith, E. (1994). Exponential functions, rates of change, and the multiplicative unit. In P. Cobb (Ed.), Learning Mathematics: Constructivist and Interactionist Theories of Mathematical Development. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
16. Dennis, D. (1995). Historical Perspectives for the Reform of Mathematics Curriculum: Geometric Curve Drawing Devices and Their Role in the Transition to an Algebraic Description of Functions. Ph.D. Thesis (Math Ed), Cornell University 1995.
17. Dennis, D. and Confrey, J. (1997). Drawing Logarithmic and Exponential Curves with the Computer Software Geometer's Sketchpad: A Method Inspired by Historical Sources. In J. King and D. Schatschneider (Eds.), Geometry Turned On: Dynamic Software in Learning, Teaching and Research (pp. 147-156). Washington D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.
18. Dienes, Z.P. (1971). The Elements of Mathematics. New York: Herder and Herder.
19. Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking. Boston: Kluwer Adademic Publishers.
20. Dugdale, S. (1993). Functions and graphs - Perspectives on student thinking. In T.A. Romberg, E. Fennema and T.P. Carpenter (Eds), Integrating Research on the Graphical Representation of Functions (pp. 101-130). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlabaum Associates.
21. Dunham, P.H. and Osborne, A. (1991). Learning how to see: Students graphing difficulties. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics 13(4): 35-49.
22. Forbus, K. (1984). Qualitative process theory. Artificial Intelligence 24: 85-168.
23. Forbus, K. (1996). Qualitative Reasoning. CRC Handbook of Computer Science and Engineering. CRC Press.
24. Goldenberg, E.P. (1987). Believing is Seeing: How Preconceptions Influence the Perception of Graphs. Montreal, Canada.
25. Goldenberg, E.P., Harvey, W., Lewis, P.G., Umiker, R.J., West, J. and Zodhiates (1988). Mathematical, Technical, and Pedagogical Challenges in the Graphical Representations of Functions (88-4). Educational Technology Center, Harvard Graduate School of Education.
26. Goldberg, F.M. and Anderson, J.H. (1989). Student difficulties with graphical representations of negative values of velocity. The Physics Teacher: 254-260.
27. Goldenberg, F.M. and Ferrini-Mundy, J. (1989). Student difficulties with graphical representations of negative values of velocity. The Physics Teacher (April): 254-260.
28. Harel, G. and Confrey, J. (1994). The Development of Multiplicative Reasoning the Learning of Mathematics. Albany NY: State Univ. of New York.
29. Huetinck, L. (1992). Laboratory connections: Understanding graphing through microcomputer-based laboratories. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 11(1): 95-100.
30. Hughes-Hallett, D. (1992). Calculus. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
31. Kaput, J. (1986). Information technology and mathematics: Opening new representational windows. Journal for Research in Mathematical Behavior 5: 187-207.
32. Kaput, J.J. (1988). Supporting Concrete Visual Thinking in Multiplicative Reasoning: Difficulties and Opportunities (Technical Report No. 88-16). Educational Technology Center.
33. Kaput, J. (1994). Democratizing access to calculus. In A. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical Thinking and Problem Solving (pp. 77-156). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
34. Kaput, J. and Roschelle, J. (1996). Math Worlds. Dartmouth MA: SimCalc. Project, University of Massachusetts.
35. Kaput, J.J., Schwartz, Judah L., Poholsky and Joel S. (1985). Extensive and intensive quantities in multiplication and division word problems: A preliminary report and a software response. In S.K.D. a. M. Selton (Ed.), Seventh Annual Meeting of the PME-NA (pp. 139-144). Columbus, Ohio.
36. Kaput, J.J., West, M.M., Luke, C. and Pattison-Gordon, L. (1988). Concrete representations for ratio reasoning. In Tenth Annual Meeting of PME-NA (pp. 93-99). Northern Illinois University.
37. Kieran, C. (1993). Functions, graphing and technology: Integrating research on learning and instruction. In T.A. Romberg, E. Fennema and T.P. Carpenter (Eds), Integrating Research on the Graphical Representation of Functions (pp. 189-278). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
38. Kuipers, B. (1994). Qualitative Reasoning: Modeling and Simulation with Incomplete Knowledge. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.
39. Krabbendum, H. (1982). The Non-Quantitative Way of Describing Relations and the Role of Graphs. Enschede, The Netherlands: National Institute for Curriculum Development.
40. Lapp, D.A. and Cyrus, V.F. (2000). Using Data Collection Devices to Enhance Student Understanding. http://calcnet.cst.cmich.edu/faculty/lapp/MT2000.pdf.
41. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O. and Stein, M.K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning and teaching. Review of Educational Research 60(1): 1-64.
42. Linn, M., Layman, J. and Nachmias, R. (1987). Cognitive consequences of microcomputerbased laboratories: graphing skills development. Contemporary Educational Psychology 12: 244-253.
43. McCloskey, M. (1983). Naive theories of motion. In D. Gentner and A.L. Stevens (Eds), Mental Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
44. McDermott, L., Rosenquist, M. and vanZee, E. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Example from kinematics. American Journal of Physics 55: 503-513.
45. Michael, V. (1989). Graphical analysis. Science Teacher 56(7): 37-40.
46. Mokros, J. (1985). The Impact of Microcomputer-based Science Labs on Children's Graphing skills (85-2). TERC.
47. Mokros, J. & Tinker, R. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based science labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24(4): 369-383.
48. Monk, G. (1989). Student understanding of function as a foundation for calculus curriculum development. In AERA. San Francisco.
49. Monk, G. (1992). A study of calculus students' constructions of functional situations: the case of the shadow problem. In American Educational Research Association. San Francisco.
50. Moschkovich, J., Schoenfeld, A.J. and Arcavi, A. (1993). Aspects of understanding: On multiple perspectives and representations of linear relations and connections among them. In T.A. Romberg, E. Fennema and T.P. Carpenter (Eds), Integrating Research on the Graphical Representation of Functions (pp. 69-100). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlabaum Associates.
51. Nachmias, R. and Linn, M. (1987). Evaluations of science laboratory data: The role of computer-presented information. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 24(5): 491-506.
52. Nemirovsky, R. (1992). On the Basic Types of Variation. TERC, 2067 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02140.
53. Nemirovsky, R. (1993). Symbolizing Motion, Flow and Contours: The Experience of Continuous Change. Doctorate: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
54. Nemirovsky, R. and Rubin, A. (1992). Students' Tendency to Assume Resemblances Between a Function and its Derivative (2-92). TERC, 2067 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, MA 02140.
55. Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C. and Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction 16(2): 119-172.
56. Orton, A. (1983). Students' understanding of differentiation. Educational Studies in Mathematics 14(1983): 235-250.
57. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.
58. Peterson, S. and Richmond, B. (1992). STELLA II. Hanover NH: High Performance Systems, Inc.
59. Phillips, R. (1990). Everyday Graphs. Published by the Shell Centre.
60. Piaget, J. (1946:1970). The Child's Conception of Movement and Speed. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
61. Piaget, J. (1968:1970). Structuralism. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
62. Rubin, A. and Nemirovsky, R. (1991). Cars, Computers, and Air Pumps: Thoughts on the Roles of Physical and Computer Models in Learning the Central Concepts of Calculus. Virginia USA.
63. Sawyer, W.W. (1999). What is Calculus About? The Mathematical Association of America.
64. Schultz, K., Clement, J. and Mokros, J. (1986). Adolescent Graphing Skills: A Descriptive Analysis. San Francisco, CA: AERA.
65. Schwartz, J.L. (1988). Intensive quantity and referent-transforming operations. In J. Hiebert and M. Behr (Eds), Number Concepts and Operations in the Middle Grades (pp. 41-52). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
66. Schwartz, J.L. (1991). Personal communication.
67. Schwartz, J.L. (1994). Personal communication.
68. Schwartz, J.L. (1995). Semantic Aspects of Quantity (Unpublished).
69. 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.
70. Silberstein, E.P. (1986). Graphically speaking. Science Teacher 53(5): 41-45.
71. Stein, J.S. (1986). Evaluating the Classroom Effectiveness of Microcomputer-based Labs. San Francisco, CA: AERA.
72. Stroup, W. (1991, 1994). Kine-Mouse Software (Unpublished).
73. Stroup, W. (1991, 1994). Vis Viva: A Conceptual Investigation of Energy and Entropy (Unpublished).
74. Stroup, W. (1993). Kine-Calc Software (Unpublished).
75. Stroup, W. (1994). What the Development of Non-universal Understanding Looks Like: An investigation of Results from a Series of Qualitative Calculus Assessments. Havard Graduate School of Education.
76. Stroup, W. (1995). Dynamics and calculus for the young learner. Connect 8(5): 16-18.
77. Stroup, W. (1996). Embodying a Nominalist Constructivism: Making Graphical Sense of Learning the Calculus of How Much and How Fast. Dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education.
78. Stroup, W. (2000). Learning Entropy and Energy Project (Proposal). CAREER Award - 0093093 (National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C.).
79. Swan, M. and the Shell Centre Team (1985). The Language of Functions and Graphs (The Red Box Materials). Published by Shell Centre & Joint Matriculation Beard 1985.
80. Tall, D.O. (1986a). Building and Testing a Cognitive Approach to the Calculus Using Computer. Mathematics Education Research Centre, University of Warwick.
81. Tall, D.O. (1986b). Using the Computer to Represent Calculus Concepts (pp. 238-264). Orleans: IMAG Grenoble.
82. Thompson, P. (1994a). The development of the concept of speed and its relationship to concepts of rate. in G.H. & J. Confrey (Eds), The Development of Multiplicative Reasoning in the Learning of Mathematics (pp. 179-234). Albany, NY: SUNY.
83. Thompson, P. (1994b). Images of rate and operational understanding of the fundamental theorem of calculus. In P. Cobb (Ed.), Learning Mathematics Constructivist and Interactionist Theories of Mathematical Development (pp. 125-170). Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
84. Thompson, P. and Thompson, A. (1996). Talking about rates conceptually, part II: Mathematical knowledge for teaching. Journal for Research in Mathematics 27: 2-24.
85. Thornton, R. (1987). Tools for scientific thinking: Microcomputer-based laboratories for physics teaching. Physics Education 22(4): 230-238.
86. Thornton, R.K. and Sokoloff, D.R. (1990). Learning motion concepts using real-time micorcomputer-based laboratory tools. American Journal of Physics 58(September 1990): 858-867.
87. Tinker, R. (1984). Microcomputers in the Lab: Techniques and Applications. Cambridge MA: Technical Education Research Center.
88. Tierney, C. Nemirovsky, R. and Noble, T. (1995). Patterns of change: Walks, tables and graphs. Curricular Unit for Grade 5. California: Dale Seymour Publications.
89. Trowbridge, D.E. and McDermott, L.C. (1980). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension. American Journal of Physics 48; 1020-1028.
90. Wilensky, U. et al. (2000). NetLogo. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo.
91. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
92. Yerushalmy, M. and Schwartz, J.L. (1993). Seizing the opportunity to make algebra mathematically and pedagogically interesting. In T.A. Romberg, E. Fennema and T.P. Carpenter (Eds), Integrating Research on the Graphical Representation of Functions (pp. 41-68). Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Erlbaum Associates.