Att designa för elevers deltagande i ett algebraiskt arbete – elever i årskurs 2 och 3 utforskar visuellt växande mönster

Jenny Fred

doi:10.7146/nomad.v24i3-4.149038

Authors

Jenny Fred

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/nomad.v24i3-4.149038

Abstract

Artikelns syfte är att beskriva och analysera vad i olika lektionssekvenser som skapar förutsättningar för att elever ska engageras i ett algebraiskt arbete och därmed urskiljer kritiska aspekter. Artikeln bygger på data från tre forskningslektioner i vilka lärandeverksamhet (learning activity) tillsammans med Radfords arbete om mönster-generaliseringar har utgjort teoretiska utgångspunkter. I analysen har didaktiska principer från lärandeverksamhet samt kritiska aspekter gällande att uttrycka och argumentera för mönstergeneraliseringar fungerat som analysredskap. Resultatet kan bidra till att fördjupa förståelsen gällande på vilka sätt principerna från lärandeverksamhet kan stödja ett etablerande och upprätthållande av ett algebraiskt arbete och därmed möjliggöra för elevers urskiljande av kritiska aspekter.

References

Björk, M., Nikula, Å., Stensland, P. & Stridfält, A. (2019). Tecken på teoretiskt tänkande om strukturer i bassystemet. Forskning om Undervisning och Lärande, 7 (2), 26-49. https://doi.org/10.61998/forskul.v7i2.27265

Blanton, M. L. & Kaput, J. J. (2011). Functional thinking as a route into algebra in the elementary grades. I J. Cai & E. Knuth (red), Early algebraization: a global dialogue from multiple perspectives (s 5-23). New York: Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17735-4_2

Cai, J. & Knuth, E. (red). (2011). Early algebraization: a global dialogue from multiple perspectives. New York: Springer Science & Business Media. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17735-4

Carlgren, I., Eriksson, I. & Runesson, U. (2017). Learning study. I I. Carlgren (red), Undervisningsutvecklande forskning. Exemplet learning study (s 17-30). Malmö: Gleerups.

Davydov, V. V. (2008). Problems of developmental instruction: a theoretical and experimental psychological study. New York: Nova Science Publishers.

Davydov, V. V., Gorbov, S. F., Mikulina, G. G. & Saveleva, O. V. (2012). Matematikka 1. [Mathematik 1]. Moskva: VitaPress.

Eriksson, H. (2015). Rationella tal som tal. Algebraiska symboler och generella modeller som medierande redskap (Licentiatuppsats). Stockholms universitet.

Eriksson, I. (2017). Lärandeverksamhet som redskap i en Learning study. I I. Carlgren (red). Undervisningsutvecklande forskning. Exemplet learning study (s 61-81). Malmö: Gleerups.

Eriksson, I. (2018). Lärandeverksamhet, lärandeuppgifter & lärandemodeller. I E. Insulander & S. Selander (red), Att bli lärare (s 160-165). Stockholm: Liber.

Eriksson, I., Wettergren, S., Fred, J., Nordin, A.-K., Nyman, M. & Tambour, T. (2019). Materialisering av algebraiska uttryck i helklassdiskussioner med lärandemodeller som medierande redskap i årskurs 1 och 5. Nomad, Nordisk MatematikkDidaktikk, 24 (3-4).

Fred, J. & Boistrup, L. B. (2017). Students' qualitatively different ways of experiencing pattern generalization. Quaderni di Ricerca in Didattica (Mathematics), 27 (2), 155-162.

Fred, J. & Stjernlöf, J. (2014). Uppgifter som redskap för mediering av kritiska aspekter i matematikundervisning. Forskning om Undervisning och Lärande, (12), 21-43. https://doi.org/10.61998/forskul.v2i12.27577

Gorbov, S. F. & Chudinova, E. V. (2000). The effect of modeling on the students' learning (regarding problem formulation). Psychological Science and Education, 2, 96-110.

Kaput, J. J. (2008). What is algebra? What is algebraic thinking? I J. Kaput, D. W. Carraher & M. Blanton (red), Algebra in the early grades (s 5-17). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315097435-2

Kieran, C. (2006). Research on the learning and teaching of algebra. I A. Gutiérrez & P. Boero (red), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education. Past, present and future (s 11-49). Rotterdam: Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789087901127_003

Kieran, C. (2011). Overall commentary on early algebraization: perspectives for research and teaching. I J. Cai & E. Knuth (red), Early algebraization: a global dialogue from multiple perspectives (s 579-593). New York: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17735-4_29

Kieran, C., Pang, J., Schifter, D. & Ng, S. F. (2016). Early algebra: research into its nature, its learning, its teaching. London: Springer International Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32258-2

Kullberg, A. (2011). Vad lär eleverna och vad görs möjligt för dem att lära? I SMDF medlemsblad. Hämtad från http://www.mai.liu.se/SMDF/medlemsblad. pdf

Larsson, M. (2015). Orchestrating mathematical whole-class discussions in the problem-solving classroom: theorizing challenges and support for teachers (Doktorsavhandling). Västerås: Mälardalens högskola.

Leontiev, A. N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Lindberg, V. (2010). Skolans kunskapsinnehåll i ljuset av elevers uppgifter - exemplet matematik. I I. Eriksson, V. Lindberg & E. Österlind (red), Uppdrag undervisning - kunskap och lärande! (s 109-123). Lund: Studentlitteratur.

Lins, R. & Kaput, J. (2004). The early development of algebraic reasoning: the current state of the field. I H. Chick & K. Stacy (red), The future of the teaching and learning of algebra: the 12th ICMI study (s 45-70). New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-8131-6_4

Marton, F. & Tsui, A. B. M. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410609762

Marton, F. (2015). Necessary conditions of learning. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315816876

Mason, J. (1996). Expressing generality and roots of algebra. I N. Bednarz, C. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1732-3_5

Kieran & L. Lee (red), Approaches to algebra: perspectives for research and teaching (s 65-86). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Mulligan, J. & Mitchelmore, M. (2009). Awareness of pattern and structure in early mathematical development. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 21 (2), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217544

Newman, D., Griffin, P. & Cole, M. (1989). The construction zone: working for cognitive change in school. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Radford, L., Bardini, C. & Sabena, C. (2007). Perceiving the general: the multisemiotic dimension of students' algebraic activity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38 (5), 507-530. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034963

Radford, L. (2006). Algebraic thinking and the generalization of patterns: a semiotic perspective. I S. Alatorre, J. L. Cortina, M. Sáiz & A. Méndez (red), PME-NA 2006 Proceedings. Mérida: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.

Radford, L. (2010a). Elementary forms of algebraic thinking in young students. I M. F. Pinto & T. F. Kawasaki (red), Proceedings of PME 34 (Vol. 4, s 73-80). Belo Horizonte: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.

Radford, L. (2010b). Signs, gestures, meanings: algebraic thinking from a cultural semiotic perspective. I V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne & F. Arzarello (red), Proceedings of CERME 6 (s XXXIII-LIII). Lyon: Institut National de Récherche Pédagogique.

Radford, L. (2011). Grade 2 students' non-symbolic algebraic thinking. I J. Cai & E. Knuth (red), Early algebraization: a global dialogue from multiple perspectives (s 303-322). Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-17735-4_17

Radford, L. (2012). Early algebraic thinking: epistemological, semiotic, and developmental issues. I S. J. Cho (red), Proceedings of ICME 12. Intellectual and attitudinal challenges (s 2019-228). Seoul: National University of Seoul.

Radford, L. (2014). On the role of representations and artefacts in knowing and learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85 (3), 405-422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9527-x

Repkin, V. V. (2003). Developmental teaching and learning activity. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 41 (5), 10-33. https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-0405410510

Runesson, U. (2011). Lärares kunskapsarbete - exemplet Learning study. Forskning om Undervisning och Lärande, 5, 7-17.

Ryve, A., Larsson, M. & Nilsson. P. (2011). Analyzing content and participation in classroom discourse: dimensions of variation, mediating tools and conceptual accountability. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 57, 101-114. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2011.628689

Strømskag, H. (2015). A pattern-based approach to elementary algebra. I K. Krainer & N. Vondrová (red), Proceedings of CERME 9 (s 474-480). Prag: Charles Universitet.

Strømskag Måsøval, H. (2011). Factors constraining students' establishment of algebraic generality in shape patterns: a case study of didactical situations in mathematics at a university college (Doktorsavhandling). Universitetet i Agder.

Warren, E. (2005). Young children's ability to generalize the pattern rule for growing patterns. I H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (red), Proceedings of PME 29 (Vol. 4, s 305-312). University of Melbourne.

Warren, E. & Cooper, T. (2008). Generalizing the pattern rule for visual growth patterns: action that support 8-year olds' thinking. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67 (2), 171-185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9092-2

Vygotskij, L. S. (2001). Tänkande och språk. Göteborg: Daidalos.

Zuckerman, G. (2003). The learning activity in the first years of schooling. I A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (red), Vygotsky's educational theory in cultural context (s 39-64). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840975.011

Zuckerman, G. (2004). Development of reflection through learning activity. European Journal of Psychology of Education, XIX (1), 9-18. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173234