Conjecturing in open geometric situations using dynamic geometry: An exploratory classroom experiment

Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 229-246

  Olivero, Federica ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952620513     PISSN: 14794802     EISSN: 17540178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14794800008520095     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Arsac, G., Germain, G. and Mante, M.: 1988, Probleme Ouvert et Situation- Probleme, IREM, Academie de Lyon.
2. Arzarello, F., Olivero, F., Paola, D. and Robutti, O.: 1999, ‘Dalle congetture alle dimostrazioni: una possibile continuity cognitiva’, L’Insegnamento della Matematica e delle Scienze Integrate, 225(3), 209-233.
3. Arzarello, F. and Bartolini Bussi, M.: 1998, ‘Italian trends in research in mathematical education: A national case study from an international perspective’. In A. Sierpinska and J. Kilpatrick (eds.), Mathematics Education as a Research Domain: A search for identity (pp. 197-212). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
4. Arzarello, F., Gallino, G., Micheletti, C., Olivero, F., Paola, D. and Robutti, O.: 1998, ‘Dragging in Cabri and modalities of transition from conjectures to proofs in geometry’. In A. Olivier and K. Newstead (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Vol. 2 (pp.32-39). Stellenbosch, South Africa.
5. Arzarello, F., Micheletti, C., Olivero, F., Paola, D. and Robutti, O.: 1998a, ‘A model for analysing the transition to formal proofs in geometry.’ In: A. Olivier and K. Newstead (eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Vol. 2 (pp. 24-31). Stellenbosch, South Africa.
6. Balacheff, N.: 1998, Apprendre la Preuve. Grenoble: CNRS, Laboratoire Leibniz- IMAG.
7. Bartolini Bussi, M.: 1998, ‘Joint activity in mathematics classrooms: A Vygotskian analysis’. In F. Seeger, J. Voigt and U. Waschescio (eds.), The Culture of the Mathematics Classroom (pp.1-45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Baulac, Y., Bellemain, F. and Laborde, J.M.: 1988, Cabri-Geometre, un Logiciel d’Aide a I’Apprentissage de la Geometrie. Logiciel et manuel d’utilisation. Paris: Cedic-Nathan.
9. Boero, P., Garuti, R. and Mariotti, M.A.: 1996, ‘Some dynamic mental process underlying producing and proving conjectures.’ In A. Gutierrez and L. Puig (eds.), Proceedings of the 2(fh Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Vol. 2 (pp. 121-128). Valencia.
10. Chazan, D.: 1993, ‘High school geometry student’s justification for their views of empirical evidence and mathematical proof.’ Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24, 359-387.
11. Duval, R.: 1991, ‘Structure du raisonnement deductif et apprentissage de la demonstration.’ Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22, 233-261.
12. Goldenberg, E.P. and Cuoco, A.: 1998, ‘What is dynamic geometry.’ In R. Lehrer and D. Chazan (eds.) Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry and Space (pp. 351-368). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Goldenberg, E.P.: 1995, ‘Rumination about dynamic imagery.’ In: R. Sutherland and J. Mason (eds.), Exploiting Mental Imagery with Computers in Mathematics Education (pp. 202-224). NATO Asi Series, Springer-Verlag.
14. Hanna, G.: 1996, ‘The ongoing value of proof.’ In A. Gutierrez and L. Puig (eds.), Proceedings of the 2 fh Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Vol. 1 (pp. 21-34). Valencia.
15. Harel, G. and Sowder, L.: 1996, ‘Classifying processes of proving.’ In A. Gutierrez and L. Puig (eds.), Proceedings of the 2u Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Vol. 3 (pp. 59-66). Valencia.
16. Healy, L. and Hoyles, C.: 1998, Justifying and Proving in School Mathematics-Technical Report on the Nationwide Survey. Institute of Education, University of London.
17. Holzl, R.: 1996, ‘How does “dragging” affect the learning of geometry.’ International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1, 169-187.
18. Hoyles, C.: 1997, ‘The curricular shaping of student’ approaches to proof, For the Learning of Mathematics, 17(1), 7-16.
19. Laborde, C.: 1998, ‘Relationship between the spatial and theoretical in geometry: the role of computer dynamic representations in problem solving.’ In D. Tinsley and D. Johnson (eds.), Information and Communications Technologies in School Mathematics (pp. 183-195). London: Chapman and Hall.
20. Laborde, C.: 1995, ‘Designing tasks for learning geometry in a computer-based environment. The case of Cabri-Geometre.’ In: L, Burton and B. Jaworski (eds.) Technology in Mathematics Teaching: A bridge between teaching and learning (pp.35-68). Bromley: Chartwell-Bratt.
21. Mariotti, M.A., Bartolini Bussi, M., Boero, P., Ferri, F. and Garuti, R.: 1997, ‘Approaching geometry theorems in contexts: from history and epistemology to cognition.’ In E. Pehkonen (ed.) Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the Internatoinal Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education Vol. 1 (pp. 180- 195). Lahti.
22. Mariotti, M.A.: 1998, ‘Introduzione alia dimostrazione all’inizio della scuola secondaria superiore.’ LTnsegnamento della Matematica e delle Scienze Integrate, 21B(3), 209-252.
23. Mogetta, C., Olivero, F. and Jones, K.: 1999, ‘Providing the Motivation to Prove in a Dynamic Geometry Environment.’ In E. Bills (ed.) Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics Conference held at St. Martin’s College, Lancaster (pp.91-96). Coventry: University of Warwick.
24. Olivero, F.: 1998, XJn per cor so didattico dal la congettura alia dimostrazione in geometria. Unpublished degree dissertation. University of Turin.
25. Olivero, F: 1999, ‘Cabri-geometre as a mediator in the process of transition to proofs in open geometric situations.’ Proceedings ofICTMT 4 (International Conference for Technology in Mathematics Teaching). Plymouth.
26. Pea, R.D.: 1987, ‘Cognitive technologies for mathematics education.’ In: A. Schoenfeld (ed.), Cognitive Science and Mathematical Education (pp.89-112). Hillsdale, N.J.: LEA.
27. Perkins, D.N.: 1993, ‘Person-plus: a distributed view of thinking and learning.’ In: G. Salomon (ed.), Distributed Cognitions (pp.88-110). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Sutherland, R. and Balacheff, N.: 1999, ‘Didactical complexity of computational environments for the learning of mathematics.’ International Journal of Computer for Mathematical learning, 4, 1-26.
29. Usiskin, Z.: 1982, Van Hiele Levels and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry. Final Report of the Cognitive Development and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry Project. Department of Education, University of Chicago.
30. Vygotsky, L.S.: 1978, Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard: Harvard University Press.