Mathematics teachers’ choices of examples that potentially support or impede learning

Research in Mathematics Education

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 143-155

  Zaslavsky, Orit ^a   Zodik, Iris ^a  

^a TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85006347412     PISSN: 14794802     EISSN: 17540178     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14794800008520176     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. thICMI study conference: The Professional Education and Development of Teachers of Mathematics, Águas de Lindóia, Brazil.
2. thConference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2 (Valencia, Spain).
3. Bills, L. and Rowland, T. (1999) Examples, generalisation and proof, in: L. Brown (Ed) Making meaning in mathematics: advances in mathematics education 1 (York, QED).
4. thConference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1 (Prague, Czech Republic).
5. Leinhardt, G. (2001) Instructional explanations: a commonplace for teaching and location for contrast, in: V. Richardson (Ed) Handbook of research on teaching (4th edition) (Washington DC, American Educational Research Association).
6. Leinhardt, G. Zaslavsky, O. and Stein, M. K. (1990) Functions, graphs, and graphing: tasks, learning, and teaching, Review of Educational Research, 60(1), 1-64.
7. Kennedy, M. M. (2002) Knowledge and teaching, Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8, 355- 370.
8. Mason, J. and Pimm, D. (1984) Generic examples: seeing the general in the particular
9. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 227- 289.
10. Peled, I. and Zaslavsky, O. (1997) Counter-examples that (only) prove and counter-examples that (also) explain, FOCUS on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 19(3), 49-61.
11. Petty, O. S. and Jansson, L. C. (1987) Sequencing examples and nonexamples to facilitate concept attainment, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18(2), 112-125.
12. Rissland-Michener, E. (1978) Understanding understanding mathematics, Cognitive Science, 2, 361-383.
13. Rowland, T. Thwaites, A. and Huckstep, P. (2003) Novices’ choice of examples in the teaching of elementary mathematics, in: A. Rogerson (Ed), Proceedings of the International Conférence on the Decidable and the Undecidable in Mathematics Education (Brno, Czech Republic).
14. Vinner, S. (1983) Concept definition, concept image and the notion of function, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 14, 293-305.
15. thConference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 4 (Norwich, UK).
16. Watson, A. and Mason, J. (2006) Seeing an exercise as a single mathematical object: using variation to structure sense-making, Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 8(2), 91-111.
17. thConference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 5 (Prague, Czech Republic).
18. thICMI study conference: The Professional Education and Development of Teachers of Mathematics, Águas de Lindóia, Brazil.
19. Zaslavsky, O. and Lavie, O. (submitted) What is entailed in choosing an instructional example?
20. Zaslavsky, O. and Peled, I. (1996) Inhibiting factors in generating examples by mathematics teachers and student-teachers: the case of binary operation, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(1), 67-78.
21. thConference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME5), Larnaka, Cyprus.