What is the point of group discussion in mathematics?

Educational Studies in Mathematics - Tập 16 - Trang 205-214 - 1985
Celia Hoyles1
1University of London Institute of Education, London, England

Tóm tắt

This paper sets out the implications of using pupil-pupil discussion within mathematics classrooms and describes the different ways that such discussion might promote mathematical understanding. It distinguishes the following aspects of a discussion: the organisation and articulation of one's own ideas for oneself; the elaboration of one's own ideas for communication to another; the dynamic feedback inherent in dialogue; and the creation of cognitive conflict and an awareness of the need for decentration. The paper then presents a framework within which discussion could most usefully take place, and the learning of the computing language, Logo, is presented as an example of a context which could satisfy the criteria suggested.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Austin J. L. and Howson A. G.: 1979, ‘Language and mathematical eduction’,Educational Studies in Mathematics 10, 161–197. Balacheff, N.: 1980, ‘The sense of mathematical explanation’,Proceedings of IGPME, Berkeley, California. Balacheff, N. and Laborde, C.: 1984, ‘Language and symbolique et preuves dans l'enseignement mathematique: une approche socio-cognitive’. in Doise, W. and Mugny, G. (eds). Forthcoming. Barnes D.: 1976,From Communication to Curriculum’, Penguin, London. Barnes D. and Todd F.: 1977,Communication and Learning in Small Groups, R.K.P., London. Bell A. W. et al.: 1983,Review of Research in Mathematical Education Part A, NFER-Nelson, Windsor. Bernstein B.: 1965, ‘A socio-linguistic approach to social learning’, in Gould J. (ed.),Social Science Survey, Penguin, London. Bernstein B.: 1970, ‘A socio-linguistic approach to socialisation with reference to educability’, in Gumper J. and Hynes D. (eds.),Directions in Socio-linguistics, Holt, Rinehart and Wilson, Eastbourne, UK. Booth L. R.: 1981, ‘Child methods in secondary mathematics’,Educational Studies in Mathematics 12, 29–41. Bruner J.: 1962,On Knowing, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass. Bruner J. S.: 1964, ‘The course of cognitive growth’,Am. Psych. 19, 1–15. Bruner J. S.: 1975, ‘Language as an instrument of thought’, in Davies A. (ed.),Problems of Language and Learning’, S.S.R.C., London. Cockcroft W. et al.: 1982,Mathmatics Counts, H.M.S.O., London. Damon W.: 1979, ‘Why study social-cognitive development?’,Human Development,22, 206–211. De Vries D. and Slavin R.: 1978, ‘Team games—fournaments: A research review’,J. Research Devel. in Education,12, 28–38. Doise W.: 1978,Groups and Individuals, C.U.P., Cambridge. Donaldson M.: 1978,Children's Minds, Fontana/Collins, London. Fletcher T. J.: 1983,Microcomputers and Mathematics in Schools—a discussion paper’, D.E.S., London. Glachan M. and Light P.: 1982, ‘Peer interactions and learning: can two wrongs make a right?’. In Butterworth G. (ed.)Social Cognition in the Development of Understanding, Harvester, Brighton. Hoyles C.: 1982, ‘The pupil's view of mathematics learning’,Education Studies in Mathematics 13, 349–372. Hoyles, C. and Sutherland, R.: 1983, ‘An investigation of the pupil-centred approach to the learning of Logo in the secondary school mathematics classroom’,Research Proposal Leverhulme Trust. Hoyles, C., Sutherland, R. and Evans, J.: 1984, ‘Pairs of children working with Logo in their mathematics classrooms’,Report to Leverhulme Trust. Johnson D. and Johnson R.: 1980, ‘The instructional use of co-operative competitive and individualistic goal structures’, in Walbert H. (ed.),Educational Environments and Effects, McCuthchan, Berkeley, California. Light P.: 1983, ‘Social interaction and cognitive development: a review of post-piagetian research’, in Meadows S. (ed.),Developing Thinking, Methuen, London. Light P. H. and Gilmour A.: 1983, ‘Conservation or conversation? Contextual facilitation of inappropriate conservation judgements’,Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 36, 356–363. Mugny G. et al.: 1981, ‘Interpersonal Co-ordination and sociological differences in the construction of the intellect’, in Stevenson G. and Davis G. B. (eds.),Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 1, Wiley, Chichester. Noss, R.: 1983, ‘Doing maths while learning Logo’,Maths Teaching 104. Smedslund J.: 1966, ‘Les origenes sociales de la decentration’, in Grize J. and Inhelder B. (eds.),Psychologie et Epistemiologie Genetique: Theories Piagetians, Dunod, Montrouge. Papert S.: 1980,Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas, Harvester, Brighton. Piaget J.: 1926,The Language and Thought of the Child, R.K.P., London. Vygotsky L. S.: 1962,Thought and Language, MIT, Cambridge, Mass. J. Wiley, NY. Walkerdine V.: 1982, ‘From context to text: a psychosemiotic approach to abstract thought’, in Beveridge M. (ed.),Children Thinking Through Language, Edward Arnold, London. Walkerdine V. and Sinha C.: 1978, ‘The internal triangle: language, reasoning and the social context’, in Markova A. (ed.),The Social Context of Language, Wiley, Chichester. Yeomans A.: 1983,Collaborative Group Work: A Research Review, University of Leicester School of Education, Leicester.