Fronteras en la investigación sobre comprensión en Educación Matemática

Referencias

Ainley, J.; Lowe, A. (1999): “Can written questions differentiate between degrees of understanding?” Mathematics Teacher, 168, 32-35. Coriat, M. (2001). Los problemas de un director de Tesis. Anexos. Ponencia presentada en el Departamento de Didáctica de la Matemática, de las Ciencias Sociales y de las Ciencias Experimentales de la Universidad de Málaga (paper). Duffin, J.; Simpson, A. (1997): “Towards a new theory of understanding”. En: E. Pehkonen (Ed.) Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp.166-173), Lhati, Finland. English, L.D.; Halford, G.S. (1995): Mathematics Education: Models and Processes. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. Fennema, E.; Romberg, T. A. (Eds.) (1999): Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, N.J. Gairín, J. M.; Sancho, J. (2002): Números y algoritmos. Síntesis, Madrid. Gallardo, J. (2004): Diagnóstico y evaluación de la comprensión del conocimiento matemático. El caso del algoritmo estándar escrito para la multiplicación de números naturales. Tesis Doctoral inédita. Universidad de Málaga. Godino, J. D. (2000): “Significado y comprensión de los conceptos matemáticos”. Uno 25, 77-87. Godino, J. D. (2002): “Perspectiva semiótica de la competencia y comprensión matemática”. La matematica e la sua didattica 4, 434-450. González, J. L. (1998): “Didactical Analysis: A non empirical qualitative method for research in mathematics education”. En: I. Schwank (Ed.) Proceedings of the First Conference of the European Society in Mathematics Education (Vol. II, pp. 245-256). Osnabrück, Germany. González, J. L. (1999): “Aproximación a un marco teórico y metodológico específico para la investigación en Educación Matemática”. III Simposio de la Sociedad Española de Investigación en Educación Matemática (pp.14-30). Universidad de Valladolid, Valladolid. Goñi, J. Mª (2000): “La enseñanza de las matemáticas, aspectos sociológicos y pedagógicos”. En: J. Mª Goñi (Coord.) El currículum de matemáticas en los inicios del siglo XXI (pp. 23-57). Grao, Barcelona. Habermas, J. (1990): La lógica de las ciencias sociales. Tecnos, Madrid. Hatano, G.;Amaiwa, S.; Inagaki, K. (1996): ““Buggy Algorithms” as Attractive Variants”. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 15, 285-302. Hennessy, S. (1993): “The stability of children’s mathematical behavior: when is a bug really a bug?” Learning and Instruction 3, 315-338. Hiebert, J.; Carpenter, T. P. (1992): “Learning and Teaching with understanding”. En: D. A. Grouws (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 65-97). MacMillan Publishing Company, New York. Hiebert, J.; Carpenter, T. P.; Fennema, E.; Fuson, K.C.; Wearne, D.; Murray, H.; Olivier, A.; Human, P. (1997): Making Sense: teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Heinemann, Portsmouth, N. H. Kieran, C. (1994): “Doing and seeing things differently: a 25-year retrospective of mathematics education research on learning”. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 25, 6, 583-607. Koyama, M. (1993): “Building a two axes process model of understanding mathematics”. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education 1, 63-73. Mason, D. E. (1998): “Capsule Lessons in Alternative Algorithms for the Classroom”. En: L. J. Morrow; M. J. Kenney (Eds.) The Teaching and Learning of Algorithms in School Mathematics (pp. 91-98). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA. Morin, E. (1994): El Método. El conocimiento del conocimiento. Cátedra, Madrid. Nakahara, T. (1994): “Study of the representational system in mathematics education”. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education 2, 59-67. NCTM (2000): Principles and standards for school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA. Philipp, R. A. (1996): “Multicultural Mathematics and alternative algorithms”. Teaching Children Mathematics 3, 128-133. Pirie, S.; Kieren, T. (1994): “Growth in mathematical understanding: how can we characterise it and how can we represent it?” Educational Studies in Mathematics 26, 165-190. Resnick, L. B. (1992): “From protoquantities to operators: building mathematical competence on a foundation of everyday knowledge”. En: G. Leinhardt; R. Putham; R. Hattrup (Eds.) Analysis of Arithmetic for Mathematics Teaching (pp. 373-429). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, N.J. Rico, L. (1997): “Reflexión sobre los fines de la Educación Matemática”. Suma 24, 5-19. Romberg, T. A. (1992): “Perspectives on Scholarship and Research Methods”. En: D. A. Grouws (Ed.) Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 49-64). MacMillan Publishing Company, New York. Sierpinska, A. (1994): Understanding in Mathematics. The Falmer Press, London. Sierpinska, A. (2000): “Book Review”. ZDM 2, 45-50. [Del libro: Fennema, E.; Romberg, T. A. (Eds.) (1999): Mathematics Classrooms that Promote Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J.]. Sierpinska, A.; Kilpatrick, J.; Balacheff, N.; Howson, A. G.; Sfard, A.; Steinbring, H. (1993): “What Is Research in Mathematics Sierpinska, A.; Kilpatrick, J.; Balacheff, N.; Howson, A. G.; Sfard, A.; Steinbring, H. (1993): “What Is Research in Mathematics Education, and What Are its Results?” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 24, 3, 274 -278. Simon, M. A. (2004): “Raising Issues of Quality in Mathematics Education Research”. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 35, 3, 157-163.