Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in mathematics

ZDM - International Journal on Mathematics Education

Volumn 45, Issue 6, 2013, Pages 797-810

  Artigue, Michèle ^a   Blomhøj, Morten ^b  

^a bâtiment Sophie Germain   (France)

^b ROSKILDE UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84887357200     PISSN: 18639690     EISSN: 18639704     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11858-013-0506-6     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Alrø, H., & Skovsmose, O. (2002). Dialogue and learning in mathematics education: Intention, reflection, critique. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
2. Bachelard, G. (1938). La formation de l'esprit scientifique. Paris: Librairie Philosophique J. Vrin.
3. Barrow, L. H. (2006). A brief history of inquiry: From Dewey to standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 265-278.
4. Blomhøj, M. (2004). Mathematical modelling-a theory for practice. In B. Clarke, D. Clark, D. Lambdin, F. Lester, G Emanuelsson, B. Johansson, A. Walbym & K. Walby (Eds.), International perspectives on learning and teaching mathematics (pp. 145-160). Gothenburg: NCM, Gothenburg University.
5. Blomhøj, M., & Kjeldsen, T. H. (2011). Students' reflections in mathematical modelling projects. In G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. Borromeo Ferri, & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling (pp. 385-396). Dordrecht: Springer.
6. Blum, W., Galbraith, P., Henn, H.-W., & Niss, M. (Eds.). (2007). Modelling and applications in mathematics education. The 14th ICMI study (pp. 3-32). New York: Springer.
7. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
8. Cai, J. (2010). Commentary on problem solving heuristics, affect, and discrete mathematics: A representational discussion. In B. Sriraman & L. English (Eds.), Theories of mathematics education (pp. 251-258). New York: Springer.
9. Cauvin, M. (1970). Le renouveau pédagogique en Allemagne de 1890 à 1933 (p. 38). Paris: Armand Colin.
10. Chevallard, Y. (2011). La notion d'ingénierie didactique, un concept à refonder. Questionnement et éléments de réponse à partir de la TAD. In C. Margolinas, M. Abboud-Blanchard, L. Bueno-Ravel, N. Douek, A. Fluckiger, P. Gibel, F. Vandebrouck, & F. Wozniak (Eds.), En amont et en aval des ingénieries didactiques (pp. 81-108). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
11. Chevallard, Y. (2013). Teaching mathematics in tomorrow's society: A case for an oncoming counterparadigm. Lecture at ICME-12, Seoul. July 2012. http://www. icme12. org/upload/submission/1985_F. pdf. Accessed 4 Apr 2013 (to appear).
12. Chevallard, Y., & Matheron, Y. (2002). Travaux personnels encadrés: Un cadre d'analyse didactique pour un changement majeur dans l'enseignement au lycée. In M. Bridenne (Ed.), Nouveaux dispositifs d'enseignement en mathématiques dans les colleges et les lycées. Dijon: IREM de Dijon.
13. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Macmillan.
14. Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt.
15. Fabre, M. (2009). Philosophie et pédagogie du problem. Paris: Librairie J. Vrin.
16. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht: Reidel.
17. Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
18. Gravemeijer, K. (1999). How emergent models may foster the constitution of formal mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1, 155-177.
19. Gravemeijer, K., & 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.
20. Hanna, G., & de Villiers, M. (Eds.). (2012). Proof and proving in mathematics education. The 19th ICMI study. Dordrecht: Springer.
21. Harlen, W. (2010). Principles and big ideas of science education. Hatfield, Herts: Association for Science Education. (Available from http://www. ase. org. uk in English, from http://www. fondation-lamap. org in French, and from http://www. innovec. org. mx in Spanish).
22. Harlen, W. (2012). Inquiry in science education. In S. Borda Carulla (coord.), Resources for implementing inquiry in science and mathematics at school. http://www. fibonacci-project. eu. Accessed 4 Apr 2013.
23. Hickman, L. A., & Spadafora, G. (Eds.) (2009). John Dewey's educational philosophy in international perspective: A new democracy for the twenty-first century. Carbondale, IL: SIU Press.
24. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Murray, H., et al. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in curriculum and instruction: The case of mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 12-21.
25. Jaworski, B. (2004). Grappling with complexity: Co-learning in inquiry communities in mathematics teaching development. in Proceedings of the 28th conference of the internationalgroup for the psychology of mathematics education (Vol. I, pp. 17-36). Bergen: Bergen University College.
26. Kaiser, G. (2002). Educational philosophies and their influence on mathematics education-an ethnographic study in English and German mathematics classrooms. ZDM-The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 34(6), 241-257.
27. Kaiser, G., Blum, W., Borromeo Ferri, R., & Stillman, G. (Eds.). (2011). Trends in teaching and learning of mathematical modelling. Dordrecht: Springer.
28. Krainer, K. (2008). Individuals, teams, communities and networks: Participants and ways of participation in mathematics teacher education. In K. Krainer & T. Wood (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics teacher education. Participants in mathematics teacher education (Vol. 3, pp. 1-10). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
29. Maaß, K., & Doorman, M. (2013). A model for a widespread implementation of inquiry-based learning. ZDM-The International Journal of Mathematical Education, 45(6), this issue. doi: 10. 1007/s11858-013-0505-7.
30. eColloque de la CORFEM (pp. 17-39). Besançon: Université de Franche-Comté. http://iremlp. irem. univ-mrs. fr/site/sites/default/files/YMDémarche%20d'investigation. pdf. Accessed 4 Apr 2013.
31. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. Niss, M., Blum, W., & Galbraith, P. (2007). Introduction. In W. Blum, P. Galbraith, H.-W. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education. The 14th ICMI study (pp. 3-32). New York: Springer.
34. Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H., & Hemmo V. (2007). L'enseignement scientifique aujourd'hui: une pédagogie renouveléepour l'avenir de l'Europe. Commission Européenne, Direction générale de la recherche, Science, économie et société.
35. Schneider, M. (1991). Un obstacle épistémologique soulevé par les "découpages infinis" des surfaces et des solides. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 11(2-3), 241-294.
36. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992a). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, meta-cognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-370). New York: MacMillan.
37. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992b). Reflections on doing and teaching mathematics. In A. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking and problem solving (pp. 53-70). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
38. Sensevy, G. (2011). Le sens du savoir. Eléments pour une théorie de l'action conjointe en didactique. Bruxelles: De Boeck Editions.
39. Skovsmose, O. (1994). Towards a philosophy of critical mathematics education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
40. Streefland, L. (1985). Wiskunde als activiteit en de realiteit als bron. Nieuwe Wiskrant, 5(1), 60-67.
41. Treffers, A. (1987). Three dimensions: A model of goal and theory descriptions in mathematics education: The Wiskobas Project. Dordrecht: Reidel.
42. Wittmann, E Ch. (2001). Developing mathematics education in a systemic process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 48, 1-20.