Un micromundo para el estudio de paralelismo con triángulos y cuadriláteros en la escuela secundaria

Referencias

Balacheff, N. (1987), “Processus de preuve et situations de validation”, Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 18, núm. 2, pp. 146-176. –––––– (2000), Procesos de prueba en los alumnos de Matemáticas, Colombia, Una Empresa Docente y Universidad de los Andes. Boero, P., R. Garuti, E. Lemut y M.A. Mariotti (1996), “Challenging the Traditional School Approach to Theorems: A Hypothesis about the Cognitive Unity of Theorems”, en L. Puig y A. Gutiérrez (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th PME Con- ference of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education, Valencia, Universitat de València, vol. 2, pp. 113-120. Chevallard, Y. (2000), La transposición didáctica. Del saber sabio al saber enseñado, Argentina, Aique Grupo Editorial. De Villiers, M. (1993), “El papel y la función de la demostración en matemáticas”, Épsilon, núm. 26, pp. 15-30. [Trad. del inglés: “The Role and Function of Proof in Mathematics”, Pythagoras, vol. 24, núm. 17, 1990.] Dreyfus, T. (1994), “The Role of Cognitive Tools in Mathematics Education”, en R. Biehler, R.W. Scholz, R. Straesser y B. Winkelmann (eds.), Didactics of Mat- hematics as a Scientific Discipline, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 201-211. Edwards, L.D. (1998), “Embodying Mathematics and Science: Microworlds as Representations”, Journal of Mathematical Behavior, vol. 17, núm. 1, pp. 53-78. Fischbein, E. (1993), “The Theory of Figural Concepts”, Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 24, pp. 139-162. Godino, J.D. y C. Batanero B. (1994), “Significado institucional y personal de los objetos matemáticos”, Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, vol. 14, núm. 3, pp. 325-355. Godino, J.D. y A.M. Recio (1997), “Meaning of Proofs in Mathematics Education”, en E. Pehkonen (ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education, Lahti, Universidad de Helsinki, Finlandia, vol. 2, pp. 313-320. Goldenberg, E.P. y A.A. Cuoco (1998), “What is Dynamic Geometry?”, en R. Lehrer y D. Chazan (eds.), Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry and Space, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 351- 367. Hanna, G. (1996), “The Ongoing Value of Proof”, en L. Puig y A. Gutiérrez (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Valencia, Universitat de València, vol. 1, pp. 21-34. (Trad. al castellano en http://www.uaq.mx/matemáticas/articulos. html?0102.) Hersh, R. (1993), “Proving is Convincing and Explaining”, Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 24, núm. 4, pp. 389-399. Hölzl, R. (1995), “Between Drawing and Figure”, en R. Sutherland y J. Mason (eds.), Exploiting Mental Imagery with Computers in Mathematics Education, Berlín, Springer, pp. 117-124. Hoyles, C. y R. Noss (1987), “Synthesizing Mathematical Conceptions and their Formalization through the Construction of a Logo-based School Mathematics Curriculum”, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, vol. 18, núm. 4, pp. 581-595. –––––– (2003), “Microworlds: The Next Generation”, en E. Filloy Y. (coord.), Matemática educativa. Aspectos de la investigación actual, México, Cinvestav-FCE, pp. 112-120. Hoyles, C. y K. Jones (1998), “Proof in Dynamic Geometry Contexts”, en C. Mammana y V. Villani (eds.), Perspectives on the Teaching of Geometry for the 21st Century, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 121-128. Laborde, C. y B. Capponi (1994), “Cabri-Géomètre constituant d’un milieu pour l’apprentissage de la notion de figure géométrique”, Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, vol. 14, núms. 1-2, pp. 165-210. Larios O., V. (2003), “Geometrical Rigidity: An Obstacle in Using Dynamic Geometry Software in a Geometry Course”, en M.A. Mariotti (ed.), Proceedings of the Third Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Bellaria, Italia, Edizioni Plus, Pisa University Press. (Disponible en http://www.dm.unipi.it/~didattica/CERME3/proceedings/Groups/TG7/TG7_LariosOsorio_cerme3.pdf.) Maracci, M. (2001), “Drawing in the Problem Solving Process”, en J. Novotná (ed.), Proceedings of 2nd Conference of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, Praga, Charles University, pp. 478-488. Mariotti, M.A. (2000), “Introduction to Proof: The Mediation of a Dynamic Soft- ware Environment”, Educational Studies in Mathematics, vol. 44, pp. 25-53. Nagel, E. y J.R. Newmann (1979), El teorema de Gödel, España, Tecnos. Olivero, F. (2003a), “Cabri as Shared Workspace within the Proving Process”, en N.A. Pateman, B.J. Dougherty y J. Zilliox (eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for Psychology of Mathematics Education, Honolulú, vol. 3, pp. 429-436. –––––– (2003b), The Proving Process within a Dynamic Geometry Environment, Tesis de doctorado, Bristol, University of Bristol, Graduate School of Education. Papert, S. (1982), Desafío a la mente. Computadoras y educación, Buenos Aires, Galápago. Sánchez S., E. (2003), “La demostración en geometría y los procesos de reconfiguración”, Educación Matemática, vol. 15, núm. 2, pp. 27-54. Straesser, R. (2001), “Cabri-Géométre: Does Dynamic Geometry Software Change Geometry and its Teaching and Learning?”, International Journal of Computer for Mathematical Learning, vol. 6, núm. 3, pp. 319-333. Sutherland, R. y N. Balacheff (1999), “Didactical Complexity of Computational Environments for the Learning of Mathematics”, International Journal of Computer for Mathematical Learning, vol. 4, pp. 1-26. Thurston, W.P. (1994), “On Proof and Progress in Mathematics”, Bulletin (new series) of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 30, núm. 2, pp. 161-177. Ursini L., S. (1993), Pupils’ Approaches to Different Characterizations of Variable in Logo, Tesis de doctorado, Londres, Universidad de Londres, Instituto de Educación.