HOW MULTIMODALITY WORKS IN MATHEMATICAL ACTIVITY: YOUNG CHILDREN GRAPHING MOTION

International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 917-939

  Ferrara, Francesca ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURIN   (Italy)

Author keywords

graphing motion; imagination; multimodality; perceptuo motor activity

Indexed keywords

EID: 84903883998     PISSN: 15710068     EISSN: 15731774     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10763-013-9438-4     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Ainley, J. (2000). Transparency in graphs and graphing tasks: An iterative design process. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 365-384.
2. Arzarello, F., Paola, D., Robutti, O. & Sabena, C. (2009). Gestures as semiotic resources in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 97-109.
3. Burbules, N. C. (2006). Rethinking the virtual. In J. Weiss, J. Nolan, J. Hunsinger & P. Trifonas (Eds.), The international handbook of virtual learning environments (pp. 37-58). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
4. Cobb, P. (2000). Conducting teaching experiments in collaboration with teachers. In A. E. Kelly & R. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 307-333). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. de Freitas, E. & Sinclair, N. (2012). Diagram, gesture, agency: Theorizing embodiment in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 80(1-2), 133-152.
6. diSessa, A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B. & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117-160.
7. Edwards, C. H. (1979). The historical development of the calculus. New York: Springer.
8. Ferrara, F. (2006). Remembering and imagining: Moving back and forth between motion and its representation. In J. Novotná, H. Moraová, M. Krátká & N. Stehlíková (eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (vol. 3, pp. 65-72). Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University, Faculty of Education.
9. Gallese, V. & Lakoff, G. (2005). The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3/4), 455-479.
10. Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: How our hands help us think. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11. Kress, G. (2004). Reading images: Multimodality, representation and new media. Information Design Journal, 12(2), 110-119.
12. Lakoff, G. & Núñez, R. (2000). Where mathematics comes from. New York: Basic Books.
13. McNeill, D. (Ed.). (2000). Language and gesture: Window into thought and action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Nemirovsky, R. (2003). Three conjectures concerning the relationship between body activity and understanding Mathematics. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. T. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of 27th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (vol. 1, pp. 105-109). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai'i.
15. Nemirovsky, R. & Ferrara, F. (2009). Mathematical imagination and embodied cognition. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 159-174.
16. Nemirovsky, R., Rasmussen, C., Sweeney, G. & Wawro, M. (2012). When the classroom floor becomes the complex plane: Addition and multiplication as ways of bodily navigation. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 1-37.
17. Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C. & Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction, 16(2), 119-172.
18. Radford, L. (2009). Why do gestures matter? Sensuous cognition and the palpability of mathematical meanings. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 111-126.
19. Radford, L., Edwards, L. & Arzarello, F. (2009). Beyond words. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 91-95.
20. Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L. & Gallese, V. (1997). The space around us. Science, 277, 190-191.
21. Roth, W. M. (2009). Bodily experience and mathematical conceptions: From classical views to a phenomenological reconceptualization. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 175-189.
22. Rotman, B. (2008). Becoming beside ourselves: The alphabet, ghosts, and distributed human beings. Durham: Duke University Press.
23. Schiralli, M. & Sinclair, N. (2003). A constructive response to 'where mathematics comes from'. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(1), 79-91.
24. Seitz, J. A. (2000). The bodily basis of thought, new ideas in psychology. An International Journal of Innovative Theory in Psychology, 18(1), 23-40.
25. Sinclair, N. & Armstrong, A. (2011). A geometric approach to story graphs and piecewise linear functions. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 16(6), 347-353.
26. Sinclair, N., de Freitas, E. & Ferrara, F. (2013). Virtual encounters: The murky and furtive world of mathematical inventiveness. ZDM The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(2), 239-252.
27. Streeck, J. & Mehus, S. (2005). Microethnography: The study of practices. In K. L. Fitch & R. E. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 381-404). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28. Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625-636.