| Paper title: |
The Effect of Visual and Interactive Tools on Students’ Performance in Identifying one-to-one Functions |
| Published in: | Issue 1, (Vol. 6) / 2012 |
| Publishing date: | 2011-04-11 |
| Pages: | 24-29 |
| Author(s): | FRAIJ Fares, AL-MAHADEEN Bassam |
| Abstract. | This paper investigates the effect of using computer applications on students’ capabilities in distinguishing a type of functions. The type of functions is one-to-one and the use of the computer applications was through visual and interactive webbased tools. The students who participated in this study were divided into two groups: control and experimental. The students in the first group were taught to identify one-to-one functions using the traditional, definition-based method. The students in the second group were also taught to identify such functions using the traditional method. However, they had the advantage to use the tools. To measure the effect of using the tools, an achievement test was prepared and given to both of the groups twice: before the beginning of the teaching process and after the end of it. The results of the tests for the students in both groups were compared and the results showed that the students in the experimental group outperformed their counterparts in the control group. This provides evidence that utilizing visual and interactive tools in identifying one-to-one functions improve the learning outcomes |
| Keywords: | Mathematics Education, One-to-one Functions, Visual And Interactive Tools, Horizontal Line Test, And Achievement Test |
| References: | 1. F. Fraij, M. Al-Quraan, A. Al-Dababseh, and S. Al-Obaidy, ‘The Impact of Employing Technology in Teaching a Mathematics Course.’ International Journal of Innovation and Learning, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 170-188, 2010. 2. B. Nihat, ‘‘Dynamic Visualization and Software Environment.,’’ The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. Vol.4, Issue 4, pp. 26-32, 2005. 3. J. D. Mills, & E. L. Johnson, ‘An evaluation of ActivStats® for SPSS® for teaching and learning.’ The American Statistician, 58(3), 2010, pp. 254-258. 4. J. Gaspar, and U. Kohlenbach, ‘‘On Tao’s “finitary” infinite pigeonhole principle,’’ The Journal of Symbolic Logic, volume 75, number 1, pp. 355–371, 2010. 5. I. Hussain, T. Shah, and H. Mahmood, ‘‘A New Algorithm to Construct Secure Keys for AES,’’ Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sciences, Vol. 5, no. 26, pp. 1263 – 1270, 2010. 6. D. A. Stylianoun, ‘‘On the interaction of visualization and analysis: the negotiation of a visual representation in expert problem solving,’’ Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21, pp. 303-317, 2002. 7. H. Dogan-Dunlup, ‘‘Computers and Linear Algebra,’’ WSEAS Transaction On Mathematics, Vol. 3, Issue 3, pp. 537-542, 2004. 8. F. Fraij, ‘The Impact of Feedback in Computer-Aided Instruction,’ International Journal of Soft Computing, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 67-71, 2010. 9. S. Wolfram, The Mathematica Book, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 10. E. Dubinsky, ‘‘Some thoughts on a First Course in Linear Algebra at the College Level,’’ Resources for Teaching Linear Algebra, MAA notes, Volume 42, pp 85-106. 1997. 11. J. R. Wicks, Linear Algebra: An Interactive Laboratory Approach with Mathematica, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. Reading, Massachusetts, 1996. 12. P. Halmos, I want to be a mathematician. Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America, 1987. 13. R. Zazkis, E. Dubinsky, & J. Dautermann, ‘‘Coordinating visual and analytic strategies: a study of students' understanding.’’ Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), pp. 435-437, 1996 14. B. Sharp, J. Garofalo, and A. Thompson, ‘‘Digital Images in the Mathematics Classroom. International Society for Technology in Education.’’ Vol. 31, No. 8, pp. 30-32, 2004. 15. N. Dissanayake, A.S. Karunananda and G.D. Lekamge, ‘‘Use of Computer Technology for the teaching of primary school mathematics.’’ OUSL Journal, Vol. 4, pp. 33- 52, 2007. 16. T. M. Conolly, and M. Stansfield, ‘‘Using Interactive Technologies in Teaching Information System Course,’’ In The Proceedings of the 2006 Informing Science and IT Education Joint Conference, 2006. 17. A. Sfard, ‘‘Reification as the Birth of Metaphor,’’ For the Learning of Mathematics, 14, pp. 44-55, 1994. 18. B. Kolman, R. Busby, S. Ross, Discrete Mathematical Structures, 5th Edition, Pearson (Prentice Hall), 2004. |
| Back to the journal content | |
