Functions of interactive visual representations in interactive mathematical textbooks

International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 217-249

  Yerushalmy, Michal ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAIFA   (Israel)

Author keywords

Algebra; Interactive diagrams; Semiotic functions; Text design; Visual design

Indexed keywords

INTERACTIVE DIAGRAMS; SEMIOTIC FUNCTIONS; TEXT DESIGN; VISUAL DESIGN;

ALGEBRA; FUNCTIONS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL TECHNIQUES; VISUALIZATION;

TEXTBOOKS;

EID: 29144465716     PISSN: 13823892     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10758-005-0538-2     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Arzarello, F., Olivero, F., Paola, D. and Robutti, O. (2002). A cognitive analysis of dragging practises in cabri environments. Zentralblatt Fur Didaktik. Der Mathematik 34(3): 66-72.
2. Ball, L.D. and Cohen, K.D. (1996). Reform by the book: What is- or might be- the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher 25(9): 6-8.
3. Borba, M.C. and Confrey, J. (1996). A student's construction of transformations of functions in a multiple representational environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics 31: 319-337.
4. Chazan, D. (2000). Beyond Formulas in Mathematics and Teaching: Dynamics of the High School Algebra Classroom. NY: Teachers College Press.
5. Chazan, D. and Yerushalmy, M. (2003). On appreciating the cognitive complexity of school algebra: Research on algebra learning and directions of curricular change. In Kilpatrick, J., Schifter, D. and Martin, G. (Eds), A Research Companion to the Principles and Standards for School Mathematics (pp. 123-135). Reston: NCTM.
6. diSessa, A. (2000). Changing Minds: computers, Learning and Literacy. MIT Press.
7. Edwards, L.D. (1998). Embodying mathematics and science: Microworlds as representations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 17(1): 53-78.
8. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an Educational Task. Dordrecht: Reidel.
9. Gilead, S. and Yerushalmy, M. (2001). Deep structures of algebra word problems: Is it approach (in)dependent? Proceedings of the 25th Annual meeting of the International Group of Psychology of Mathematics Education, Utrecht.
10. Goldenberg, P.E. (1999). Principles, arts, and craft in curriculum design: The case of connected geometry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 4: 191-224.
11. Hershkovitz, R. (1987). The acquisition of concepts and misconceptions in basic geometry - or when a little learning is a dangerous thing. In Novak, J.D. (Eds), Proceedings of the Second International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics 3 (pp. 238-251). Ithaca NY.
12. Hershkovitz, R. and Schwarz, B.B. (1999). Reflective processes in a technology-based mathematics classroom. Cognition and Instruction 17: 665-91.
13. Hershkovitz, R., Dreyfus, T., Ben-Zvi, D., Freidlander, A., Hadas, N., Resnick, T., Tabach, M. and Schwarz, B. (2002). Mathematics curriculum development for computerized environments: A designer-researcher-teacher-learner-activity. In English, L. (Eds), Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education, Mahwah, New Jersey & London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Holzl, R. (1996). How does "Dragging" affect the learning of geometry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 1(2): 169-187.
15. Hoyles, C. (1993). Microworlds/Schoolworlds: The transformation of an innovation. In C. Keitel and K. Ruthven (Eds), Learning from Computers: Mathematics Education and Technology, pp 1-16.
16. Hoyles, C. and Noss, R. (2003). What can digital technologies take from and bring to research in mathematics education, innovation. In A.J. Bishop, M.A. Clements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick and F.K.S. Leung (Eds), Second International Handbook of Mathematics Education Dordrecht, Vol. 1. (pp. 323-350) Kluwer.
17. Jewitt, C. and Oyama, R. (2001). Visual meaning: A social semiotic approach. In Leeuwen, T.van and Jewitt, C. (Eds), Handbook of Visual Analysis, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
18. Kieran, C. and Yerushalmy, M. (2004). Research on the role of technological environments in algebra learning and teaching. In K. Stacey and H. Shick (Eds), ICMI Studies in Algebra (Chapter 5).
19. Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.
20. Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London: Routledge.
21. Laborde, C. (2001). Integration of technology in the design of geometry tasks with cabri-geometry. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 6(3): 283-317.
22. Lagrange, J.-B. and Artigue, M., et al., (2003). Technology and Math Education: A Multidimensional Study of the Evolution of Research and Innovation. The 2nd International Handbook of Mathematics Education. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
23. Lemke J.L. (1998). Multiplying meaning: visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. London: Routledge (pp. 87-113) In J.R. martin and R. Veel (Eds), Reading Science. Routledge.
24. Leikin, R. and Dinur, S. (2003). Patterns of flexibility: Teachers' behavior in mathematical discussion. In Electronic Proceedings of the Third Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education. (10 p.) http:// www.dm.unipi.it/~didattica/CERME3/WG11/papers_pdf/TG11_Leikin.pdf.
25. Levin, J.R. (1989). A transfer- appropriate-processing perspective of pictures in prose. In H. Mandl and J.R. Levin (Eds), Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. 58.
26. Love E. and Pimm D. (1996). This is so: A text on texts. In A.J. Bishop (Ed.), International Handbook of Mathematics Education, (pp. 371-409) Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
27. Mandl, H. and Levin, J.R. (Eds) (1989). Knowledge Acquisition from Text and Pictures. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers.
28. Molitor, S. and Ballstaedt, S.-P. (1989). Problems in knowledge acquisition from text and pictures. In H. Mandl and J.R. Levin (Eds), Knowledge Acquisition from text and Pictures, vol. 58. (pp. 3-35) Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.
29. Morgan C. (1998). Writing mathematically, The Discourse of Investigation. London: Falmer Press.
30. Nunokawa, K. (1994). Improving diagrams gradually: One approach to using diagrams in problem solving. For the Learning of Mathematics 14(1): 34-38.
31. Netz, R. (1999). The Shaping of Deduction in Greek Mathematics. UK: Cambridge University Press.
32. Romberg, T.A., Fennema, E. and Carpenter, T. (1993). Integrating Research on Graphical Representations of Functions. NJ: Erlbaum Inc.
33. Shternberg, B. and Yerushalmy, M. (2003). Models of functions and models of situations: On design of a modeling based learning environment. In Doerr, H.M. and Lesh, R. (Eds), Beyond Constructivism: A Model and Modeling Perspective on Teaching, Learning, and Problem Solving in Mathematics Education (pp. 479-500). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Album.
34. Vinner, S. (1983). Concept definition, concept image and the notion of function. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 14: 293-305.
35. Vinner, S. and Dreyfus, T. (1989). Images and definitions for the concept of function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 20: 356-366.
36. Visual-Mathematics (1995) Algebra and functions, (Curriculum In Hebrew) Center for Educational Technology, Tel-Aviv, http://www.cet.ac.il/math-international/visualizing.htm.
37. Yerushalmy, M. (2000). Problem Solving Strategies and Mathematical Resources: A Longitudinal View on Problem Solving in a Functional Based Approach to Algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics 43: 125-147.
38. Yerushalmy, M. (1999). Making exploration visible: On software design and school algebra curriculum. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 4: 169-184.
39. Yerushalmy, M. (1997a). Reaching the unreachable: Technology and the semantics of asymptotes. International Jounral of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 2:1-25.
40. Yerushalmy, M. (1997b). Mathematizing qualitative verbal descriptions of situations: A language to support modeling. Cognition and Instruction 15(2): 207-264.
41. Yerushalmy, M. (1991). Students perceptions of aspects of algebraic function using multiple representation software. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. Blackwell Scientific Publications 7: 42-57.
42. Yerushalmy, M. and Chazan, D. (2002). Flux in school algebra: Curricular change, graphing technology, and research on student learning and teacher knowledge. In English, L.D. (Eds), Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education. (pp. 725-755). Mahwah, New Jersey and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
43. Yerushalmy, M. and Chazan, D. (1990). Overcoming visual obstacles with the aid of the supposer. Educational Studies in Mathematics 21: 199-219.
44. Yerushalmy, M., Katriel, H. and Shternberg, B. (2002). The Function Web-book. http://www.cet.ac.il/math/function/english.
45. Yerushalmy, M and Gafni, R. (1992). Syntactic Manipulations and Semantic Interpretations in Algebra: The Effect of Graphic Representation. Learning and Instruction. Vol. 2. (pp. 303-319) Pergamon Press Ltd.
46. Yerushalmy, M. and Schwartz, J.L. (1993). Seizing the opportunity to make algebra mathematically and pedagogically interesting. In Romberg, T.A., Fennema, E. and Carpenter, T. (Eds), Integrating Research on Graphical Representations of Functions, NJ: Erlbaum Inc.
47. Yerushalmy, M. and Shternberg, B. (2001). A visual course to functions. In Cuoco, A.A. and Curcio, F. (Eds), The Roles of Representations in School Mathematics (pp. 125-147). NTCM Yearbook.