Evaluating Difficulty Levels of Dynamic Geometry Software Tools to Enhance Teachers' Professional Development

By Judith Hohenwarter, Markus Hohenwarter, and Zsolt Lavicza Florida State University, USA and University of Cambridge, UK judith@geogebra.org, markus@geogebra.org, zl221@cam.ac.uk Received: 22. January 2010 This paper describes a study aimed to identify commonly emerging impediments related to the introduction of dynamic mathematics software. We report on the analysis of data collected during a three-week professional development programme organised for middle and high school teachers in Florida. The study identified challenges that participants face during software introductory workshops and evaluated the difficulty levels of the dynamic geometry tools and other features used. Based on the data analysis, complexity criteria for dynamic geometry software tools were developed and commonly occurring difficulties were identified, which provided the basis for the development of several new introductory materials and pedagogy that could assist workshop activities and contribute to the improvement of future introductory professional development workshops with dynamic mathematics software.

[1]  Jeremy Kilpatrick,et al.  International handbook of mathematics education , 1997 .

[2]  Colette Laborde,et al.  Technology and Mathematics Education: A Multidimensional Study of the Evolution of Research and Innovation , 2003 .

[3]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1992 .

[4]  Markus Hohenwarter,et al.  Creating Mathlets with Open Source Tools , 2007 .

[5]  Tamara Pearson,et al.  Educators and Technology Standards , 2002 .

[6]  Dale S. Niederhauser,et al.  Teachers' Perspectives on Computer-Assisted Instruction: Transmission versus Construction of Knowledge , 1995 .

[7]  Harold H. Wenglinsky.  Does It Compute? The Relationship between Educational Technology and Student Achievement in Mathematics. , 1998 .

[8]  Jill Adler,et al.  Reflections on an Emerging Field: Researching Mathematics Teacher Education , 2005 .

[9]  Larry Cuban,et al.  High Access and Low Use of Technologies in High School Classrooms: Explaining an Apparent Paradox , 2001 .

[10]  Yusuf Koc,et al.  Mathematics Teacher Education and Technology , 2003 .

[11]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1993 .

[12]  Zsolt Lavicza.  Examining the use of Computer Algebra Systems in university-level mathematics teaching , 2009 .

[13]  Joan Ferrini-Mundy,et al.  Principles and Standards for School Mathematics: A Guide for Mathematicians , 2000 .

[14]  Markus Hohenwarter,et al.  Introducing Dynamic Mathematics Software to Secondary School Teachers: the Case of GeoGebra , 2009 .

[15]  J. Pellegrino,et al.  Professional Development in Integrating Technology Into Teaching and Learning: Knowns, Unknowns, and Ways to Pursue Better Questions and Answers , 2007 .