Supercalculators and university entrance calculus examinations

Mathematics Education Research Journal

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 321-336

  Hong, Ye Yoon ^a   Thomas, Michael O J ^a   Kiernan, Christine ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b Lynfield College   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 29344437249     PISSN: 10332170     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF03217092     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Dick, T. (1992). Super calculators: Implications for curriculum, instruction and assessment. In J. T Fey & C. R. Hirsch (Eds), Calculators in mathematics education (1992 Yearbook, pp. 145-157). Reston, VA: National Cotmcil of Teachers of Mathematics.
2. Dtmham, P. H., & Dick, T. (1994). Research on graphing calculators. Mathematics Teacher, 87, 440-445.
3. Fey, J. (1979). Mathematics teaching today: Perspectives from three national surveys, Mathematics Teacher, 72, 490-504.
4. Goldin, G. A. (1998). Representational systems, learning, and problem solving in mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17, 137-165.
5. Graham, A. T., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2000). Building a versatile Lmderstanding of algebraic variables with a graphic calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 265-282.
6. Green, J. (1997). The TI-92: Present challenges and future directions. In Proceedings of the international conference of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Hanoi, Vietnam (pp. 235-240). Perth: Curtin University of Tedlnology.
7. Guin, D., & Trouche, L. (2000). Thinking of new devices to make viable symbolic calculators in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 24th annual conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 9-16). Hiroshima, Japan: Program Committee.
8. Hong, Y. Y., & Thomas, M. O. J. (1998). Versatile understanding in integration. Proceedings of the ICMI South East Asian Conference on Mathematics Education (pp. 255-265). Seoul, Korea: Korea Society of Mathematical Education.
9. Hong, Y. Y, Thomas, M. O. J., & Kwon, O. (2000). Understanding linear algebraic equations via super-calculator representations. Proceedings of the 24 annual conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 57-64). Hiroshima, Japan: Program Committee.
10. Hopkins, M. H. (1992). The use of calculators in the assessment of mathematics achievement. In J. T. Fey & C. R. Hirsch (Eds.), Calculators in mathematics education (1992 Yearbook, pp. 145-157). Reston, VA: National Cotmcil of Teachers of Mathematics.
11. Hylton-Lindsay, A. A. (1998). The effect of the graphing calculators on metacognitive aspects of student performance in pre-calculus for business (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University Teachers' College, 1997). Dissertation Abstracts International, 58/09, 3449.
12. Jones, P., & McCrae B. (1996). Assessing the impact of graphic calculators on mathematics examinations. Technology in mathematics education (Proceedings of the 19th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, p p. 306-313). Melbourne: MERGA.
13. Kemp, M., Kissane, B., & Bradley, J. (1996). Graphics calculator use in examinations: Accident or design? Australian Senior Mathematics Journal, 10(1), 36-50.
14. Kendal, M. & Stacey, K. (2000). Acquiring the concept of derivative: Teaching and learning with multiple representations and CAS. Proceedings of the 24th annual conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 127-134). Hiroshima, Japan: Program Committee.
15. Kiernan, C., Oates, G., & Thomas, M. O. J. (1999). Graphic calculators and mathematics assessment. In F. Biddulph & K. Carr (Eds.), Science and Mathematics Education [SAME] papers (pp. 88-106). Waikato, NZ: Waikato University, Centre for Science, Mathematics and Technology Research.
16. Kissane, B., Bradley, J., & Kemp, M. (1994). Graphic calculators, equity and assessment. Australian Senior Mathematics Journal, 8(2), 31-44.
17. May, C. M. (1995). Factors affecting the integration of graphing calculator technology in the secondary pre-calculus classroom: Attitudes, teacher training and curriculum issues. (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55/10, 3127.
18. Ministry of Education. (1992). Mathematics in the Nezo Zealand Curriculum. Wellington, NZ: Learning Media.
19. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
20. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1998). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
21. Penglase, M. & Arnold, S. (1996). The graphic calculator in mathematics education: A critical review of recent research. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 8,58-90.
22. Pomerantz, H. (1997). The role of calculators in math education. Dallas, TX:The Urban Systemic Initiative/Comprehensive Partnership for Mathematics and Science Achievement Superintendents Forum.
23. Ruthven, K. (1990). The influence of gratphic calculator use on translation from graphic to symbolic forms. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21,143-50.
24. Wilson, J. W., & Kilpatrick, J. (1989). Theoretical issues in the development of calculatorbased mathematics tests. In J. W. Kenelly (Ed.), The Use of calculators in the standardised testing of mathematics. New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.