Teaching and learning functions

How Students Learn

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 251-291

  Kalchman, Mindy ^a   Koedinger, Kenneth R ^b  

^a DEPAUL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84917144151     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.17226/11101     Document Type: Chapter

References (16)

1. Chi, M.T.H., Feltovich, P.J., and Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
2. Goldenberg, E.P. (1995). Multiple representations: A vehicle for understanding. In D. Perkins, J. Schwartz, M. West, and M. Wiske (Eds.), Software goes to school: Teaching for understanding with new technologies (pp. 155-171). New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Kalchman, M. (2001). Using a neo-Piagetian framework for learning and teaching mathematical functions. Doctoral Dissertation, Toronto, Ontario, University of Toronto.
4. Koedinger, K.R., and Nathan, M.J. (2004). The real story behind story problems: Effects of representations on quantitative reasoning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(2).
5. Koedinger, K.R., Anderson, J.R., Hadley, W.H., and Mark, M.A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8 30-43.
6. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., and Stein, M. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60(1), 1-64.
7. Nathan, M.J., and Koedinger, K.R. (2000). Teachers' and researchers' beliefs of early algebra development. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 168-190.
8. Romberg, T., Fennema, E., and Carpenter, T.P. (1993). Integrating research on the graphical representation of functions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1987). Cognitive science and mathematics education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Schoenfeld, A.H. (1998). Reflections on a course in mathematical problem solving. In A.H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, and E. Dubinsky (Eds.), CBMS issues in mathematics education (vol. 7, pp. 81-99.) Washington, DC: Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences.
11. Schoenfeld, A.H., Smith J., and Arcavi A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic analysis of one student's evolving understanding of a complex subject matter. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology (vol. 4, pp. 55-175). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Thomas, G.B. (1972). Calculus and analytic geometry. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
13. Bednarz, N., Kieran, C., and Lee, L. (1996). Approaches to algebra. Perspectives for research and teaching. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
14. Confrey, J., and Smith, E. (1995). Splitting, co-variation, and their role in the development of exponential functions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(1), 66-86.
15. Janvier, C. (1987). Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. Kaput, J.J. (1989). Linking representations in the symbol systems of algebra. In S. Wagner and C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 167-181). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.