Emergent modeling: Discrete graphs to support the understanding of change and velocity

ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education

Volumn 41, Issue 1-2, 2009, Pages 199-211

  Doorman, L M ^a   Gravemeijer, K P E ^b  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77958526651     PISSN: 18639690     EISSN: 18639704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11858-008-0130-z     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Boyd, A., & Rubin, A. (1996). Interactive video: A bridge between motion and math. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1, 57-93.
2. Clagett, M. (1959). Science of mechanics in the middle ages. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
3. Clement, J. (1985). Misconceptions in graphing. In L. Streefland (Ed.), Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Utrecht: Utrecht University, pp. 369-375.
4. Cobb, P. (1999). Individual and collective mathematical development: The case of statistical data analysis. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(1), 5-43.
5. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9-13.
6. Dall'Alba, G., Walsh, E., Bowden, J., Martin, E., Masters, G., Ramsden, P., et al. (1993). Textbook treatment of students' understanding acceleration. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(7), 621-635.
7. Doerr, H. M. (1997). Experiment, simulation and analysis: An integrated instructional approach to the concept of force. International Journal of Science Education, 19(3), 265-282.
8. Doerr, H. M., & Zangor, R. (2000). Creating meaning for and with the graphing calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41, 143-163.
9. Doorman, M., Drijvers, P., Dekker, T., Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., De Lange, J., & Wijers, M. (2007). Problem solving as a challenge for mathematics education in The Netherlands. ZDM Mathematics Education, 39(5-6), 405-418.
10. Doorman, L. M. (2005). Modeling motion: From trace graphs to instantaneous change. Utrecht: CD-Beta Press.
11. Edelson, D. C. (2002). Design research: What we learn when we engage in design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 105-121.
12. Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education-China lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
13. Goldin, G. A. (2003). Representation in school mathematics: A unifying research perspective. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
14. Gravemeijer, K., & Cobb, P. (2006). Design research from the learning design perspective. In J. van den Akker, K. Gravemeijer, S. McKenney & N. Nieveen (Eds.), Educational design research (pp. 17-51). London: Routledge.
15. Gravemeijer, K. P. E., & Doorman, L. M. (1999). Context problems in realistic mathematics education: A calculus course as an example. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39(1-3), 111-129.
16. Gravemeijer, K. (1999). How emergent models may foster the constitution of formal mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(2), 155-177.
17. Gravemeijer, K. (2004). Local instruction theories as means of support for teachers in reform mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6, 105-128.
18. Gravemeijer, K. (2007). Emergent modelling as a precursor to mathematical modelling. In W. Blum, P. L. Galbraith, H. W. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education. The 14th ICMI Study (pp. 137-144). New York: Springer.
19. Klaassen, C. W. J. M. (1995). A problem-posing approach to teaching the topic of radioactivity. Utrecht: CD-Beta Press.
20. Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., & Post, T. (2000). Principles for developing thought-revealing activities for students and teachers. In A. Kelly, & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Lijnse, P. L. (1995). 'Developmental research' as a way to an empirically based 'didactic structure' of science. Science Education, 79, 189-199.
22. McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55(6), 503-513.
23. Michelsen, C. (1998). Expanding context and domain: a crosscurricular activity in mathematics and physics. ZDM Mathematics Education, 30(4), 100-106.
24. Monk, S. (2003). Representation in School Mathematics: Learning to Graph and Graphing to Learn. In J. Kilpatrick et al. (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston: NCTM.
25. Rasmussen, C., & Blumenfeld, H. (2007). Reinventing solutions to systems of linear differential equations: A case of emergent models involving analytic expressions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 26, 195-210.
26. Roth, W., & Tobin, K. (1997). Cascades of inscriptions and the representation of nature: How numbers, tables, graphs, and money come to re-present a rolling ball. International Journal of Science Education, 19(9), 1075-1091.
27. Sherin, M. G. (2002). A balancing act: Developing a discourse community in a mathematics community. Journal of Mathematics Teachers Education, 5, 205-233.
28. Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114-145.
29. Van Dijk, I. M. A. W., Van Oers, B., & Terwel, J. (2003). Providing or designing? Constructing models in primary maths education. Learning and Instruction, 13, 53-72.