The role of representations in learning the derivative

Markus Hahkioniemi The role of representations in learning the derivative. University of Jyvaskyla. Department of Mathematics and Statistics. Report 104. It has been proposed that there are two ways how learning a mathematical concept may develop. A new object may be abstracted from actions performed on already existing objects. For example, the derivative concept may be abstracted from calculating values of the derivative. Another way is to act with the concept to be learnt and perceive it as an object. For instance, some properties of the derivative may be learnt by perceiving the derivative of a function from the graph of the function. These two ways correspond to learning in the symbolic and in the embodied worlds in the theory of the three worlds of mathematics. Several studies have suggested that the learning results of the derivative are enhanced if teaching takes into account, for example, working with several representations including the graphical ones, considering the limiting process inherent in the derivative thoroughly, supporting the process-object development and, in general, emphasizing problem solving. However, there is still need for a detailed analysis on how students are thinking about the derivative in approaches which takes into account the above-mentioned suggestions. The aim of this study is to find out how students may use different kinds of representations for thinking about the derivative in a specific approach. To achieve this, I designed and implemented a five-hour teaching-learning sequence introducing the derivative concept in a Finnish high school (grade 11). The above-mentioned aspects of learning were taken into account in the design. After the teaching-learning sequence, I selected five students into carefully designed task-based interviews. From the interviews I analyzed what kind of representations the students used for thinking about the derivative and for which purpose and how they used these. Especially, using limiting processes and perceiving the derivative from the graph of a function were taken into account in the design of the interviews as well as in the analysis. I found that the embodied world offered powerful thinking tools for the students. They used the increase, steepness, horizontalness and tangent of the graph for thinking about the derivative qualitatively without calculating anything. These representations were accompanied by gestures which were an essential part of thinking. At this very early stage of learning the derivative the students seemed to consider the derivative as an object, which has some properties, in the embodied world. Using the above-mentioned representations, they, for example, considered when the derivative is positive/negative, and what the maximum/minimum point of the derivative is. Therefore, this study supports the claims that learning may begin by considering the derivative as an object. The study also suggests that in the embodied world students may learn as the representations become more and more transparent allowing seeing the derivative. The students used various kinds of limiting processes and connected them in different ways to the limit of the difference quotient. Some of the students changed from one of these two representations to the other, and some of them explained one with the other. I named the two connections associative and reflective connections, respectively. One of the students, who made the reflective connection, had major difficulties in using the limit of the difference quotient. This suggests that a student may have conceptual knowledge of this notion without being able to use it for calculating the derivative. On the basis of the analysis of the students’ use of representations, I constructed a hypothetical learning path to the derivative. According to the learning path, the representations of the tangent, increase, steepness and horizontalness of the graph as well local straightness, moving a hand along the graph and placing a pencil as a tangent may be used to perceive the rate of change in the embodied world. In the symbolic world, students may calculate the average rate of change over different intervals. This way, students may build knowledge of the derivative even before being introduced to its definition and they have readiness to investigate the problem of the value of the instant rate of change.

[1]  Markus Hähkiöniemi Associative and Reflective Connections between the Limit of the Difference Quotient and Limiting Process. , 2006 .

[2]  David Tall,et al.  Using Technology to Support an Embodied Approach to Learning Concepts in Mathematics , 2004 .

[3]  Lillian C. McDermott,et al.  Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics , 1987 .

[4]  Markus Hähkiöniemi Perceptual and Symbolic Representations as a Starting Point of the Acquisition of the Derivative. , 2004 .

[5]  Robert B. Davis,et al.  How students think: The role of representations , 1997 .

[6]  Lois W. Sayrs Interviews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing , 1996 .

[7]  Wolff‐Michael Roth,et al.  From activity to gestures and scientific language , 2001 .

[8]  Draga Vidakovic,et al.  Constructing a schema: The case of the chain rule? , 1997 .

[9]  M. Kathleen Heid,et al.  Resequencing Skills and Concepts in Applied Calculus Using the Computer as a Tool. , 1988 .

[10]  L. Schauble,et al.  Design Experiments in Educational Research , 2003 .

[11]  Ricardo Nemirovsky,et al.  Learning to See: Making Sense of the Mathematics of Change in Middle School , 2004, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[12]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[13]  P. Cobb Where Is the Mind? Constructivist and Sociocultural Perspectives on Mathematical Development , 1994 .

[14]  A. Sfard,et al.  The gains and the pitfalls of reification — The case of algebra , 1994 .

[15]  Carol B. MacKnight,et al.  International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments , 1996, J. Comput. High. Educ..

[16]  Chris Rasmussen,et al.  Classroom mathematical practices and gesturing , 2004 .

[17]  Wolff-Michael Roth,et al.  Competent Workplace Mathematics: How Signs Become Transparent in Use , 2003, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[18]  K.P.E. Gravemeijer,et al.  Context Problems in Realistic Mathematics Education: A Calculus Course as an Example , 1999 .

[19]  Martin A. Simon Reconstructing Mathematics Pedagogy from a Constructivist Perspective. , 1995 .

[20]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data , 1984 .

[21]  Gaea Leinhardt,et al.  Functions, Graphs, and Graphing: Tasks, Learning, and Teaching , 1990 .

[22]  J. Sandberg,et al.  The think aloud method , 1994 .

[23]  Judit N. Moschkovich,et al.  Moving Up and Getting Steeper: Negotiating Shared Descriptions of Linear Graphs , 1996 .

[24]  Luciano Meira,et al.  Making Sense of Instructional Devices: The Emergence of Transparency in Mathematical Activity. , 1998 .

[25]  S. Berberian Limits of Functions , 1994 .

[26]  Kristina Juter Limits of Functions University Students' Concept Development , 2006 .

[27]  Daniel C. Edelson Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage in Design , 2002 .

[28]  A. Orton,et al.  Students' understanding of differentiation , 1983 .

[29]  G. Salomon Distributed cognitions : psychological and educational considerations , 1997 .

[30]  Gerald A. Goldin,et al.  Chapter 4: Observing Mathematical Problem Solving through Task-Based Interviews , 1997 .

[31]  Motion, speed, and other ideas that “should be put in books” , 2003 .

[32]  G. Goldin A Scientific Perspective on Structured, Task-Based Interviews in Mathematics Education Research , 2000 .

[33]  D. Tall,et al.  USING THEORETICAL-COMPUTATIONAL CONFLICTS TO ENRICH THE CONCEPT IMAGE OF DERIVATIVE , 2003 .

[34]  Michèle Artigue,et al.  The Integration of Symbolic Calculators into Secondary Education: Some Lessons from Didactical Engineering , 2005 .

[35]  David Tall,et al.  Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity , 1981 .

[36]  Andee Rubin,et al.  Students' Tendency To Assume Resemblances between a Function and Its Derivative. , 1992 .

[37]  E. Snapper What do we do when we do mathematics? , 1988 .

[38]  Ed Dubinsky,et al.  Development of the process conception of function , 1992 .

[39]  G. Goldin Representational systems, learning, and problem solving in mathematics , 1998 .

[40]  D. Tall,et al.  A THEORY OF MATHEMATICAL GROWTH THROUGH EMBODIMENT, SYMBOLISM AND PROOF , 2006 .

[41]  Paul Ernest Chapter 3: The Epistemological Basis of Qualitative Research in Mathematics Education: A Postmodern Perspective , 1997 .

[42]  Markus Hähkiöniemi How the derivative becomes visible: the case of Daniel , 2007 .

[43]  Draga Vidakovic,et al.  Understanding the limit concept: Beginning with a coordinated process scheme , 1996 .

[44]  J. Clement Analysis of Clinical Interviews: Foundations and model viability , 2000 .

[45]  Douglas A. Grouws,et al.  Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning , 1992 .

[46]  A. Sfard On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin , 1991 .

[47]  David Tall,et al.  Relationships between embodied objects and symbolic procepts: an explanatory theory of success and failure in mathematics , 2004 .

[48]  Claude Janvier Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics , 1987 .

[49]  R. Duit,et al.  Understanding the basic ideas of chaos‐theory in a study of limited predictability , 1997 .

[50]  A. Schoenfeld Learning to Think Mathematically: Problem Solving, Metacognition, and Sense Making in Mathematics (Reprint) , 2009 .

[51]  D. Tall Schemas and processes for sketching the gradient of a graph , 2001 .

[52]  Mike Thomas,et al.  Representational Ability and Understanding of Derivative. , 2003 .

[53]  Incoherence of a concept image and erroneous conclusions in the case of differentiability , 2008, The Mathematics Enthusiast.

[54]  Luc Trouche,et al.  The Didactical Challenge of Symbolic Calculators , 2005 .

[55]  J. Hiebert Conceptual and procedural knowledge : the case of mathematics , 1987 .

[56]  Alan H. Schoenfeld The Case of Algebra , 2007 .

[57]  J. Berry,et al.  Promoting students’ graphical understanding of the calculus , 2003 .

[58]  Michele Cerulli,et al.  Calculators, Graphs, Gestures and the Production of Meaning. , 2003 .

[59]  Lenni Haapasalo,et al.  Two Types of Mathematical Knowledge and Their Relation , 2000 .

[60]  T. P. Carpenter,et al.  Learning and teaching with understanding. , 1992 .

[61]  Dimitris Psillos,et al.  Teaching–learning sequences: aims and tools for science education research , 2004 .

[62]  Cheng-Shang Chang Calculus , 2020, Bicycle or Unicycle?.

[63]  Robert J. Beichner,et al.  Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs , 1994 .

[64]  D. Tall Reflections on APOS theory in Elementary and Advanced Mathematical Thinking , 1999 .

[65]  David Tall,et al.  Advanced Mathematical Thinking , 1994 .

[66]  Ed Dubinsky,et al.  The development of students' graphical understanding of the derivative , 1997 .

[67]  Leslie P. Steffe,et al.  Theories of Mathematical Learning , 1996 .

[68]  L. McDermott,et al.  Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension , 1980 .

[69]  Anna Sfard,et al.  Analyzing tools : perspectives on the role of designed artifacts in mathematics learning : special issue , 2002 .

[70]  Anna Watson Kenilworth THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICAL EMBODIMENT AND MATHEMATICAL SYMBOLISM : THE CONCEPT OF VECTOR , 2004 .

[71]  C. Maher,et al.  Representing motion: an experiment in learning , 2003 .

[72]  Michelle Zandieh,et al.  Exploring the Role of Metonymy in Mathematical Understanding and Reasoning: The Concept of Derivative as an Example. , 2006 .

[73]  Lenni Haapasalo,et al.  The conflict between conceptual and procedural knowledge : Should we need to understand in order to be able to do , or vice versa ? , 2004 .

[74]  Ed Dubinsky,et al.  Reflective Abstraction in Advanced Mathematical Thinking , 2002 .

[75]  L. M. Doorman,et al.  Modelling motion: from trace graphs to instantaneous change , 2005 .

[76]  유창조 Naturalistic Inquiry , 2022, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[77]  Nobuhiko Nohda,et al.  Teaching by Open-Approach Method in Japanese Mathematics Classroom. , 2000 .

[78]  M. Studdert-Kennedy Hand and Mind: What Gestures Reveal About Thought. , 1994 .

[79]  B. Rittle-Johnson,et al.  Developing Conceptual Understanding and Procedural Skill in Mathematics: An Iterative Process. , 2001 .

[80]  Samer Habre,et al.  Students’ conceptual understanding of a function and its derivative in an experimental calculus course , 2006 .

[81]  C. Maher,et al.  An analytical model for studying the development of learners’ mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data☆ , 2003 .

[82]  Pamela Jordan Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques , 1994 .

[83]  Carolyn A. Maher,et al.  Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem solving: Insights from a longitudinal study , 2005 .

[84]  E. Wenger,et al.  Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[85]  P. Cobb,et al.  A Constructivist Alternative to the Representational View of Mind in Mathematics Education. , 1992 .

[86]  D. McNeill Hand and Mind , 1995 .

[87]  Ulla Maija Valleala JYVÄSKYLÄ STUDIES IN EDUCATION, PSYCHOLOGY AND SOCIAL RESEARCH 280 , 2006 .

[88]  Derek Allan Holton,et al.  The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level : an ICMI study , 2001 .

[89]  Alan H. Schoenfeld,et al.  Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. I , 1994 .

[90]  Tommy Dreyfus,et al.  Advanced Mathematical Thinking Processes , 2002 .

[91]  Johan F. Hoorn,et al.  Distributed cognition , 2005, Cognition, Technology & Work.

[92]  Ed Dubinsky,et al.  APOS: A Constructivist Theory of Learning in Undergraduate Mathematics Education Research , 2001 .

[93]  David Tall,et al.  The fundamental cycle of concept construction underlying various theoretical frameworks , 2005 .

[94]  Janet Ainley Transparency in graphs and graphing tasks: an iterative design process , 2000 .

[95]  Reinders Duit,et al.  Studies on educational reconstruction of chaos theory , 1997 .

[96]  Maurice J. Martin Introduction to the Concept , 1987 .

[97]  Garnet Smith Hauger Growth of Knowledge of Rate in Four Precalculus Students. , 1997 .

[98]  Harry Silfverberg Peruskoulun yläasteen oppilaan geometrinen käsitetieto , 1999 .

[99]  H. Saari,et al.  Research‐based teaching unit on the tides , 2004 .

[100]  J. Hiebert,et al.  Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge in Mathematics: An Introductory Analysis , 1986 .

[101]  David Tall,et al.  THINKING THROUGH THREE WORLDS OF MATHEMATICS , 2004 .

[102]  Maarten van Someren,et al.  The Think Aloud Method: A Practical Guide to Modelling Cognitive Processes , 1994 .

[103]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[104]  L. Radford Signs and meanings in students' emergent algebraic thinking: A semiotic analysis , 2000 .

[105]  John Francisco INSIGHTS INTO STUDENTS' ALGEBRAIC REASONING , 2006 .

[106]  David Tall,et al.  Descriptions and Definitions in the Teaching of Elementary Calculus , 2005 .

[107]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[108]  Tracey Wright Karen in Motion. , 2001 .

[109]  David Tall,et al.  The Psychology of Advanced Mathematical Thinking , 2002 .