The effect of graphic calculators on negev arab pupils’ learning of the concept of families of functions

Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 183-202

  Abu Naja, Muhammad ^a  

^a ACHVA ACADEMIC COLLEGE   (Israel)

Author keywords

Arab sector; Families of functions; Graphic calculators

Indexed keywords

EID: 77951880518     PISSN: 14794802     EISSN: 17540178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14794800802233704     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Abu-Naja, M. 2004. How do students in the Bedouin section who study mathematics with graphic calculators cope with some basic concepts of the math curriculum? PhD diss., Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva.
2. Abu-Naja, M. 2005. Hashpa’at ha-shimush bemahshavonim grafiim ‘al havanat talmidim Bedu’im ‘et musag mishpahot shel funktziot” (The influence of graphic calculators on Bedouin students’ understanding of the concept “family of functions”). A’leh 34: 44-52. Kesher Ham. The Department of Technological and Scientific Education. The Technion. Haifa (Hebrew).
3. Abu-Naja, M. and M. Amit. 2006. The impact of graphic calculator use on Bedouin students’ learning functions. In Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, ed.
4. J. Novotna, H. Moraova, M. Kratka, and N. Stehlikova, Vol. 1, 213. Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University.
5. Alkhateeb, H. and J. Wampler. 2002. Graphing calculators and student’s conceptions of the derivative. Perceptual and Motor Skills 94, no. 1: 165-70.
6. Barton, D. 2003. Using technology to teach the “transformation of graphs”. Micromath 19, no. 2: 12-15.
7. Becker, B.A. 1992. The concept of function: Misconception and remediation at the college level. PhD diss., Illinois State University.
8. Berry, J., E. Graham, and A. Smith. 2003. Student difficulties in graphing effectively with a graphics calculator. The International Journal of Computer Algebra in Mathematics Education 10, no. 4: 251-64.
9. Bloedy-Vinner, H. 1996. The analgebraic mode of thinking and other errors in word problem solving. In Proceedings of the 20th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, ed. L. Puig and A. Gutierrez, Vol. 2, 105-12. Valencia, Spain: University of Valencia.
10. Confrey, J., E. Smith, S. Piliero, and J. Rizzuti. 1991. The use of contextual problems and multi-representation software to teach the concept of function. (Final project report). Ithaca. NY: Department of Education. Cornell University.
11. Demana, F. and B.K. Waits. 1990. The role of technology in teaching mathematics. Mathematics Teacher 83, no. 1: 27-31.
12. Demana, F. and B.K. Waits. 1992. Sound off: A computer for all students. Mathematics Teacher 85, no. 2: 94-5.
13. Demana, F. and B.K. Waits. 1998. The role of graphing calculators in mathematics reform. http://www.math.ohio-state.edu/~waitsb/papers/roleofgraphcalc.pdf
14. Doerr, H.M. and R. Zangor. 2000. Creating meaning for and with the graphing calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics 41: 143-63.
15. Dunham, P. 1992. Teaching with graphing calculators: A survey of research on graphing technology. Proceedings of the Fourth Conference on Technology in Collegiate Mathematics. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
16. Farrell, A.M. 1996. Roles and behaviors in technology-integrated pre-calculus classrooms. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 15: 35-53.
17. Giamati, C.M. 1991. The effect of graphing calculator use on students’ understanding of variations on a family of equations and their transformations of their graphs. PhD diss. University of Michigan.
18. Gorev, D. 2002. Estimating in the computerized environment: On semantic knowledge of low performers in differential calculus. PhD diss. University of Haifa.
19. Harvey, J., B. Waits, and F. Demana. 1995. The influence of technology on the teaching and learning of algebra. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 14: 75-109.
20. Kaput, J.J. 1992. Technology and mathematics education. In Handbook of research in mathematics teaching and learning, ed. D. Grouws, 515-57. New York: Macmillan.
21. Kastberg, S. and K. Leatham. 2005. Research on graphing calculators at the secondary level: Implications for mathematics teacher education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education 5, no. 1: 25-37. http://www.citejournal.org/vol5/iss1/mathematics/article1.cfm
22. Latner, L. 1999. Thought processes of high school graduates during execution of tasks requiring spatial comprehension. PhD diss. The Technion. Haifa.
23. Penglase, M., and S. Arnold. 1996. The graphics calculator in mathematics education: A critical review of recent research. Mathematics Education Research Journal 8, no. 1: 58-90.
24. Perl, H. 2002. Hora’at matematika bahativa ha’eliona be’ezrat mahshevonim grafiim (Teaching mathematics in high school with graphing calculators). PhD diss. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Hebrew).
25. Rasslan, S. 1996. High-school students’ understanding of basic concepts of the new mathematics curriculum and teachers’ understanding of objectives (Arab society). PhD diss. Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
26. Ruthven, K. 1990. The influence of graphic calculator use on translation from graphic to symbolic forms. Educational Studies in Mathematics 21: 431-50.
27. Ruthven, K. 1992. Personal technology and classroom change: A British perspective. In Calculators in mathematics education, ed. J. Fey and C.R. Hirsch, 91-100. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
28. Vinner, S. 1993. Hora’at matematika - mahshavot vetofa‘ot meyomano shel moreh hoker (Teaching mathematics - thoughts and phenomena from the diary of a research teacher). A’leh 13: 21-8. The Center for Scientific Teaching. Hebrew University of Jerusalem (Hebrew).
29. Vinner, S. 1997. The pseudo-conceptual and the pseudo-analytical thought processes in mathematics learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics 34: 97-129.
30. Wilson, M. and C. Krapfl. 1994. The impact of graphic calculators on students’ understanding of function. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 13, no. 3: 252-64.