From drag and drop with the mouse to finger manipulations on multi touch devices: how ICT practices can foster mathematical inquiries

Referencias

Antonini, S., Mariotti, M.A. (2009), Abduction and the explanation of anomalies: the case of proof by contradiction. In Proceedings of the 6th ERME Conference, Lyon, France, 2009. Arzarello, F., Bairral, M., Dané, C. (2014a). Moving from dragging to touchscreen: geometrical learning with geometric dynamic software, Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 33, pp. 39-51. Arzarello, F., Bairral, M., Dané, C.,Yasuyuki I. (2013). Ways of manipulation touchscreen in one geometrical dynamic software. Proceedings of ICTMT, Bari, July 9-12, 2013. 59-64. (http://www.dm.uniba.it/ictmt11/download/ICTMT11_Proceedings.pdf) Arzarello, F., Bairral, M., Soldano, C. (2014b). Learning with touchscreen devices: the manipulation to approach and the game approach as strategies to improve geometric thinking. Subplenary Conference. Proceedings of LXVI CIEAEM, Lyon, July 21-25, 2014. Arzarello, F., Bartolini Bussi, M.G., Leung, A., Mariotti, M.A., & Stevenson, I. (2012). Experimental Approaches to Theoretical Thinking: Artefacts and Proofs. In: Hanna, G., de Villiers, G. (Ed.s), Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education, New ICMI Studies Series, Vol. 15, Berlin-New York: Springer. 97-146. Balacheff, N. (1988). Aspects of proof in pupils’ practice of school mathematics. (In D.Pimm (Ed.), Mathematics, teachers and children. London: Hodder and Stoughton). 216-235. Devlin, K. (2011). Mathematics education for a new era: Video games as a medium for learning. CRC Press. Dvora, T. (2012). Unjustified Assumptions in Geometry made by high school students in Israel, PhD Dissertation, Tel Aviv University - The Jaime and Joan Constantiner School of Education Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer. Fischbein,E.(1982), Intuition and proof, For the Learning of mathematics3 (2), Nov., 8-24. Hanna, G. and de Villiers, M. (2012). Proof and Proving in Mathematics Education. The 19th ICMI Study. Series: New ICMI Study Series, Vol. 15. Berlin/New York: Springer. Healy, L. and Hoyles, C. (2000). A Study of Proof Conceptions in Algebra, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Vol. 31, No. 4., 396-428. Hintikka, J. (1998), The principles of Mathematics revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Hintikka, J. (1998). The principles of mathematics revisited. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press. Hintikka, J. (1999), Inquiry as Inquiry: A logic of Scientific Discovery. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. Kosko, K. W., Rougee, A., & Herbst, P. (2014). What actions do teachers envision when asked to facilitate mathematical argumentation in the classroom?. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(3), 459-476. Mason, J. (2005). Frameworks for learning, teaching and research: theory and practice. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of PME-NA, Roanoke. Peirce, C.S., 1960, Collected papers, edited by C. Hartshorne and P.Weiss, Cambridge (Mass.): Harvard University Press. Reiss, K., Klieme, E., & Heinze, A. (2001). Prerequisites for the understanding of proofs in the geometry classroom. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proc. 25th Conf. of the int. Group for the Psychology of Math. Education(Vol. 4, pp. 97-104). Utrecht: PME.