Research in Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Pseudo-Covariational Reasoning Thought Processes in Constructing Graph Function of Reversible Event Dynamics Based on Assimilation and Accommodation Frameworks

  • Subanji, Rajiden (Department of Mathematics, State University of Malang) ;
  • Supratman, Ahman Maedi (Mathematics Education Courses and Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, University of Siliwangi Tasikmalaya)
  • Received : 2014.12.02
  • Accepted : 2015.03.24
  • Published : 2015.03.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study discussed about how pseudo-thinking process actually occurs in the mind of the students, used Piaget's frame work of the assimilation and accommodation process. The data collection is conducted using Think-Out-Loud (TOL) method. The study reveals that pseudo thinking process of covariational reasoning occurs originally from incomplete assimilation, incomplete accommodation process or both. Based on this, three models of incomplete thinking structure constructions are established: (1) Deviated thinking structure, (2) Incomplete thinking structure on assimilation process, and (3) Incomplete thinking structure on accommodation process.

Keywords

References

  1. Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  2. Carlson, M.; Jacobs, S.; Coe, E.; Larsen, S. & Hsu, E. (2002). Applying covariational reasoning while modeling dynamic events: A framework and a study. J. Res. Math. Educ. 33(5), 352-378. ME 2011e.00792 https://doi.org/10.2307/4149958
  3. Kahneman, D. (2002). Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. In: T. Frangsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel Prizes 2002 (pp. 449-489). Stockholm: Nobel Foundation. Retrieved December 8, 2014 at http://www. nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2002/kahnemann-lecture.pdf
  4. Lee, H. S. (2005). Facilitating Students' Problem Solving in Technological Context: Prospective Teachers' Learning Trajectory. J. Math. Teach.Educ. 8(3), 223.254. ME 2006a.00080 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-005-2618-6
  5. Lee, S. J.; Brown, E. R. & Orrill, H. C, (2011). Mathematics Teachers' Reasoning About Fraction and Decimal Using Drawn Representation. Math. Think. Learn. 13(3), 198-220. ME 2011e.00164 https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2011.564993
  6. Leron, U. & Hazzn, O. (2009). Intuitives versus Analytical Thinking: Four perspectives. Educ. Stud. Math. 71(3), 263-278. ME 2009f.00534 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9175-8
  7. Lithner, J., 2000. Mathematical Reasoning in Task Solving. Educ. Stud. Math. 41(2), 165-190. ME 2001a.00169 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003956417456
  8. Olson, G. M.; Duffy, S. A.; & Mack, R. L. (1984). Thinking-Out-Loud as a Method for Studying Real-Time Comprehension Processes. In: D. E. Kieras & M. A. Just (Eds), New methods in reading comprehension research (pp. 253-286). Hills Dole, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publisher.
  9. Pape, S. (2004). Middle School Children's Problem solving Behavior: A Cognitive Analysis from A Reading Comprehension Perspective. J. Res. Math. Educ. 35(3), 187-219. ME2004d.03437 https://doi.org/10.2307/30034912
  10. Supratman, A. M. (2013). Piaget's Theory in the Development of Creative Thinking. In: Y. Choe, O. N. Kwon & B. E. Suh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2013 Joint International Conference on Mathematics Education held at Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea; November 1-2, 2013 (pp. 559-574). Seoul, Korea: Korean Society of Mathematical Education.
  11. Tall, D. (2004). Thinking Through Three Worlds of Mathematics. In: Marit Johnsen Hoines, et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME 28), Bergen, Norway, July 14-18, 2004, Vol 4 (pp 281-288). Bergen, Norway: Bergen University College. ME 2008b.00080
  12. Vinner, S. (1997). The pseudo-conceptual and the pseudo-analytical thought processes in mathematics Learning. Educ. Stud. Math. 34(2), 97-129. ME 2002c.01839 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002998529016
  13. Wu, M. & Adam, R. (2006). Modelling Mathematics Problem Solving Item Responses Using Multidimensional IRT Model. Math. Educ. Res. J. 18(2), 93-113. ME 2007e.00439 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217438

Cited by

  1. University students metacognitive failures in mathematical proving investigated based on the framework of assimilation and accommodation vol.11, pp.12, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5897/ERR2016.2721