Hypothesenprüfung, Theorieentwicklung und Erkenntnisfortschritt in der Mathematikdidaktik Ein Plädoyer für Methodenpluralismus

被引:0
作者
Wellenreuther M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Fachbereich Erziehungswissenschaften, Institut für Pädagogik, Universität Lüneburg, 21335 Lüneburg
关键词
D O I
10.1007/BF03338847
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The learning and understanding of mathematical concepts can be facilitated through detailed textual or oral explanation. Here explanation has two different meanings: Explanation as didactical explication of mathematical ideas or explanation as explication of conditions under which some people develope mathematical ideas. The main goal of mathematics instruction is two delineate explanations in such a way that students dont have to make additional inferences in producing a coherent text base. To construct such explanations the application of the theory of text comprehension of Kintsch is being applied to the verbalization of mathematical concepts. The core of real-science explanations are hypotheses. Empirical science has to test such hypotheses in prospective studies in a way that eliminates alternative explanations. After that the contribution of different research methods to scientific progress is discussed. Four different research methods were differentiated: (1) Diagnostic / descriptiv research of learning behavoirs, attitudes and strategies, (2) research of mathematics instruction (teaching and student behavior) (3) experimental research as prospective research and (4) developmental research. It is concluded that all four types of research have their own goals and it seems unfortunate to prefer one type at expense of others. © 1997 GDM - Gesellschaft für Didaktik der Mathematik.
引用
收藏
页码:186 / 216
页数:30
相关论文
共 59 条
[31]  
Leinhardt G., Expertice in Instructional Lessons: An Example from Fractions, Perspectives on Research on Effective Mathematics Teaching, pp. 47-66, (1988)
[32]  
Leinhardt G., Development of an Expert Explanation: An Analysis of a Sequence of Subtraction Lessons, Knowing, Learning and Instruction: Essays in Honor of R. Glaser, pp. 187-215, (1989)
[33]  
Leinhardt G., Math lessons: A contrast of novice and expert competence, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 1, pp. 52-75, (1989)
[34]  
Leinhardt G., On Teaching, Advances in Instructional Psychology, 4, pp. 1-54, (1993)
[35]  
Leinhardt G., Smith D.A., Expertice in Mathematics Instruction: Subject Matter Knowledge, Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, pp. 247-271, (1985)
[36]  
Mannes S.M., Kintsch W., Knowledge Organization and Text Organization, Cognition and Instruction, 4, 2, pp. 91-115, (1987)
[37]  
Maurer S.B., New Knowledge about Errors and New Views about Lerners: What They Mean to Educators and More Educators would Like to Know, Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education, pp. 165-187, (1987)
[38]  
McKoon G., Ratcliff R., Inference During Reading, Psychological Review, 99, 3, pp. 440-466, (1992)
[39]  
Padberg F., Über typische Schülerschwierigkeiten in der Bruchrechnung - Bestandsaufnahme und Konsequenzen, Mu, 32, 3, pp. 58-77, (1986)
[40]  
Padberg F., Dezimalbrüche- problemlos und leicht?, Der Mathematische Und Naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht (MNU), pp. 387-395, (1989)