#
Student Teachers’ Use of Technology-Generated Representations: Exemplars and Rationales
Article

## Nicole Juersivich, Joe Garofalo, Virginia Fraser, University of Virginia, United States

Journal of Technology and Teacher Education Volume 17, Number 2, ISSN 1059-7069 Publisher: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education, Waynesville, NC USA

## Abstract

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics identified technology as a feature of high-quality mathematics education. One way that teachers can use technology to facilitate their pupils’ mathematical understanding is through the generating and exploring multiple representations of mathematical ideas. The purposes of this study are to: (1) observe and describe how pre-service mathematics teachers, who had a variety of experiences doing and practice-teaching mathematics in a technology-rich environment, subsequently incorporated technology-generated representations into their student teaching and (2) understand and expound on their rationales for using such representations. Consistent with the purposes of this study, the data collection is both descriptive and qualitative. Data were collected through various means and mediums such as observations, interviews, and artifacts. We found that these pre-service teachers appropriately utilized the provided technology to generate representations for the purpose of helping their pupils to develop conceptual understanding and reasoning. These pre-service teachers realized that technology makes possible representations that support pupils’ sense making in ways that could not be actualized under typical conditions.

## Citation

Juersivich, N., Garofalo, J. & Fraser, V. (2009). Student Teachers’ Use of Technology-Generated Representations: Exemplars and Rationales. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 17(2), 149-173. Waynesville, NC USA: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education. Retrieved January 29, 2020 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/28157/.

© 2009 Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education

### Keywords

## References

View References & Citations Map- Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.
- Ainsworth, S., Bibby, P., & Wood, D. (1997). Information technology and multiple representations: New opportunities—New problems. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 6(1), 93-105.
- Ainsworth, S., Bibby, P., & Wood, D. (2002). Examining the effects of different multiple representational systems in learning primary mathematics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 25-61.
- Borwein, J. M., & Bailey, D.H. (2003). Mathematics by experiment: Plausible reasoning in the 21st century. Natick, MA: AK Peters.
- Bottino, R., & Furinghetti, F. (1996). Emerging of teachers’ conceptions of new subjects inserted in mathematics programs: The case of informatics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 30, 109-134.
- Chazan, D. (1999). On teachers’ mathematical knowledge and student exploration: A personal story about teaching a technologically supported approach in school algebra. International Journal for Computers in Mathematical Learning, 4, 121-149.
- Dwyer, D.C., Ringstaff, C., & Sandholtz, J.H. (1991). Changes in teachers’ beliefs and practices in technology-rich classrooms. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 45-52.
- Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 68-120). New York: Macmillan.
- Garofalo, J., Shockey, T., Harper, S., & Drier, H. (2000). The Impact project at Virginia: promoting appropriate uses of technology in mathematics teaching. Virginia Mathematics Teacher, 25(2), 14-15.
- Goldenberg, E.P. (1988). Mathematics, metaphors, and human factors: Mathematical, technical, and pedagogical challenges in the educational use of graphical representations. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 7, 135-173.
- Goldin, G. (2002). Representation in mathematical learning and problem solving. In L. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 197-218). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Harper, S.R., Schirack, S.O., Stohl, H.D., & Garofalo, J. (2001). Learning mathematics and developing pedagogy with technology: A reply to Browning and Klepsis. [Online
- Heid, M.K. (1997). The technological revolution and the reform of school mathematics. American Journal of Education, 106(1), 5-61.
- Hiebert, J., & LeFevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Jiang, Z., & McClintock, E. (2000). Multiple approaches to problem solving and the use of technology. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(1), 7-20.
- Kaput, J.J. (1989). Linking representations in the symbolic systems of algebra. In S. Wagner & C. Kieran (Eds.), Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp 167-194). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
- Kaput, J.J. (1992). Technology and mathematics education. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 515-556). New York: Macmillan.
- Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M.K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, learning and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60(1), 1-64.
- Lesh, R., Post, T., & Behr, M. (1987). Representations and translations among representations in mathematics learning and problem solving. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems
- Means, B., & Olson, K. (1994). Tomorrow’s schools: Technology and reform in partnership. In B. Means (Ed.), Technology and the education reform (pp. 191-222). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Mergendoller, J.R. (1994). The Curry school of education, University of Virginia. In J.R. Mergendoller, J. Johnston, S. Rockman, & J. Willis, Exemplary approaches to training teachers to use technology—Vol. 1: Case studies (pp. 4.1-4.24). Novato, CA: Beryl Buck Institute for Education.
- Meyer, J., Shinar, D., & Leiser, D. (1997). Multiple factors that determine performance with tables and graphs. Human Factors, 39(2), 268-286.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
- Olive, J., & Leatham, K. (2000, December). Using technology as a learning tool is not enough. Paper presented at the International Conference of Technology in Mathematics Education, Auckland, New Zealand.
- Piez, C., & Voxman, M. (1997). Multiple representations—Using different perspectives to form a clearer picture. The Mathematics Teacher, 90, 164-166.
- Pólya, G. (1945). How to solve it? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Schoenfeld, A. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic Press.
- Vinner, S., & Dreyfus, T. (1989). Images and definitions for the concept of function. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(4), 356-366.
- Waits, B.K., & Demana, F. (2000). Calculators in mathematics teaching and learning: Past, present, and future. In M. J. Burke & F. R. Curcio (Eds.), Learning mathematics for a new century (pp. 51-66). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References## Cited By

View References & Citations Map-
### Novice Mathematics Teachers’ Use of Technology-Generated Representations

#### Virginia Fraser, Indiana University Southeast, United States; Joe Garofalo, University of Virginia, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (Mar 07, 2011) pp. 3984–3992

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.