检视逆的概念:透过独立文献回顾建立理论

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
John Paul Cook , April Richardson , Steve Strand , Zackery Reed , Kathleen Melhuish
{"title":"检视逆的概念:透过独立文献回顾建立理论","authors":"John Paul Cook ,&nbsp;April Richardson ,&nbsp;Steve Strand ,&nbsp;Zackery Reed ,&nbsp;Kathleen Melhuish","doi":"10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101100","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Inverse is a critical topic throughout the K–16 mathematics curriculum where students encounter the notion of mathematical inverse across many contexts. The literature base on inverses is substantial, yet context-specific and compartmentalized. That is, extant research examines students’ reasoning with inverses within specific algebraic contexts. It is currently unclear what might be involved in productively reasoning with inverses across algebraic contexts, and whether the specific ways of reasoning from the literature can be abstracted to more general ways of reasoning about inverse. To address this issue, we conducted a standalone literature review to explicate and exemplify three cross-context ways of reasoning that, we hypothesize, can support students’ productive engagement with inverses in a variety of algebraic contexts: <em>inverse as an undoing</em>, <em>inverse as a manipulated element</em>, and <em>inverse as a coordination of the binary operation, identity, and set</em>. Findings also include explicating affordances and constraints for each of these ways of reasoning. Finally, we reflect on when and how standalone literature reviews can serve the purpose of unifying fragmented and obscured insights about key mathematical ideas.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47481,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the concept of inverse: Theory-building via a standalone literature review\",\"authors\":\"John Paul Cook ,&nbsp;April Richardson ,&nbsp;Steve Strand ,&nbsp;Zackery Reed ,&nbsp;Kathleen Melhuish\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jmathb.2023.101100\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Inverse is a critical topic throughout the K–16 mathematics curriculum where students encounter the notion of mathematical inverse across many contexts. The literature base on inverses is substantial, yet context-specific and compartmentalized. That is, extant research examines students’ reasoning with inverses within specific algebraic contexts. It is currently unclear what might be involved in productively reasoning with inverses across algebraic contexts, and whether the specific ways of reasoning from the literature can be abstracted to more general ways of reasoning about inverse. To address this issue, we conducted a standalone literature review to explicate and exemplify three cross-context ways of reasoning that, we hypothesize, can support students’ productive engagement with inverses in a variety of algebraic contexts: <em>inverse as an undoing</em>, <em>inverse as a manipulated element</em>, and <em>inverse as a coordination of the binary operation, identity, and set</em>. Findings also include explicating affordances and constraints for each of these ways of reasoning. Finally, we reflect on when and how standalone literature reviews can serve the purpose of unifying fragmented and obscured insights about key mathematical ideas.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47481,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Mathematical Behavior\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Mathematical Behavior\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732312323000706\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Mathematical Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0732312323000706","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

逆是贯穿K-16数学课程的一个关键主题,学生在许多情况下都会遇到数学逆的概念。基于逆的文献是大量的,但具体的上下文和划分。也就是说,现有的研究考察了学生在特定代数背景下的逆推理。目前还不清楚在代数背景下对逆进行有效推理可能涉及什么,以及是否可以将文献中的特定推理方式抽象为更一般的逆推理方式。为了解决这个问题,我们进行了一项独立的文献综述,以解释和举例说明三种跨上下文的推理方式,我们假设,可以支持学生在各种代数上下文中对逆的有效参与:逆作为撤消,逆作为被操纵的元素,逆作为二进制操作,恒等和集合的协调。研究结果还包括解释每种推理方式的可用性和约束。最后,我们反思了独立的文献综述何时以及如何能够统一关于关键数学思想的碎片化和模糊的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining the concept of inverse: Theory-building via a standalone literature review

Inverse is a critical topic throughout the K–16 mathematics curriculum where students encounter the notion of mathematical inverse across many contexts. The literature base on inverses is substantial, yet context-specific and compartmentalized. That is, extant research examines students’ reasoning with inverses within specific algebraic contexts. It is currently unclear what might be involved in productively reasoning with inverses across algebraic contexts, and whether the specific ways of reasoning from the literature can be abstracted to more general ways of reasoning about inverse. To address this issue, we conducted a standalone literature review to explicate and exemplify three cross-context ways of reasoning that, we hypothesize, can support students’ productive engagement with inverses in a variety of algebraic contexts: inverse as an undoing, inverse as a manipulated element, and inverse as a coordination of the binary operation, identity, and set. Findings also include explicating affordances and constraints for each of these ways of reasoning. Finally, we reflect on when and how standalone literature reviews can serve the purpose of unifying fragmented and obscured insights about key mathematical ideas.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Mathematical Behavior
Journal of Mathematical Behavior EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
17.60%
发文量
69
期刊介绍: The Journal of Mathematical Behavior solicits original research on the learning and teaching of mathematics. We are interested especially in basic research, research that aims to clarify, in detail and depth, how mathematical ideas develop in learners. Over three decades, our experience confirms a founding premise of this journal: that mathematical thinking, hence mathematics learning as a social enterprise, is special. It is special because mathematics is special, both logically and psychologically. Logically, through the way that mathematical ideas and methods have been built, refined and organized for centuries across a range of cultures; and psychologically, through the variety of ways people today, in many walks of life, make sense of mathematics, develop it, make it their own.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信