ORDER OF CONSTRUCTION 
  IN DYNAMIC GEOMETRY ENVIRONMENT
  Varda Talmon 
  vardat@construct.haifa.ac.il 
  Faculty of Education 
  University of Haifa 
  Israel 
   
 
Abstract
 
  Order and dependency are two fundamental concepts of mathematics. The order 
  of geometric constructions in DGEs, is central from the very beginning.  
   
  The sequential organization of actions necessary to produce a figure in any 
  Dynamic Geometry Environment (DGE) introduces an explicit order of construction. 
  In a complex figure this sequential organization produces what is, in effect, 
  a hierarchy of dependencies as each part of the construction depends on something 
  created earlier. This hierarchy of dependencies is one of the main factors that 
  determine DB within DGE (Jackiw & Finzer, 1993; Laborde, 1993).  
   
  The longer DGEs are in use and under study the more we learn about their contribution 
  to the learning of geometry but also about the obstacles they are liable to 
  pose to such learning. (Chazan & Yerushalmy, 1998; Goldenberg & Cuoco, 1998; 
  Healy & Hoyles, 2001; Mariotti, 2002)  
   
  This abstract focus on user's perceptions of dragging and their accordance to 
  the hierarchy of dependencies, which derive from the order of construction. 
  As a part of a larger study on the complexities involved in understanding DB, 
  Junior high students and graduate students in math education were asked to predict 
  the DB of points that were part of a geometric construction. The study reveals 
  that while hierarchy in geometric constructions in a DGE is mirrored by the 
  DB, user actions and perceptions of DB indicate that users often grasp a reverse 
  hierarchy in which dragging a child affects its parent.  
   
  References  
   
  Chazan, D., & Yerushalmy, M. (1998). Charting a Course for Secondary Geometry. 
  In R. Lehrer, and D. Chazan (eds.),Designing Learning Environments for Developing 
  Understanding of Geometry and Space, Hillsdale, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 
  pp. 67-90.  
  Goldenberg, E. P., & Cuoco, A. A. (1998). What is Dynamic Geometry? In D. Chazan 
  (ed.),Designing Learning Environments for Developing Understanding of Geometry 
  and Space., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ, pp. 351-368.  
  Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (2001). Software Tools for Geometrical Problem Solving: 
  Potentials and Pitfalls. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical 
  Learning 6, 235-256.  
  Jackiw, R. N., & Finzer, F. W. (1993). The Geometer's Sketchpad: Programming 
  by Geometry. In A. Cypher (ed.),Watch What I Do: Programming by Demonstration, 
  The MIT Press., Cambridge, London, pp. 293-308.  
  Laborde, C. (1993). The Computer as Part of the Learning Environment: The Case 
  of Geometry. In C. Keitel, and K. Ruthven (eds.),Learning from Computers: Mathematics 
  Education and Technology., NATO ASI Series, Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 
  Vol. 121, pp. 48-67.  
  Mariotti, M. A. (2002). The Influence of Technological Advances on Students' 
  Mathematics Learning. In L. D. English (ed.),Handbook of International Research 
  In Mathematics Education, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ, pp. 695-723.  
   
  |