SPACE-TIME REPRESENTATIONS IN YOUNG CHILDREN: Thinking Through Gestures in Motion Experiments

Representational Systems and Practices as Learning Tools

Volumn , Issue , 2009, Pages 59-75

  Robutti, Ornella ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867452553     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/9789087905286_005     Document Type: Chapter

References (34)

1. Ainley, J. (2000). Transparency in graphs and graphing tasks. An iterative design process. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 365-384.
2. Anichini, G., Arzarello, F., Ciarrapico, L., & Robutti, O. (Eds.). (2004). New mathematical standards for the school from 5 through 18 years Copenhagen: UMI-CIIM.
3. Antinucci, F. (2001). La scuola si e rotta. Bari, Italy: Laterza.
4. Arcavi, A. (1994). Symbol sense: Informal sense-making in formal mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(3), 24-35.
5. Arzarello F., & Robutti, O. (2004). Approaching functions through motion experiments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57, 305-308.
6. Boero, P. (1989). Mathematical literacy for all: Experiences and problems. Actes de la 13e Conference Internationale PME (pp. 62-74). Paris: Paris 1.
7. Borba, M., & Scheffer, N. (2003). Sensors, body, technology and multiple representations. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. T. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th PME International Conference (Vol. 1, pp. 121-128). Honolulu, HI: CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawai'i.
8. Borba, M. C., & Villarreal, M. E. (2005). Humans-with-media and the reorganization of mathematical thinking New York: Springer.
9. Calvino, I. (1956). Fiabe italiane Torino: Giulio Einaudi.
10. Ferrara, F., Robutti, O., & Sabena, C. (2005, February). Different perspectives on computer-based graphs and their meaning. Paper presented at Fourth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Working Group 11, Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved September 28, 2006, from http://cerme4.crm.es/Papers%20definitius/11/paperswg11.htm
11. Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: How our hands help us think Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
12. Mariotti, M. A. (2002). Influence of technologies advances on students' math learning. In L. English, M. Bartolini Bussi, G. A. Jones, R. A. Lesh, & D. Tirosh (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 695-724). London: Lawrence Erbaum.
13. McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought Chicago: Chicago University Press.
14. Meira, L. (1998). Making sense of instructional devices: The emergence of transparency in mathematical activity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 121-142.
15. Nemirovsky, R. (2003). Three conjectures concerning the relationship between body activity and understanding mathematics. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Joint Meeting of PME and PME-NA (Vol. 1, pp. 105-109). Honolulu, HI: CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawai'i.
16. Nemirovsky, R., & Borba, M. (2003). Research forum 1: Perceptuo-motor activity and imagination in mathematics learning. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Joint Meeting of PME and PME-NA (Vol. 1, pp. 103-104). Honolulu, HI: CRDG, College of Education, University of Hawai'i.
17. Nemirovsky, R., & Monk, S. (2000). "If you look at it the other way": An exploration into the nature of symbolizing. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel, & K. McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms: Perspectives on discourse, tools and instructional design (pp. 177-221). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Noss, R. (1995). Thematic chapter: Computers as commodities. In A. A. diSessa, C. Hoyles, & R. Noss (Eds.), Computers and exploratory learning, Nato Asi Series F (Vol. 146, pp. 363-381) Berlin: Springer Verlag.
19. Rabardel, P. (1995). Les hommes et les technologies Paris: Armand Colin.
20. Radford, L. (2000). Signs and meanings in students' emergent algebraic thinking: A semiotic analysis. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42, 237-268.
21. Radford, L. (2001). Factual, contextual and symbolic generalisation in algebra. In M. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of PME25 (Vol. 4, pp. 81-88). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Utrecht University.
22. Radford, L. (2002). The seen, the spoken and the written: A semiotic approach to the problem of objectification of mathematical knowledge. For the Learning of Mathematics, 22(2), 14-23.
23. Radford, L. (2003). Gestures, speech and the sprouting of signs. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 37-70.
24. Radford, L. (2006). The anthropology of meaning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 39-65.
25. Robutti, O. (2003). Il senso del grafico con la mediazione delle tecnologie: metafore attivate e signi-ficati costruiti. La matematica e la sua didattica, 2, 173-195.
26. Robutti, O. (2005). Hearing gestures in modelling activities with the use of technology. In F. Olivero & R. Sutherland (Eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching (pp. 252-261). Bristol, UK: University of Bristol.
27. Robutti, O. (2006). Motion, technology, gesture in interpreting graphs. The International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 13(3), 117-126.
28. Robutti, O., & Ferrara, F. (2002). Approaching graphs with motion experiences. In A. D. Cockbrun & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of PME 26 (Vol. 4, pp. 121-128). Norwich, UK: School of Education and Professional Development, University of East Anglia.
29. Robutti, O., & Ghirardi, S. (2004). Dai moti alle rappresentazioni simboliche: un'esperienza nella scuola elementare. L'insegnamento della matematica e delle scienze integrate, 27A-B(5), 577-616.
30. Roth, M. (2003). Competent workplace mathematics: How signs become transparent in use. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8, 161-189.
31. Sfard, A., & McClain, K. (2002). Analyzing tools: Perspectives on the role of designed artifacts in mathematics learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(2&3), 153-161.
32. Sowder, J. T. (1992). Estimation and number sense. In D. A. Grows (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371-389). New York: NCTM, Mac Millan Library Reference, Simon & Schuster.
33. Verillon, P., & Rabardel, P. (1995). Artefact and cognition: A contribution to the study of thought in relation to instrumented activity. European Journal of Psychology in Education, 10, 77-103.
34. West, T. G. (1997). In the mind’s eye. New York: Prometheus books.