Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An epistemic model of task design in dynamic geometry environment

  • Original Article
  • Published:
ZDM Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dynamic geometry environment (DGE) has been a catalytic agent driving a paradigm shift in the teaching and learning of school geometry in the past two decades. It opens up a pedagogical space for teachers and students to engage in mathematical explorations that niche across the experimental and the theoretical. In particular, the drag-mode in DGE has been a unique pedagogical tool that can facilitate and empower students to experiment with dynamic geometrical objects which can lead to generation of mathematical conjectures. Furthermore, the drag-mode seems to open up a new methodology and even a new discourse to acquire geometrical knowledge alternative to the traditional Euclidean deductive reasoning paradigm. This discussion paper proposes an epistemic model of techno-pedagogic mathematic task design which serves as a theoretical combined-lens to view mathematics knowledge acquisition. Three epistemic modes for techno-pedagogic mathematical task design are proposed. They are used to conceptualize design of dynamic geometry tasks capitalizing the unique drag-mode nature in DGE that opens up an explorative space for learners to acquire mathematical knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ainley, J., Pratt, D., & Hansen, A. (2006). Connecting engagement and focus in pedagogic task design. British Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 21–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arzarello, F., Olivero, F., Paola, D., & Robutti, O. (2002). A cognitive analysis of dragging practices in Cabri environments. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik, 34(3), 66–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baccaglini-Frank, A., & Mariotti, M. A. (2010). Generating conjectures in dynamic geometry: The maintaining dragging model. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15, 225–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baccaglini-Frank, A., Mariotti, M. A., & Antinini, S. (2009). Different perceptions of invariants and generality of proof in dynamic geometry. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, & H. Sakonidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 89–96). Thessaloniki, Greece: PME.

  • Brown, J. (2005). Affordances of a technology-rich teaching and learning environment. In P. Clarkson, A. Downton, D. Gronn, M. Horne, A. McDonough, R. Pierce, M. Horne, & A. Roche (Eds.), Building connections: Theory, research, and practice, Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Melbourne (Vol. 1, pp. 177–184). Sydney: MERGA.

  • Duval, R. (1995). Geometrical pictures: Kinds of representation and specific processing. In R. Sutherland & J. Mason (Eds.), Exploiting mental imagery with computers in mathematics education (pp. 142–157). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freudenthal, H. (1968). Why to teach mathematics so as to be useful. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1, 3–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laborde, C. (2005). Robust and soft constructions: Two sides of the use of dynamics geometry environments. In Proceedings of the Tenth Asian Technology Conference in Mathematics (pp. 22–35). Korea National University of Education, Cheong-Ju, South Korea.

  • Leung, A. (2003) Dynamic geometry and the theory of variation. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of PME 27: Psychology of Mathematics Education 27th International Conference (Vol. 3, pp. 197–204). Honolulu, USA.

  • Leung, A. (2008). Dragging in a dynamic geometry environment through the lens of variation. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 13, 135–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, A. (2009). Written proof in dynamic geometry environment: Inspiration from a student’s work. In Proceedings of the ICMI 19 Study Conference: Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 15–20). Taipei, Taiwan.

  • Leung, A., Chan, Y. C., & Lopez-Real, F. (2006). Instrumental genesis in dynamic geometry environments. In Proceedings of the ICMI 17 Study Conference: Technology Revisited, Part 2 (pp. 346–353). Hanoi, Vietnam.

  • Leung, A., & Lopez-Real, F. (2002). Theorem justification and acquisition in dynamic geometry: A case of proof by contradiction. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 7, 145–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leung, A., & Or, A. (2009). Cognitive apprehension in Cabri 3D environment. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, & H. Sakonidis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, p. 417). Thessaloniki, Greece: PME.

  • Lopez-Real, F., & Leung, A. (2006). Dragging as a conceptual tool in dynamic geometry environments. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 37(6), 665–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mariotti, M. A. (2002). Influence of technologies advances on students’ maths learning. In L. English, M. Bartolini Bussi, G. Jones, R. Lesh, & D. Tirosh (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 695–721). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, J., & Johnston-Wilder, S. (2006). Designing and using mathematical tasks. St. Albans: Tarquin Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, D., & Noss, R. (2010). Designing for mathematical abstraction. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15, 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Restrepo, A. M. (2008). Genese instrumentale du deplacement en geometrie dynamique chez des eleves de 6eme. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis. Universite Joseph Fourier.

  • Talmon, V., & Yerushalmy, M. (2004). Understanding dynamic behaviour: Parent–child relations in dynamic geometry environments. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57, 91–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vérillon, P., & Rabardel, P. (1995). Cognition and artifacts: A contribution to the study of thought in relation to instrumented activity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 10(1), 77–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Education Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, Kowloon Tong, Hong Kong SAR, China

    Allen Leung

Authors
  1. Allen Leung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Allen Leung.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Leung, A. An epistemic model of task design in dynamic geometry environment. ZDM Mathematics Education 43, 325–336 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0329-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0329-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation