¿Cómo enseñar las matemáticas y ciencias experimentales? Resolviendo el dilema entre transmisión e indagación

Referencias

Alfieri, L., Brooks P. J., Aldrich, N. J. & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1-18. Artigue, M., & Blomhøj, M. (2013). Conceptualizing inquiry-based education in mathematics. ZDM Mathematics Education 45, 797–810. Baker, G. P. & Hacker, P. M. S. (1985). Wittgenstein. Rules, grammar and necessity. An analytical commentary on the Philosophical Investigations. Glasgow: Basil Blackwell. Ben-Chaim, D., Keret, Y. & Ilany, B. S. (2012). Ratio and proportion: Research and teaching in mathematics teachers’ education. Rotterdam: Sense Publisher Bentley, B. & Yates, G. C. R. (2017). Facilitating proportional reasoning through worked examples: Two classroom-based experiments. Cogent Education, 4 (1), 1297213. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1297213 Bloor, D. (1983). Wittgenstein. A social theory of knowledge. London: The Macmillan Press. Boghossian, P. (2006). Behaviorism, constructivism, and Socratic pedagogy. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 38(6), 713-722. Breda, A., Font, V. & Pino-Fan, L.R. (2018). Criterios valorativos y normativos en la Didáctica de las Matemáticas: el caso del constructo idoneidad didáctica. Bolema, 32 (60), p. 255 - 278. Brousseau, B. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer A. P. Burgos, & Godino, J. D. (2019). Trabajando juntos situaciones introductorias de razonamiento proporcional en primaria. Análisis de una experiencia de enseñanza centrada en el profesor, en el estudiante y en el contenido. Bolema, 33 (63), 389-410. Burgos, M. & Godino, J. D. (2020). Modelo ontosemiótico de referencia de la proporcionalidad. Implicaciones para la planificación curricular en primaria y secundaria. Avances de Investigación en Educación Matemática - AIEM (en prensa). Ernest, P. (1994). Varieties of constructivism: Their metaphors, epistemologies, and pedagogical implications. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education, 2, 1-14. Font, V., Godino, J. D. & Gallardo, J. (2013). The emergence of objects from mathematical practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82, 97–124. Fox, R. (2001). Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27 (1), 23-35. Freudenthal, H. (1973). Mathematics as an educational task. Dordrecht: Reidel. Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China lectures. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Godino, J. D. (2013). Indicadores de la idoneidad didáctica de procesos de enseñanza y aprendizaje de las matemáticas. Cuadernos de Investigación y Formación en Educación Matemática, 11, 111-132. Godino, J. D. (2019). How to teach mathematics and experimental sciences? Solving the inquiring versus transmission dilemma. In K. O. Villalba-Condori, A. Adúriz-Bravo, F. J. García-Peñalvo & J. Lavonen (Eds.), Proceeding of the Congreso Internacional Sobre Educación y Tecnología en Ciencias - CISETC 2019 (Arequipa, Perú, December 10-12, 2019) (pp. 71-81). Aachen, Germany: CEUR-WS.org. Godino, J. D. Aké, L., Gonzato, M. & Wilhelmi, M. R. (2014). Niveles de algebrización de la actividad matemática escolar. Implicaciones para la formación de maestros. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 32.1, 199-219. Godino J. D., Batanero C., Cañadas G. R., & Contreras, J. M. (2015). Linking inquiry and transmission in teaching and learning mathematics. En K. Krainer & N. Vondrobá (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CEME9, 4-8 February 2015) (pp. 2642-2648). Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Education and ERME. Godino, J. D. Batanero, C. & Font, V. (2007). The onto-semiotic approach to research in mathematics education. ZDM. The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 39 (1-2), 127-135. Godino, J. D., Batanero, C. & Font, V. (2019). The onto-semiotic approach: implications for the prescriptive character of didactics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 39 (1), 37- 42. Godino, J. D., Contreras, A. & Font, V. (2006). Análisis de procesos de instrucción basado en el enfoque ontológico-semiótico de la cognición matemática. Recherches en Didactiques des Mathematiques, 26 (1), 39-88. Godino, J. D., Font, V., Wilhelmi, M. R. & Castro, C. de (2009). Aproximación a la dimensión normativa en Didáctica de la Matemática desde un enfoque ontosemiótico. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 27(1), 59–76. Godino, J. D., Font, V., Wilhelmi, M. R. y Lurduy, O. (2011). Why is the learning of elementary arithmetic concepts difficult? Semiotic tools for understanding the nature of mathematical objects. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 77 (2), 247-265. Godino, J. D., Neto, T., Wilhelmi, M. R., Aké, L., Etchegaray, S. & Lasa, A. (2015). Niveles de algebrización de las prácticas matemáticas escolares. Articulación de las perspectivas ontosemiótica y antropológica. Avances de Investigación en Educación Matemática, 8, 117-142. Godino, J. D., Rivas, H., Burgos, M. & Wilhelmi, M. D. (2018). Analysis of didactical trajectories in teaching and learning mathematics: overcoming extreme objectivist and constructivist positions. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 147-161 Harris, P. L (2012). The child as anthropologist. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 35 (3), 259-277. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. Hudson P., Miller S. P., & Butler F. (2006). Adapting and merging explicit instruction within reform based mathematics classrooms. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 19-32 Jonassen D. H. (1991). Objectivism vs. constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educacional Technology Research & Development, 39(3), 5-14. Kirschner P. A., Sweller J., & Clark R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. Lamon, S. (2007). Rational number and proportional reasoning. Toward a theoretical framework for research. En, F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 629-667). New York, NY: Information Age Pub Inc. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517–538. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59 (1), 14 - 19. Miyakawa, T. y Winsløw, C. (2009). Didactical designs for students’ proportional reasoning: an “open approach” lesson and a “fundamental situation”. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 72, 199–218. Radford, L. (2006). Introducción. Semiótica y educación matemática. Revista Latinoamericana de Matemática Educativa, Número especial, pp. 7-22. Radford, L. (2014). De la teoría de la objetivación. Revista Latinoamericana de Etnomatemática, 7(2), 132-150. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In: D. Grouws (Ed.). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (p. 334-370). New York: MacMillan. Simon M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy form a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 114-145. Simon M. A., & Tzur R. (2004). Explicating the role of mathematical tasks in conceptual learning: An elaboration of the Hypothetical Learning Trajectory. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 91-104. Steele M. M. (2005). Teaching students with learning disabilities: Constructivism of behaviorism? Current Issues in Education, 8(10). Retrieved from http://cie.ed.asu.edu/coume8/number10 Sweller J., Kirschner P. A., & Clark R. E. (2007). Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work: A reply to commentaries. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 115-121. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. Yale University Press. Zhang, L. (2016). Is inquiry-based science teaching worth the effort? Some thoughts worth considering. Science Education, 25, 897-915. Wilhelmi, M. R. (2017). Proporcionalidad en Educación Primaria y Secundaria. En J. M. Contreras, P. Arteaga, G. R. Cañadas, M. M. Gea, B. Giacomone y M. M. López-Martín (Eds.), Actas del Segundo Congreso International Virtual sobre el Enfoque Ontosemiótico del Conocimiento y la Instrucción Matemáticos. Disponible en, enfoqueontosemiotico.ugr.es/civeos.html Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York, NY: The MacMillan Company. Wittgenstein, L. (1978). Remarks on the foundations of mathematics (3rd. ed.). Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell. Vygotsky, L. S. (1993). Pensamiento y lenguaje. [Obras escogidas II, pp. 9-287]. Madrid: Visor.