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 studentsâ€™ 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, â€œHow People Learn: brain, mind, experience, and Schoolâ€�, Washington DC, National Academy Press, 1999.
[2] M. S. Donovan and J. D. Bransford, â€œHow Students Learn: History, Mathematics and Science in the Classroomâ€�, Washington DC, National Academy Press, 2005.
[3] G. B. Gearhart and M.Seltzer, â€œRelations Between Classroom Practices and Student Learning in the Domain of Fractionsâ€�, Cognition and Instructions, 17, pp.124, 1999.
[4] W. H. Schmidt, C. C. McKnight, R. T. Houang, H. Wang, D. E. Wiley and L. S. Cogan, â€œWhy Schools Matter: A Crossnational Comparison of Curriculum and Learningâ€�, San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass, 1999.
[5] S. S. Stodolsky, â€œThe Subject Matters: Classroom Activity in Math and Social Studiesâ€�, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1988.
[6] A. Dendane, â€œProceedings of the Second Annual Conference for Middle East Teachers of Science, Mathematics and Computingâ€�, â€œExploring Topics in Mathematics Using Computer Softwareâ€�, METSMaC, Abu Dhabi, UAE, March 2006.
[7]A. Dendane, 10th Annual Research Conference, â€œSkills Needed for Mathematical Problem Solvingâ€�, UAE University, Al Ain, UAE, April 2009.
[8] A. H. Schoenfeld, â€œLearning to Think Mathematically: Problem Solving, Metacognition, and SenseMaking in Mathematicsâ€�, Handbook for Research on Mathematics, Edited by D. D. Grouws, MacMillan, New York, 1992.
[9] G. Polya, â€œHow to Solve it: A New Aspect of mathematical Method?â€�, Second Edition, Penguin Books, 1990.
[10] P. S. Wilson, â€œResearch Ideas For the Classroom: High School Mathematicsâ€�, Chapter 4, MacMillan, 1993.
[11] National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, â€œthe learning principle: A brief introduction [online]â€�, 2000.
Available from: http://standards.nctm.org/document/chapter2/learn.htm
[12] D. Mackie, â€œUsing Computer Algebra System to encourage deep learning approach to calculus â€�, Paper presented at the International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics, Hersonissos, Greece 2002.
[13] M. Dugopolski, J. Coburn & A. G. Bluman, â€œAlgebra for College Studentsâ€�, McGraw Hill, 2006.
[14] J. Kaput, â€œLinking Representations in the Symbol Systems of Algebraâ€�, 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, â€œSymbolicGraphical Calculators: Teaching Tools for Mathematicsâ€�, School Science and Mathematics. 92, 19, 1994.
[16] P. H. Dunham and T. P. Dick, â€œConnecting Research to Teaching: Research on Graphing Calculatorsâ€�, The Mathematics Teacher, 87, 440 â€“ 445, 1994.
[17] A. M. Farrell,â€�Teaching and Learning behaviors in TechnologyOriented precalculus classroomsâ€�, doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, Dissertations Abstracts International, 51, 1990.
1,
2,
3,
4,
5,
