Student understanding of the cartesian connection: An exploratory study

Journal for Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 31, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 500-508

  Knuth, Eric J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

Connections in mathematics; Functions; Representations; Secondary mathematics

Indexed keywords

EID: 23044518791     PISSN: 00218251     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/749655     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Dubinsky, E. (1993). Computers in teaching and learning discrete mathematics and abstract algebra. In D. L. Ferguson (Ed.), Advanced educational technologies for mathematics and science (pp. 525-583). New York: Springer-Verlag.
2. Eisenberg, T., & Dreyfus, T. (1991). On the reluctance to visualize in mathematics. In W. Zimmermann & S. Cunningham (Eds.), Visualization in teaching and learning mathematics (pp. 25-37). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
3. Goldenberg, E. P. (1988). Mathematics, metaphors, and human factors: Mathematical, technical, and pedagogical challenges in the educational use of graphical representation of functions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 135-173.
4. Harel, G., & Dubinsky, E. (Eds.). (1992). The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy. Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
5. Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 65-97). New York: Macmillan.
6. Knuth, E. (1997, April). Student understanding of the connections between the algebraic and graphical representations of functions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
7. Lacampagne, C. B., Blair, W., & Kaput, J. (1995). The algebra initiative colloquium (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education & Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 385 436)
8. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-99.
9. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1-64.
10. Moschkovich, J., Schoenfeld, A., & Arcavi, A. H. (1993). Aspects of understanding: On multiple perspectives and representations of linear relations and connections among them. In T. A. Romberg, E. Fennema, & T. P. Carpenter (Eds.), Integrating research on the graphical representation of functions (pp. 69-100). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1997). A framework for constructing a vision of algebra: A discussion document. Unpublished manuscript.
12. Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
13. Romberg, T. A., Carpenter, T. P., & Fennema, E. (1993). Toward a common research perspective. In T. Romberg, E. Fennema, & T. P. Carpenter (Eds.), Integrating research on the graphical representation of functions (pp. 1-9). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Romberg, T. A., Fennema, E., & Carpenter, T. P. (Eds.). (1993). Integrating research on the graphical representation of functions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Schoenfeld A. H., Smith, J. P., III, & Arcavi, A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic analysis of one student's evolving understanding of a complex subject matter domain. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Volume 4 (pp. 55-175). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Schwartz, J., & Yerushalmy, M. (1992). Getting students to function in and with algebra. In G. Harel & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), The concept of function: Aspects of epistemology and pedagogy (pp. 261-289). Washington, DC: Mathematical Association of America.
17. Yerushalmy, M., & Schwartz, J. L. (1993). Seizing the opportunity to make algebra mathematically and pedagogically interesting. In T. A. Romberg, E. Fennema, & T. P. Carpenter (Eds.), Integrating research on the graphical representation of functions (pp. 41-68). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.