gc环境对代数学习能产生积极影响

1、gc环境对代数学习能产生积极影响来自实证研究的一些最新证据令人鼓舞王长沛2010/12/6对mcl项目的第一轮教学实践研究，已经进入总结深入阶段.为帮助大家进 行研究成果的小结，这里提供一些国外的研究证据,希望有助于大家的反思和进 一步的研究.下面来自实证的研究证据来自2009年月1日美国<school science and mathematics > 发表的研究扌妆告"graphi ng calculator use in algebra teachi ng "(report). 作者为 dewey, brenda l.; singletary, ted j

2、.; kinzel, margaret t.该报告对已有的关于 图像计算器环境，对学生代数学习的研究，做了回顾与评述.这些发现来实证研 究-涉及学生与教师对gc的态度和观念.从该报告引用的研究证据，我们可以 得到一些令人鼓舞的结论.下面摘译部分结论供大家参考(英文原文附在后面).建议:如要引用这些研究，需要进一步和原文核查，以保证准确无误这里仅仅匆 匆提供一些线索.王长沛 2010/12/6(一) 对于学生的影响发现1计算器的使用不会对学生的计算能力的发展产生消极影响.文献：dessart, deridder, & ellington, 1999;ellington, 2003, 20

3、06;hollar &n orwood, 1999;smith, 1996；ellington, a. j. (2006). the effects of graphing calculators on student achievement and attitude levels in mathematics - a meta-analysis. school science and mathematics, 106 (1) 16-26.发现2图形计算器的使用确实能改进问题解决和概念理解；文献：boers-van oosterum, 1990;dunham & dick, 1

4、994;ellington, 2003, 2006;hart, 1992;rich, 1991.发现3：图像计算器的使用有助于学生提高对于函数及其图像的理解；文献boers-van oosterum; hollar & norwood; as cited in interactive educational systemsdesign, inc., 2003; rich.发现4:有助于提升学生代数概念多重表示及其联系的能力；文献boers-van oosterum; graham & thomas, 2000; rich.发现5：提高对用数形结合的方法解决问题的理解；文献boe

5、rs-van oosterum; harskamp, suhre, & van streun, 2000; rich.发现6：和传统的教学比较，对数学概念和技能之间的联系，学生表现出更好的 迁移能力.文献hart, 1992; rich, 1991(-) 对于教师发现1：对于图形计算器，教师的态度和实践往往折射他们的数学和数学教育观; 那些持数学是规则学习的教师，常常认为计算器无助于他们的教学，甚 至妨害他们的教学；而那些持较开放的数学观的教师，往往把图形计算 器看作是数学和科学的有机组成部分.发现2:研究发现，对于技术的认识和态度，一般并不指向技术本身，更多的取 决于教师个人的数学观

6、和教育观。关于数学技术的辩论和消极态度，表明“前技术”时代的数学课程和教 学方法，仍然影响着今天的课堂教学。文献burrill et al., 2002; simmt, 1997;thaip, fitzsimmons, & brown-ayers, 1997 p. 558simmt, 1997;milou, 1999waits & demana, 2000(三)原文article: graphing calculator use in algebra teaching.(report)article from: school scienee and mathematicsart

7、icle date:november 1, 2009author:dewey, brenda l.; singletary, ted j.; kinzel, margaret tcopyrightthis study examines graphing calculator technology availability, characteristics of teachers who use it, teacher attitudes, and how use reflects changes to algebra curriculum and instructional practices

8、. algebra i and algebra ii teachers in 75 high school and junior high/middle schools in a diverse region of a northwestern state were surveyed. forty of the 75 schools (53%) returned a total of 109 individual surveys. results indicated that.(1) while 78% of teachers have some access to the technolog

9、y, only 28% use it regularly.(2) statistically significant relationships exist between use and age, years of experience, teaching assignment, and teaching level.(3) respondents view graphical solution methods as secondary to symbolic methods.(4) teachers are more receptive to using technology to sup

10、plement rather than expand the curriculum.literature reviewcurrent standards in mathematics education advocate technology use to promote problem-solving, reasoning, and conceptual understanding (national council of teachers of mathematics nctm, 2000). research supports these standards indicating tha

11、t calculator use does not undermine computational ability (as cited in dessart, deridder, & ellington, 1999; ellington, 2003, 2006; hollar & norwood, 1999; smith, 1996), while it does improve problem-solving and conceptual understanding (boers-van oosterum, 1990; dunham & dick, 1994; ell

12、ington, 2003, 2006; hart, 1992; rich, 1991). studies have shown that students instructed with graphing calculators demonstrate improved understanding of functions and graphing (boers-van oosterum; hollar & norwood; as cited in interactive educational systems design, inc., 2003; rich), greater ab

13、ility to connect multiple representations of algebraic concepts (boers-van oosterum; graham & thomas, 2000; rich), and increased understanding of a dual approach to problem-solving, using both symbolic and graphical solution methods (boers-van oosterum; harskamp, suhre, & van streun, 2000; r

14、ich). additionally, students instructed with technology demonstrate less compartmentalization of mathematical concepts and techniques compared to those receiving more traditional instruction (hart). though not all studies have had positive results, relatively few have shown no benefit of calculator

15、use (as cited in dun ham & dick; giamati, 1990).when the national council of teachers of mathematics (nctm) first introduced standards for math instruction in 1989, one key component of these new standards was the assumption that appropriate calculators would be an integral part of classroom ins

16、truction and specifically graphing calculators for grades 9-12 (nctm, 1989). despite the standards and supporting research, calculator use in the classroom is still a highly debated issue among mathematics educators (usiskin, 1999). views range from one extreme to the other with most educators falli

17、ng somewhere in between, searching for balance between calculator and pencil-paper techniques. literature reveals that the calculator is most controversial when it is introduced before students master the equivalent pencil-and-paper algorithms without the technology (ballheim, 1999). current trends

18、reflect this with less use of four-function calculators in elementary schools (national center for education statistics, n.d.); less use of graphing calculators in algebra i (dion et al., 2001; milou, 1999); and little use of symbolic manipulators at any level (dion et al.).research concerning teach

19、er attitudes and classroom practices related to technology use has identified a critical characteristic of teachers that may very well be at the center of the controversy surrounding this issue research has shown that teacher attitudes and practices related to graphing calculators tend to be manifes

20、tations of personal philosophies of mathematics and mathematics education, and that teachers tend to use graphing calculators as an extension of the way they would normally teach (burrill et al., 2002; simmt, 1997). one study used qualitative data to categorize teachers as to whether their view of m

21、athematics was rule-based or non-rule based (tharp, fitzsimmons, & brown-ayers, 1997). they summarized their findings in the following statement,. teachers who hold a more rule-based view of mathematics are more likely also to hold the view that calculators do not enhance instruction and may eve

22、n hinder it. on the other hand, teachers with a less rule-based view of mathematics are more likely to view calculators as an integral part of mathematics and science instruction (tharp et alm p. 558)the findings of this study in particular clarify why there are perhaps such extreme perspectives on

23、graphing calculator use in the classroom. as demonstrated by the study, perceptions and attitudes regarding technology are not so much aimed at the technology itself, but rather stem from teachers1 personal philosophies and views of mathematics.considering the connection between technology use and teachers* philosophies of mathematics instruction, the current debate and trends in calculator use would indicate that the curriculum and instructional methods of pre