Problem-Posing Activities in a Dynamic Geometry Environment: When and How

In this chapter, results obtained from previous studies on the issue of problem posing in a dynamic software environment using the “what if not?” strategy are presented. These results include outcomes received from prospective teachers’ engagement in problem-posing activities both in plane and solid geometry, and outcomes received by the engagement of the researcher in the problem-posing activity. The above-presented results are followed by discussion and a list of implications for instruction. Problem-posing activities should follow activities of problem solving through which the content knowledge of the learnt topic is built. Students should experience problem-posing activities starting at elementary school. In these activities they should be provided with opportunities to develop cognitive processes needed for problem posing such as filtering, comprehending, translating, and editing. When students are exposed to geometrical objects, they should be provided with the option to make sense of the objects via dynamic geometry software.

[1]  Guy Brousseau,et al.  Theory of Didactical Situations in Mathematics: Didactique des Mathématiques, 1970-1990 , 2014 .

[2]  Vinicio Villani,et al.  Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century : an ICMI study , 1998 .

[3]  Paul Ernest,et al.  The Philosophy of Mathematics Education , 2003 .

[4]  G. Brousseau.  Theory of didactical situations in mathematics , 1997 .

[5]  Philip Clarkson,et al.  Language Factors in Mathematics Teaching and Learning , 1996 .

[6]  Edward A. Silver,et al.  The role of task format, mathematics knowledge, and creative thinking on the arithmetic problem posing of prospective elementary school teachers , 1997 .

[7]  G. N. Getman.  Computers in the Classroom , 1983 .

[8]  Sergei Abramovich,et al.  Technology as a Medium for Elementary Preteachers' Problem-Posing Experience in Mathematics , 2006 .

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

[10]  Nathalie Sinclair,et al.  What makes a problem mathematically interesting? Inviting prospective teachers to pose better problems , 2008 .

[11]  Robert F. Cunningham.  Problem Posing: An Opportunity for Increasing Student Responsibility. , 2004 .

[12]  Ilana Lavy,et al.  Problem Posing in a Dynamic Geometry Environment and the Development of Mathematical Insights , 2012 .

[13]  Arjuna I. Ranasinghe,et al.  The Benefit of Integrating Technology into the Classroom , 2009 .

[14]  Stephen I. Brown,et al.  The Art of Problem Posing , 1983 .

[15]  Nerida F. Ellerton,et al.  Children's made-up mathematics problems — a new perspective on talented mathematicians , 1986 .

[16]  E. Silver,et al.  Posing Mathematical Problems: An Exploratory Study. , 1996 .

[17]  J. Mestre.  Probing adults' conceptual understanding and transfer of learning via problem posing , 2002 .

[18]  A. Einstein,et al.  The Evolution of Physics: The Growth of Ideas from the Early Concepts to Relativity and Quanta , 1938 .

[19]  Cemalettin Işık,et al.  Prospective teachers’ skills in problem posing with regard to different problem posing models , 2011 .

[20]  Michèle Artigue,et al.  Learning Mathematics in a CAS Environment: The Genesis of a Reflection about Instrumentation and the Dialectics between Technical and Conceptual Work , 2002, Int. J. Comput. Math. Learn..

[21]  I. Lavy,et al.  Problem posing via “what if not?” strategy in solid geometry — a case study , 2003 .

[22]  Ilana Lavy,et al.  Engaging in problem posing activities in a dynamic geometry setting and the development of prospective teachers’ mathematical knowledge , 2010 .

[23]  A. Su,et al.  The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics , 1932, The Mathematical Gazette.

[24]  Aharon Aviram,et al.  From ``Computers in the Classroom'' to Mindful Radical Adaptation by Education Systems to the Emerging Cyber Culture , 2000 .

[25]  E. Silver.  On Mathematical Problem Posing. , 1994 .

[26]  Oleksiy Yevdokimov.  On development of students' abilities in problem posing: a case of plan geometry , 2005 .

[27]  I. Lavy,et al.  SMALL CHANGE - BIG DIFFERENCE , 2009, The Mathematics Enthusiast.

[28]  Nancy A. Gonzales.  Problem Formulation: Insights from Student Generated Questions , 1996 .

[29]  J. Mason.  Asking mathematical questions mathematically , 2000 .

[30]  Amy Roth McDuffie,et al.  Utilizing Online Discussion to Support Reflection and Challenge Beliefs in Elementary Mathematics Methods Classrooms , 2002 .

[31]  Marios Pittalis,et al.  Problem Solving and Problem Posing in a Dynamic Geometry Environment , 2005 .

[32]  Jennifer I. Berne,et al.  Chapter 6 : Teacher Learning and the Acquisition of Professional Knowledge: An Examination of Research on Contemporary Professlonal Development , 1999 .

[33]  N. Lipley.  What's your problem? , 2000, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[34]  Liora Linchevski,et al.  To see or not to see: analyzing difficulties in geometry from the perspective of visual perception , 2010 .

[35]  R. Marrades,et al.  Proofs produced by secondary school students learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment , 2000 .

[36]  Margaret Sinclair,et al.  Working with Accurate Representations: The Case of Preconstructed Dynamic Geometry Sketches. , 2004 .

[37]  Lyn D. English,et al.  Promoting a Problem-Posing Classroom. , 1997 .

[38]  A. Hošpesová,et al.  Developing teachers’ subject didactic competence through problem posing , 2013 .