|
CONCLUSION
Although no quantitative analysis of the effects of Autograph on the students understanding and performance was undertaken in this study, it was easy to observe changes in student behavior when exploring mathematical topics using Autograph. This was shown when some of the above activities were used in class and students worked individually, in pairs or groups. I believe that the use of Autograph helped in creating a new environment not experienced by students before. They were actively involved most of the time during these activities and this shows their enthusiasm about using this software to explore mathematical objects.
Using this software to visually represent mathematical objects such as functions and equations definitely help students understand these objects but is not enough. Autograph is a highly interactive software and this interactivity has to be fully exploited by the students in order to benefit to benefit from it. Activities have to be designed to meet well defined objectives and students’ activities must be well defined.
A more comprehensive quantitative and qualitative study of the effects, of the use of Autograph, on students understanding and performance is needed. This will help in understanding these effects but will also help in adjusting the ways in which Autograph is used and also designing other activities. Such a study will also help to focus on the activities which have more effects on students understanding of mathematical concepts and objects.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author would like to thank all colleagues at UGRU with whom he had fruitful discussions about this work.
REFERENCES
[1] J. D. Bransford and A. L. Brown and R. R. Cocking, “How People Learn: brain, mind, experience, and School”, Washington DC, National Academy Press, 1999.
[2] M. S. Donovan and J. D. Bransford, “How Students Learn: History, Mathematics and Science in the Classroom”, Washington DC, National Academy Press, 2005.
[3] G. B. Gearhart and M.Seltzer, “Relations Between Classroom Practices and Student Learning in the Domain of Fractions”, Cognition and Instructions, 17, pp.1-24, 1999.
[4] W. H. Schmidt, C. C. McKnight, R. T. Houang, H. Wang, D. E. Wiley and L. S. Cogan, “Why Schools Matter: A Cross-national Comparison of Curriculum and Learning”, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1999.
[5] S. S. Stodolsky, “The Subject Matters: Classroom Activity in Math and Social Studies”, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1988.
[6] A. Dendane, “Proceedings of the Second Annual Conference for Middle East Teachers of Science, Mathematics and Computing”, “Exploring Topics in Mathematics Using Computer Software”, METSMaC, Abu Dhabi, UAE, March 2006.
[7]A. Dendane, 10th Annual Research Conference, “Skills Needed for Mathematical Problem Solving”, UAE University, Al Ain, UAE, April 2009.
[8] A. H. Schoenfeld, “Learning to Think Mathematically: Problem Solving, Metacognition, and Sense-Making in Mathematics”, Handbook for Research on Mathematics, Edited by D. D. Grouws, MacMillan, New York, 1992.
[9] G. Polya, “How to Solve it: A New Aspect of mathematical Method?”, Second Edition, Penguin Books, 1990.
[10] P. S. Wilson, “Research Ideas For the Classroom: High School Mathematics”, Chapter 4, MacMillan, 1993.
[11] National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, “the learning principle: A brief introduction [online]”, 2000.
Available from: http://standards.nctm.org/document/chapter2/learn.htm
[12] D. Mackie, “Using Computer Algebra System to encourage deep learning approach to calculus ”, Paper presented at the International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics, Hersonissos, Greece 2002.
[13] M. Dugopolski, J. Coburn & A. G. Bluman, “Algebra for College Students”, McGraw Hill, 2006.
[14] J. Kaput, “Linking Representations in the Symbol Systems of Algebra”, S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research Issues in the Learning and Teaching of Algebra, Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989.
[15] T. P. Dick, “Symbolic-Graphical Calculators: Teaching Tools for Mathematics”, School Science and Mathematics. 92, 1-9, 1994.
[16] P. H. Dunham and T. P. Dick, “Connecting Research to Teaching: Research on Graphing Calculators”, The Mathematics Teacher, 87, 440 – 445, 1994.
[17] A. M. Farrell,”Teaching and Learning behaviors in Technology-Oriented precalculus classrooms”, doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Dissertations Abstracts International, 51, 1990.
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
|
