Pre-service mathematics teachers' use of multiple representations in technology-rich environments

Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 19-37

  Özmantar, Mehmet Fatih ^a   Akkoç, Hatice ^b   Bingölbali, Erhan ^a   Demir, Servet ^a   Ergene, Berna ^c  

^a GAZIANTEP UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b MARMARA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^c Be ikta Anadolu Lisesi   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Derivative; Multiple representations; Pre service teachers; TPCK

Indexed keywords

EID: 77955801286     PISSN: 13058215     EISSN: 13058223     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.12973/ejmste/75224     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Preservice and experienced biology teachers' global and specific subject matter structures: implications for conceptions of pedagogical content knowledge. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 2(1), 1-29.
2. Akkoç, H. (2006) Bilgisayar Destekli Matematik Öǧretimi: Grafik Analiz Yaklaşi{dotless}mi{dotless}: İlköǧretim İkinci Kademe ve Liseler İçin (CD Ekli Öǧretmen Çali{dotless}şma Kitabi{dotless}). Toroslu Kitapli{dotless}ǧi{dotless}: İstanbul.
3. Akkoç, H. (2008). Kavramsal anlama için matematik eǧitiminde teknoloji kullani{dotless}mi{dotless}. Özmantar, M.F., Bingölbali, E., Akkoç, H. (Eds.) Matematiksel Kavram Yani{dotless}lgi{dotless}lari{dotless} ve Çözüm Önerileri (pp. 361-392), Pegem Akademi, Ankara.
4. Alagic, M. & Palenz, D. (2006). Teachers Explore Linear and Exponential Growth: Spreadsheets as Cognitive Tools, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14 (3), 633-649.
5. Amoah, V. & Laridon, P. (2004). Using multiple representations to assess students' understanding of the derivative concept. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 24(1), 1-6, London, UK.
6. Arnold, S.R., Padilla, M.J. & Tunhikorn, B. (2009). The development of pre-service teachers' professional knowledge in utilizing ICT to support professional lives. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(2), 91-101.
7. Berthold, K., Eysink, T.H.S., & Renkl, A. (2009). Assisting self-explanation prompts are more effective than open prompts when learning with multiple representations. Instructional Science, 37: 345-363.
8. Bingölbali, E. (2008). Türev kavrami{dotless}na ilişkin öǧrenme zorluklari{dotless} ve kavramsal anlama için öneriler. Özmantar, M.F., Bingölbali, E., Akkoç, H. (Eds.) Matematiksel Kavram Yani{dotless}lgi{dotless}lari{dotless} ve Çözüm Önerileri (pp. 223-255), Pegem Akademi, Ankara.
9. Blokland, P., Giessen, C. & Tall, D.O. (2006). Graphic Calculus Software. VUsoft.
10. Cuoco, A. A. (2001) Yearbook of the National Council of the Teachers of Mathematics: The Roles of Representation in School Mathematics (pp.173-185). Reston, Virginia: The Council.
11. de Jong, T., Ainsworth, S., Dobson, M., van der Hulst, A., Levonen, J., Reimann, P., Sime, J.-A., van Someren, M. W., Spada, H., & Swaak, J. (1998). Acquiring knowledge in science, mathematics: The use of multiple representations in technology-based learning environments. In M. van Someren, P. Reimann, H. P. A. Boshuizen, & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with Multiple Representations (pp. 9-40). Amsterdam: Pergamon.
12. Ertmer, P. A., Addison, P., Lane, M., Ross, E., & Woods, D. (1999). Examining teachers' beliefs about the role of technology in the elementary classroom. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 54-71.
13. Friedlander, A. & Tabach, M. (2001) Promoting Multiple representations in Algebra. In A.A: Cuoco (Ed.) Yearbook of the National Council of the Teachers of Mathematics: The Roles of Representation in School Mathematics (pp.173-185). Reston, Virginia: The Council.
14. Goldenberg, E.P. (1988). Mathematics, metaphors, and human factors: Mathematical, technical, and pedagogical challenges in the educational use of graphical representations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 135-173.
15. Grossman, P. L. (1990). The Making of a Teacher: Teacher Knowledge and Teacher Education. New York: Teachers College Press.
16. Hakkarainen, K., Muukonen, H., Lipponen, L., Ilomaki, L., Rahikainen, M., & Lehtinen, E. (2001). Teachers' information and communication technology skills and practices of using ICT. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(2), 181-197.
17. Hew, K.F. & Brush, T. (2007) Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55:223-252.
18. Juersivich, N., Garofalo, J. & Fraser, V. (2009). Student Teachers' Use of Technology-Generated Representations: Exemplars and Rationales, Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17, 2, 149-173.
19. Kaput, J. J. (1989). Linking representations in the symbol systems of algebra. In S. Wagner, & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research Issues in the Learning and Teaching of Algebra (pp. 167-194). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Magnusson, S. Krajcik, J. & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In Gess-Newsome & Lederman (Eds.), Examining Pedagogical Content Knowledge: The Construct and Its Implications for Science Education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
21. Mishra, P. & Koehler, M.J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054.
22. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Multimedia-supported metaphors for meaning making in mathematics. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 215-248.
23. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA.: The Council.
24. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and Standards of School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
25. Newhouse, C. P. (2001). A follow-up study of students using portable computers at a secondary school. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(2), 209-219.
26. Niess, M.L. (2005). Preparing teachers to teach science and mathematics with technology: Developing a technology pedagogical content knowledge. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 509-523.
27. Ozmantar, M.F., Akkoç, H. & Bingölbali, E. (2009). Development of pedagogical content knowledge with regard to intersubjectivity and alterity. Proceedings of 33rd International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, vol: 4, 265-272.
28. Ozmantar, M. F. (2005). An Investigation of the Formation of Mathematical Abstractions through Scaffolding. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Leeds.
29. Pelgrum, W. J. (2001). Obstacles to the integration of ICT in education: Results from a worldwide educational assessment. Computers and Education, 37, 163-178.
30. Pierson, M. E. (2001). Technology integration practice as a function of pedagogical expertise. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 413-429.
31. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
32. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 122.
33. Tall, D. ve Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 151-169.
34. Uşak, M. (2009). Preservice Science and Technology Teachers' Pedagogical Content Knowledge on Cell Topics. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eǧitim Bilimleri, 9(4), 2013-2046.
35. Yerushalmy, M. (2005). Functions of interactive visual representations in interactive mathematical textbooks. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 10, 217-249.
36. Zbiek, R M., Heid, M. K., Blume, G., & Dick, T.P. (2007). Research on technology in mathematics education: The perspective of constructs. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research in Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 1169-1207). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.