Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Mathematics Education Library ((MELI,volume 30))

Abstract

In prior work we1 observed that, while designing representations, students employed an iterative process of innovating, critiquing, selecting, refining, and combining representations. Prior work also cataloged a rich set of ideas for representational innovation. This chapter focuses on the ability to judge and critique the quality of representations. In a study of high school students’ critical abilities, we investigated three main hypotheses: (1) Students’ ability to critique representations is rich and generative. (2) Students’ critical capabilities are, by and large, relatively reactive and inarticulate. (3) Students’ critical capabilities are design-linked; that is, competence does not appear equally in all contexts, but shines particularly in the context of design. Data from our study support all these hypotheses, with qualifications. Most unequivocally, students seem to have a strong, uninstructed, yet scientifically cogent competence to judge the quality of representations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Azevedo, F. S. (2000). “Designing Representations of Terrains: A Study in Meta-Representational Competence.” Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19.4, pp. 423-480.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. (1993). “Toward an Epistemology of Physics.” Cognition and Instruction 10.2-3, pp. 105-225; “Responses to Commentary”, pp. 261-280. (Cognition and Instruction, Monograph No. 1.)

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. (2000). Changing Minds: Computers, Learning, and Literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. (in press). “Meta-Representation: Native Competence and Targets for Instruction.” In S. Strauss (Ed.), The Development of Notational Representations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. (1991). Hammer, D., Sherin, B. & Kolpakowski, T. “Inventing Graphing: Meta-Representational Expertise in Children.” Journal of Mathematical Behavior 10. 2, pp. 117–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. & Sherin, B. L. (1998). “What Changes in Conceptual Change?” International Journal of Science Education 20.10, pp. 1155-1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa, A. A. & Sherin, B. L. (2000). “Meta-Representation: An Introduction.” Journal of Mathematical Behavior 19.4, pp. 385-398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, J. & diSessa, A. A. (1999). “What Should Students Know about Technology? The Case of Scientific Visualization.” International Journal of Technology and Science Education 9.3, pp. 175196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granados, R. (2000). “Constructing Intersubjectivity in Representational Design.” Journal of Mathematical Behavior 19.4, pp. 503-530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirshner, D., & Whitson, J. A. (1997). Situated Cognition: Social, Semiotic, and Psychological Perspectives. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherin, B. L. (2000). “How Students Invent Representations of Motion.” Journal of Mathematical Behavior 19.4, pp. 399-441.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

diSessa, A.A. (2002). Students’ Criteria for Representational Adequacy. In: Gravemeijer, K., Lehrer, R., Van Oers, B., Verschaffel, L. (eds) Symbolizing, Modeling and Tool Use in Mathematics Education. Mathematics Education Library, vol 30. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3194-2_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-3194-2_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6180-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-3194-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics