Abstract
This study focuses on the role of tools, provided by a computer microworld (C.AR.ME), on the strategies developed by 14-year-old students for the area measurement of a non-convex polygon. Students' strategies on a transformation and a comparison task were interpreted and classified into categories in terms of the tools used for their development. The analysis of the data shows that an environment providing the students with the opportunity to select various tools and asking them to produce solutions `in any possible way' can stimulate them to construct a plurality of solution strategies. The students selected tools appropriate for their cognitive development and expressed their own individual approaches regarding the concept of area measurement. The nature of tools used affected the nature of solution strategies that the students constructed. Moreover, all students were involved in the tasks and succeeded in completing them with more than one correct solution strategy thereby developing a broader view of the concept, although not all of them realized the same strategies. Three different approaches to area measurement emerged from the strategies which were constructed by the students in this microworld: automatic area measurement, provided by the environment, the operation of area measurement using spatial units and the use of area formulae. Almost all the students experienced qualitative aspects of area measurement through being involved in the process of covering areas using spatial units. Students also managed to use the area formulae meaningfully by studying it in relation to automatic area measurement and to area measurement using spatial units. Through these strategies, the concepts of conservation of area and its measurement as well as area formulae were viewed by the students as interrelated. Finally, some basic difficulties regarding area measurement were overcome in this computer environment.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Babbie, E. (1989). The Practice of Social Research. CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Balacheff, N. and Kaput, J. (1996). Computer-based learning environments in mathematics.In A.J. Bishop, K. Klements, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatric and C. Laborde (Eds), International Handbook on Mathematics education (pp. 469–501). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Baturo, A. and Nason, R. (1996). Student teachers' subject matter knowledge within the domain of area measurement. Educational Studies in Mathematics 31: 235–268.
Beattys, C.B. and Maher C.A. (1985). Approaches to learning area measurement and its relation to spatial skill. Proceedings of the 7th PME Conference (pp. 2–7). Colombus, Ohio.
Bell, A., Costello, J. and Kunhemann, D. (1983). Research on Learning and Teaching, Part A. London: NFER – Nelson.
Borba, M. and Confrey, G. (1996). A student's construction of transformations of functions in a multirepresentational environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics 31: 319–337.
Campbell, P.F. (1990). Young children's concept of measure. In L.P. Steffe and T. Wood (Eds), Transforming Children's Mathematics Education (pp. 92–99). Hilsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Carpenter, T.P. (1975). Measurement concepts of first-and second-grade pupils. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 6(1): 3–13.
Carpenter, T.P. (1976). Analysis and synthesis of existing research on measurement. In R.A. Lesh (Ed.), Number and Measurement (pp. 47–83). ERIC/SMEAK Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education Information Analysis Center.
Carpenter, T.P., Coburn, T.G., Reys, R. E. and Wilson, J.W. (1975). Notes from National Assesment: Basic concepts of area and volume. Arithmetic Teacher 22(6): 501–507.
Carpenter, T.P. and Lewis, R. (1976). The development of the concept of a standard unit of measure in young children. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 7: 53–58.
Cohen, L. and Manion, L. (1989). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.
Comiti, C. and Moreira Baltar, P. (1997). Learning process for the concept of area of planar regions in 12-13 year-olds. Area integration rules for grades 4, 6, and 8 pupils. Proceedings of the 21th of PME Conference, vol. 3 (pp. 264–271). Lathi, Finland.
Crawford, K. (1996a). Vygotskian appraches in Human development in the information era. Educational Studies in Mathematics 31: 43–62.
Crawford, K. (1996b). Distributed cognition, technology and change. Proceedings of the 20th of PME Conference, vol. 1 (pp. 81–112). Valencia, Spain.
Douady, R. and Perrin, M-J (1986). Concerning conceptions of area (pupils aged 9 to 11). Proceedings of 10 PME Conference (pp. 253–258). London, England.
Driscoll, M.J. (1981). Measurement in elementary school mathematics. In Research Within Reach (pp. 29–36). Reston, VA: CEMREL, Inc., N.C.T.M.
Hart, K. (1984). Which comes first – length, area, or volume? Arithmetic Teacher 31(9): 16–18, 26–27.
Hart, K-M. (1989). Measurement. In J. Murray (Ed.), Childrens Understanding of Mathematics, vols. 11–16 (pp. 9–22). G. Britain: Athenaeum Press Ltd.
Heraud, B. (1987). Conceptions of area units by 8–9 year old children. In Bergeron, N. Herscovics and C. Kieran (Eds), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Psychology of Mathematics Education, vol. 3 (pp. 299–304). Paris: CNRS-Paris.
Hiebert, J. (1981). Units of measure: Results and implications from national assesment. Arithmetic Teacher 28(6): 38–43.
Hirstein, J., Lamb, C.E. and Osborn, A. (1978). Student misconceptions about area measure. Arithmetic Teacher 25(6): 10–16.
Hoyles, C. and Surtherland, R. (1989). Logo Mathematics in the Classroom. London: Routledge.
Inskeep J-J. E. (1976). Teaching measurement to elementary school children. In D. Nelson and R. Reys (Eds), Measurement in school Mathematics (pp. 60–86). Reston, VA: N.C.T.M.
Johnson, H.C. (1986). Area is a measure. International Journal of Mathematics Education, Science and Technology 17(4): 419–424.
Kidman, G. and Cooper, T.J. (1997). Area integration rules for grade 4, 6, and 8 pupils. Proceedings of the 21st of PME Conference, vol. 3 (pp. 136–143). Lathi, Finland.
Kordaki, M. and Potari, D. (1998a). Children's approaches to area measurement through different contexts. Journal of Mathematical Behavior 17(3): 303–316.
Kordaki, M. and Potari, D. (1998b). A learning environment for the conservation of area and its measurement: A computer microworld. Computers and Education 31: 405–422.
Kordaki, M. and Potari, D. (1998c). L'étude-pilote de l' evaluation d' un microcosme qui se rapporte a la notion de la conservation de la surface. Actes du 1er Colloque en Didactique des Mathematiques (pp. 280–288). Rethymnon, Greece.
Kordaki, M. (1999). The Concepts of Conservation of Area and Its Measurement Through the Design, Implementation and Evaluation of an Educational Software. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Patras, Greece.
Kordaki, M. (2001, in preparation). The role of the tools of a computer microworld on pupils transformation and comparison strategies regarding the concept of conservation of area.
Lemerise, T. (1992). On intra interindividual differences in children's learning styles. In C. Hoyles and R. Noss (Eds), Learning Mathematics and Logo (pp. 191–222). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Liebeck, P. (1987). Measurement. In How Children Learn Mathematics (pp. 125–220). Middlesex: Penguin Books Ltd.
Maher, C.A. and Beattys, C.B. (1986). Examining the construction of area and its measurement by ten to fourteen year old children. In E. Lansing, G. Lappan and R. Even (Eds), Proceedings of 8th PME Conference (pp. 163–168). N. A.
Marton, F. (1988). Phenomenography: Exploring different conceptions of reality. In D.M. Fetterman (Ed.), Qualitative Approaches to Evaluation in Education: The Silent Scientific Revolution (pp. 176–205). New York: Praeger.
Menon, R. (1996). Assesing preservice teachers' conceptual understanding of perimeter and area. In Proceedings of the 20th of PME Conference, vol. 1 (p. 184). Valencia, Spain.
Noss, R. and Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on Mathematical Meanings: Learning Cultures and Computers. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Nunes, T., Light, P. and Mason, J. (1993). Tools for thought: The measurement of length and area. Learning and Instruction 3: 39–54.
Owens, K. and Outhred, L. (1997). Early representations of tiling areas. Proceedings of the 21st of PME Conference, vol. 3 (pp. 312–319). Lathi, Finland.
Piaget, J., Inhelder, B. and Sheminska, A. (1981). The Child's Conception of Geometry. N.Y.: Norton and Company.
Rahim, M.H. and Sawada, D. (1990). The duality of qualitative and quantitative knowwing in school geometry. International Journal of Mathematics Education, Science and Technology 21(2): 303–308.
Reynolds, A. and Wheatley, G.H. (1996). Elementary pupils' construction and coordination of units in an area setting. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 27(5): 564–581.
Sutherland, R. (1995). Mediating mathematical action. In R. Sutherland and J. Mason (Eds), Exploiting Mental imagery with Computers in Mathematics Education (pp. 71–81). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Tierney, C., Boyd, C. and Davis, G. (1986). Prospective primary teachers' conceptions of area. 10th PME Conference (pp. 307–315).
von Glasersfeld, E. (1990). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In R.B. Davis, C.A. Maher and N. Noddings (Eds), Constuctivist Views on the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics (pp. 1–3). Reston VA: N.C.T.M.
von Glasersfeld, E. (1991). Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education. Boston: Kluwer.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Weir, S. (1992). LEGO-Logo: A vehicle for learning. In C. Hoyles and R. Noss (Eds), Learning Mathematics and Logo (pp. 165–190). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kordaki, M., Potari, D. The Effect of Area Measurement Tools on Student Strategies: The Role of a Computer Microworld. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 7, 65–100 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016051411284
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016051411284