Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Special Article

Vol. 13 No. 4(II) (2010): Número Especial /Diciembre

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TEACHER BEHAVIOR AND STUDENTS´ COGNITIVE PROGRESS WHEN EDUCATIONAL SOFTWARE IS INTRODUCED INTO THE CLASSROOM

Submitted
December 26, 2023
Published
2010-06-23

Abstract

In the first part of this article, we briefly describe a study which had the objective of finding out the benefits of introducing in the classrooms of elementary education, a computer, a projector and computational software designed with well founded didactical principles. However, our main purpose here is to show the effect that the type of the teacher' s behavior has on the cognitive development of his students within this teaching situation. The results revealed the strong influence of the teacher' s instruction and interaction modes, and point to this as a critical factor in the teaching and learning process of any pedagogical model. However, teacher' s behavior is, in large measure, a reflection of his content and pedagogical knowledge, but especially of a knowledge that intertwines both, called Mathematical Knowledge for Teaching. Thus, we have to focus constantly on this more essential aspect, if we hope for significant advances in education.

References

  1. Balacheff, N. y Kaput, J. (1996). Computer-based Learning Environments in Mathematics En Bishop et al. (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 469-501) Kluwer Dordrecht.
  2. Ball. D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education 51 (3), 241-247.
  3. Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Franke, M. L., Levi, L y Empson, S. B. (2000), Cognitively guided instruction: A research-based professor professional development program for elementary school mathematics, National center for improving student learning and achievement in mathematics and science, Report No. 003, Wisconsin centre for education research. The University of Wisconsin-Madison.
  4. Chapman, O. (2002). Belief structure and inservice high school mathematies teacher growth. In G. C. Leder, E. Pehkonen and G. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A Hidden Variable in Mathematics Education? (pp. 177-194). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
  5. diSessa, A. (1993). Toward an Epistemology of Physics. Cognition and Instruction 10 (2). 105-225.
  6. Emest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher A model Journal of Education for Teaching 15, 13-33
  7. Hill, H. Cy Ball, D. L. (2004). Learning Mathematics for Teaching: Results from California's Mathematics Professional Development Institutes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 35 (5), 330-351.
  8. Hoyles, C. (1992). Illuminations and reflections: Teachers, methodologies and mathematics. Proceedings of the 16 annual meeting of The International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol. 3, pp. 263-286). Durham; University of Jew Hampshire
  9. Hoyles, C. y Noss, R. (1992), A Pedagogy for Mathematical Microworlds. Educational Studies in Mathematics 23 (1), 31-57.
  10. Jacobs, V. y Ambrose, R. (2003). Individual interviews as a window into professors' practice: A framework for understanding professor-student interactions during mathematical problem solving In G. M. Lloyd, M. Wilson, J. L. M. Wilkins & S. L. Behm (Eds.), Proceedings of the 27 annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol. 3, 33-38). Roanoke, VA: Virginia Tech
  11. Mellar, H., Bliss, Boohan. Ogborn y Tompsett (1994). Learning with Artificial Worlds Computer based modelling in the curriculum, Washington, Falmer Press.
  12. Mochón, S. y Rojano, T. (1999). Teaching math with technologies: A national project in Mexico, Proceedings of the 23 annual meeting of The International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 1, 300, Haifa, Israel.
  13. Mochón, S. (2001). Aiming a better understanding in science courses through mathematical reasoning. Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, 2525-2531, Orlando, Florida.
  14. Mochón, S. (2006). Teaching Math with a Computer and a Projector. An Educational and Research Project, Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, 3774-3781. Orlando, Florida, USA.
  15. Mochón, S. (2008). The Need for Developing Math Teachers" "Knowledge for Teaching", for an Effective Use of Technological Tools, Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, 5291-5296, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA.
  16. Moyer, P. S. y Milewicz, E. (2002). Learning to question: Categories of questioning used by pre-service professors during diagnostic mathematics interviews. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 5, 293-315.
  17. Noss, R. y Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on Mathematical Meanings: Learning Cultures and Computers, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
  18. Pirie, S. y Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterize it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 165-190.
  19. Ponte, J. P. y Chapman, O. (2006). Mathematics teachers' knowledge and practices. In A. Gutierrez & P. Boero (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: Past, present and future (pp. 461-494). Roterdham: Sense.
  20. Ponte, J. P. y Chapman, O. (2008). Preservice mathematics teachers' knowledge and development. En L. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 223-261). New York, NY: Routledge.
  21. Rojano, T. (2002). Mathematics learning in the junior secondary school: Students' Access to significant mathematical ideas. In Lyn D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 143-162). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  22. Rojano, T. (2003). Incorporación de entornos tecnológicos de aprendizaje a la cultura escolar. Proyectos de innovación educativa en matemáticas y ciencias en escuelas secundarias públicas en México. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación OEI, 33, 135-169.
  23. Sacristán, A. I (2005). Teachers' difficulties in adapting to the use of new technologies in mathematics classrooms and the influence on students' learning and attitudes, Proceedings of the 27 annual meeting of the North American Chapter of The International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (CD-ROM), Virginia Tech, U.S.A.
  24. Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20-26.
  25. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Research, 15 (2), 4-14.
  26. Thompson, A. G. (1984). The relationship of teachers' conceptions of mathematics teaching to instructional practice. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15 (2), 105-127.
  27. Warner, L y Schorr, R. Y. (2004). From primitive knowing to formalizing: The role of student- to-student questioning in the development of mathematical understanding, Proceedings of the 26 annual meeting of the North American Chapter of The International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. 2, 429-437, Toronto, Canada.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

<< < 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.