Generalization, Assimilation, and Accommodation

Allison Dorko

Abstract


Generalization is critical to mathematical thought and to learning mathematics. However, students at all levels struggle to generalize. In this paper, I present a theoretical analysis connecting Piaget’s assimilation and accommodation constructs to Harel and Tall’s (1991) framework for generalization in advanced mathematics. I offer a theoretical argument and empirical examples of students generalizing graphing from R2 to R3.  The work presented here contributes to the field by (a) drawing attention to particular cognitive activities that underpin generalization, (b) explaining empirical findings (my own and others’) occurring as a result of particular cognitive activities, and (c) providing implications for influencing student cognition in the classroom.


Keywords


generalization; assimilation; accommodation; graphing; function machine

Full Text:

PDF

References


Dorko, A. (2016). What do students attend to when first graphing y = 3 in R3? In T. Fukawa-Connelly, N. Infante, M. Wawro, and S. Brown (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, (pp. 111–124). Pittsburgh, PA: West Virginia University. Retrieved from http://sigmaa.maa.org/rume/RUME19v3.pdf

Dorko, A. (2017). Students’ generalisation of function from single- to multivariable settings (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR. Retrieved from https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/graduate_thesis_or_dissertations/9p290g05d

Dorko, A. & Lockwood, E. (2016). What do students attend to when first graphing in R3? In M. B. Wood, E. E. Turner, M. Civil, & J. A. Eli (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 565 - 572). Tucson, AZ: The University of Arizona. Retrieved from http://www.pmena.org/pmenaproceedings/PMENA%2038%202016%20Proceedings.pdf

Dorko, A. & Weber, E. (2014). Generalising calculus ideas from two dimensions to three: How multivariable calculus students think about domain and range. Research in Mathematics Education. 16(3), 269–287. doi:10.1080/14794802.2014.919873

Ellis, A. B. (2007). A taxonomy for categorizing generalizations: Generalizing actions and reflection generalizations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(2), 221–262. doi:10.1080/10508400701193705

Ellis, A. B., Tillema, E., Lockwood, E., & Moore, K. C. (2017). Generalization across domains: The relating-forming-extending generalization framework. In E. Galindo & J. Newton (Eds.), Proceedings of the thirty-ninth Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 667–684). Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED581351.pdf

Gallagher, J. M. & Reid, D. K. (2002). The Learning Theory of Piaget & Inhelder. NE: Authors Choice Press.

Harel, G., & Tall, D. (1991). The general, the abstract, and the generic in advanced mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 11(1), 38–42. Available at https://www.jstor.org/stable/40248005?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

Hunting, R. (1997). Clinical interview methods in mathematics education research and practice. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 16(2), 145–165.

Kabael, T. U. (2011). Generalizing single variable functions to two variable functions, function machine and APOS. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 484–499. Available at https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ919912.pdf

Martínez-Planell, R., & Gaisman, M. T. (2013). Graphs of functions of two variables: results from the design of instruction. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44(5), 663–672. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2013.780214

Martínez-Planell, R., & Gaisman, M. T. (2012). Students’ understanding of the general notion of a function of two variables. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81(3), 365–284. doi:10.1007/s10649-012-9408-8

Martínez-Planell, R., & Trigueros, M. (2012). Activity sets to help student graphing of functions of two variables. In Proceedings of the 12th International Congress of Mathematics Education (pp. 2759–2769). Retrieved from https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319106854

Mitchelmore, M. C. (2002, May). The role of abstraction and generalisation in the development of mathematical knowledge. Paper presented at the East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education (EARCOME) (2nd) and the Southeast Asian Conference on Mathematics Education (9th), Singapore. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED466962.pdf

Moore, K.C., Liss II, D.R., Silverman, J., Paoletti, T., LaForest, K.R., & Musgrave, S. (2013). Pre-service teachers’ meanings and non-canonical graphs. In M., Martinez & A. Castro Superfine (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 441-448). Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago. Retrieved from http://www.pmena.org/pmenaproceedings/PMENA%2035%202013%20Proceedings.pdf

Moore, K. C., Stevens, I. E., Paoletti, T., Hobson, N. L. F., & Liang, B. (2019). Pre-service teachers’ figurative and operative graphing actions. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 56, 100692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2019.01.008

Moore, K. C., & Thompson, P. W. (2015). Shape thinking and students’ graphing activity. In T. Fukawa-Connelly, N. I. Engelke, K. Keene, & M. Zandieh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 782–789). Pittsburgh, PA: West Virginia University.

Piaget, J. (1980). Schemes of Action and Language Learning. In M. Piattelli-Palmarini (Ed.), Language and Learning: The Debate Between Jean Piaget and Noam Chomsky (pp. 23–34). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Steffe, L. (1991). The constructivist teaching experiment: Illustrations and implications. In E. von Glasersfeld (Ed.), Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education (pp. 177–194). Dordrect, the Netherlands: Springer.

Steffe, L. P. & Wiegel, H. G. (1992). On reforming practice in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23(5), 445–465.

Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In R. A. Lesh & A. E. Kelly (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267–307). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Tall, D. O., McGowen, M., & DeMarois, P. (2000). The function machine as a cognitive root for building a rich concept image of the function concept. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Tucson, AZ. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=ED446945

Thompson, P.W. (2016). Researching mathematical meanings for teaching. In L. D. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 435–461). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.

Trigueros, M., & Martínez-Planell, R. (2010). Geometrical representations in the learning of two-variable functions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 73(1), 3–19. doi: 10.1007/s10649-009-9201-5

von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. London: Falmer Press.

Wagner, J. F. (2010). A transfer-in-pieces consideration of the perception of structure in the transfer of learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(4), 443–479.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.