Interpreting a graph and constructing its derivative graph: Stability and change in students' conceptions

International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 609-637

  Ubuz, Behiye ^a  

^a MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547199376     PISSN: 0020739X     EISSN: 14645211     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00207390701359313     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Fiel, S.N., Curcio, F.R. and Bright, G.W., 2001, Making sense of graphs: critical factors influencing comprehension and instructional implications. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 124-158.
2. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O. and Stein, M.K., 1990, Functions, graphs, and graphing: tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1-64.
3. Baker, B., Cooley, L. and Trigueros, M., 2000, A calculus graphic schema. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3(5), 557-578.
4. Aspinwall, L., Shaw, K.L. and Presmeg, N.C., 1997, Uncontrollable mental imagery: graphical connections between a function and its derivative. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 301-317.
5. Asiala, M., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E. and Schwingendorf, K.E., 1997, The development of students' graphical understanding of derivative. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16, 399-431.
6. Berry, J.S. and Nyman, M.N., 2003, Promoting students' graphical understanding of the calculus. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 481-497.
7. Tall, D., 1986, Building and testing a cognitive approach to the calculus using interactive computer graphics. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Warwick.
8. Ubuz, B., 2001, First year engineering students' learning of point of tangency, numerical calculation of gradients, and the approximate value of a function at a point through computers. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 20(1), 113-137.
9. Ubuz, B., 2002, Development of calculus concepts through a computer based learning environment. In CD Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics (at the Undergraduate Level), July, Crete.
10. Carpenter, T.P. and Fennema, E., 1991, Research and cognitively guided instruction. In: E. Fennema, T.P. Carpenter and S.J. Lamon (Eds) Integrating Research on Teaching and teaming Mathematics (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press), pp. 1-16.
11. Confrey, J., 1990, A review of the research on student conceptions in mathematics, science, and programming. Review of Research in Education, 16, 3-56.
12. Ferrini-Mundy, J. and Lauten, D., 1994, Learning about calculus learning. The Mathematics Teacher, 87(2), 115-121.
13. Skemp, R.R., 1971, The Psychology of Learning Mathematics (London: Penguin).
14. Smith, J.P., Di Sessa, A.A. and Roschelle, J., 1993/94, Misconceptions reconceived: a constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of The Learning Science, 3, 115-163.
15. Ubuz, B., and Kirkpinar, B., 2000a, Factors contributing to learning of calculus. In Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 4, Hiroshima University, Japan, pp. 241-248.
16. Tall, D.O., Blokland, P. and Kok, D., 1990, A Graphic Approach to the Calculus [Computer Program] (Pleasantville, NY: Sunburst).
17. McCabe, M. and Greenhow, M., May 1995, Designer software for maths assessment? Maths & Stats, 6(1), 11-16.
18. Stroud, K.A., 1987, Engineering Mathematics: Programmes and Problems (London: Macmillan Education).
19. Jeffrey, A., 1992, Essentials of Engineering Mathematics: Worked Examples and Problems (London: Chapman and Hall).
20. Okeke, A.C.E. and Eunice, A.C., 1980, A study of the understanding of transport mechanisms among Nigerian school certificate biology candidates. In: W.F. Archenhold, R.H. Driver, A. Orton and C. Wood-Robinson (Eds) Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics (UK: The University of Leeds).
21. Linn, R.L. and Slinde, J.A., 1977, The determination of the significance of change between pre- and post-testing periods. Review of Educational Research, 47, 121-150.
22. Edwards, P., 1995, Some mathematical misconceptions on entry to higher education. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 14, 23-27.
23. Morgan, A.T., 1988, A study of the difficulties experienced by engineering students in higher education with mathematics and related subjects, and their relevance to the structure of mathematical ability. Unpublished PhD thesis, Brunel University.
24. Neill, H. and Shuard, H., 1982, Teaching Calculus (London: Blackie).
25. Alkalay, M., 1993, The use of computers for independent exploration in precalculus: effects on attitudes. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 12(2), 111-119.
26. Boers, M., and Jones, P., 1992, Graphics calculators and calculus: impact on students attitude and change. In: M. Artigue and G. Ervynck (Eds), In Proceedings of Working Group 3 on Students' Difficulties in Calculus, ICME-7, Québec Collège de Sherbrooke, pp. 84-86.
27. Hickernell, F. and Proskurowski, W., 1985, The use of microcomputers in the teaching of calculus. Collegiate Microcomputer, 3(2), 111-25.
28. Helgeson, S.L. and Kumar, D.D., 1993, A review of educational technology in science assessment. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 12, 227-243.
29. Porter, G.J., 1988, The use of computers in mathematics instruction past history - future prospects. In: D.A. Smith, G.J. Porter, L.C. Leinbach and R.H. Wenger (Eds) Computers and Mathematics (Reston, VA: Mathematical Association of America), pp. vii-x.
30. Schoenfeld, A.H., 1988, Uses of computers in mathematics instruction, In: D.A. Smith, G.J. Porter, L.C. Leinbach and R.H. Wenger (Eds) Computers and Mathematics (Reston, VA: Mathematical Association of America), pp. 1-11.
31. Laurillard, D., 2001, Rethinking University Teaching, 2nd edn (Routledge Falmer).
32. Kolb, D.A., 1984, Experiential Learning (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
33. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., Renshaw, P. and Geiger, V., 2003, Perspectives on technology mediated learning in secondary school mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 73-89.
34. Schwarz, B.B. and Herschkowitz, R., 1999, Prototypes: Brakes or levers in learning the function concept? The role of computer tools. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 362-389.
35. Hershkowitz, R., 1989, Visualization in geometry-two sides of the coin. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 11(1), 61-76.
36. Ubuz, B. and Kirkpinar, B., 2000b, The role of examples in the formation of mathematical concepts. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Egitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19, 134-138.
37. Davis, R.B. and Vinner, S., 1986, The notion of limit: Some seemingly unavoidable misconception stages. Journal of Mathematical Behaviour, 5(3), 281-303.
38. Gray, E. and Tall, D., 1993, Success and failure in mathematics: the flexible meaning of symbols as process and concept. Mathematics Teaching, 142, 6-11.
39. Goldenberg, E.P., 1988, Mathematics, metaphors, and human factors: Mathematical, technical and pedagogical representation of functions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 135-173.
40. Bell, A., Brekke, G. and Swan, M., 1987, Diagnostic teaching: 4 graphical interpretations. Mathematics Teaching, 119, 56-60.