International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education

Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 2016 - Volume 11 Issue 3, pp. 421-431
  • Published Online: 28 Apr 2016
  • Article Views: 2034 | Article Download: 2080
  • Open Access Full Text (PDF)
AMA 10th edition
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Şandır H, Aztekin S. Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them. Int Elect J Math Ed. 2016;11(3), 421-431.
APA 6th edition
In-text citation: (Şandır & Aztekin, 2016)
Reference: Şandır, H., & Aztekin, S. (2016). Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(3), 421-431.
Chicago
In-text citation: (Şandır and Aztekin, 2016)
Reference: Şandır, Hakan, and Serdar Aztekin. "Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2016 11 no. 3 (2016): 421-431.
Harvard
In-text citation: (Şandır and Aztekin, 2016)
Reference: Şandır, H., and Aztekin, S. (2016). Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(3), pp. 421-431.
MLA
In-text citation: (Şandır and Aztekin, 2016)
Reference: Şandır, Hakan et al. "Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 11, no. 3, 2016, pp. 421-431.
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Şandır H, Aztekin S. Pre-Service Math Teachers’ Opinions about Dynamic Geometry Softwares and Their Expectations from Them. Int Elect J Math Ed. 2016;11(3):421-31.

Abstract

This study was designed to determine the pre-service teachers’ opinions about three dynamic geometry software (Cabri II Plus, the Geometer's Sketchpad, GeoGebra) and influences of gender and academic achievement to these opinions. The researchers also investigated the most important properties that the pre-service teachers expect from a dynamic geometry software. The study was conducted in the 2011-2012 academic year with 64 prospective teachers who had taken a course about math education software during a year in the university. Results revealed that pre-service teachers found Geometers’ Sketchpad more effective than others in the positive development of the students' attitudes and in teaching high level geometry. However, they think that GeoGebra is easier than Cabri II Plus to use and has wide area of use. According to the pre-service teachers; using a native language, screen clarity, a detailed user manual and the ease of use are the most important properties of a dynamic geometry software.

References

  • Allison, L. (1995). The status of computer technology in classrooms using the integrated thematic instructional model. International Journal of Instructional Media, 22(1), 33 – 43.
  • Bielefeld, T.G. (2002). On dynamic geometry software in the regular classroom. Zentralblattfür Didaktikder Mathematik, 34(3), 85-92.
  • Daher, W. (2009). Pre-service Teachers' Perceptions of Applets for Solving Mathematical Problems: Need, Difficulties and Functions. Educational Technology & Society, 12 (4), 383–395.
  • Erbas, A. K. & Yenmez, A. A. (2011).The effect of inquiry-based explorations in a dynamic geometry environment on sixth grade students’ achievements in polygons. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2462-2475.http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.002
  • Gomoll, M. (1999). Choosing Contingency Planning Software. The Ease-Of-Use Issue in Software Selection. Disaster Recovery Journal. Vol. 5, 4.
  • Göktaş, Y, Küçük, S., Aydemir, M., Telli, E., Arpacık, Ö., Yıldırım & G., Reisoğlu, İ. (2012). Educational Technology Research Trends in Turkey: A Content Analysis of the 2000-2009 Decade. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice - 12(1), 191-196, Educational Consultancy and Research Center
  • Guven, B. (2012).Using dynamic geometry software to improve eight grade students’ understanding of transformation geometry. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(2), 364-382
  • Hull, A. N., & Brovey, A. J. (2004).The impact of the use of dynamic geometry software on student achievement and attitudes towards mathematics. Action Research Exchange, 3(1), 24-37.
  • Hohenwarter, M. & Fuchs, K. (2004). Combination of dynamic geometry, algebra and calculus in the software system GeoGebra. ZDM classification: R 20, U 70, Retrieved on 10-November-2014, at URL: http://archive.geogebra.org/static/publications/pecs_2004.pdf
  • Hohenwarter, M., & Lavicza, Z. (2007). Mathematics teacher development with ICT: towards an International GeoGebra Institute. In D. Küchemann (Ed.), Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics. 27(3):49-54. University of Northampton, UK: BSRLM.
  • Kortenkamp, U., & Dohrmann, C. (2010). User interface design for dynamic geometry software. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 3(2), 59–66.
  • Isiksal, M. & Askar, P. (2005): The effect of spreadsheet and dynamic geometry software on the achievement and self-efficacy of 7th-grade students. Educational Research, 47:3, 333-350
  • Mackrell, K. (2011a). Design decisions in interactive geometry software. ZDM Mathematics Education, 43:373–387 DOI 10.1007/s11858-011-0327-4
  • Mackrell, K. (2011b). Finding the area of a circle: Affordances and design issues with different IGS programs. Proceedings of the Second North American GeoGebra Conference: Where Mathematics, Education and Technology Meet? University of Toronto, Toronto, ON June 17-18, 2011.
  • Oldknow, A. (2001).  Special group 2: DGS — Dynamic Geometry Software. In  M. Borovcnik & H. Kautschitsch (Ed.): Electronic Proceedings of the  Fifth International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching. August, 6-9, 2001 — University of Klagenfurt, Austria.http://wwwg.uniklu.ac.at/stochastik.schule/ICTMT_5/ICTMT_5_CD/Special%20groups/CD_Special2.htm#b9
  • Oldknow, A. & Tetlow, L. (2008). Using dynamic geometry software to encourage 3D visualisation and modelling. Electronic Journal of Mathematics and Technology.1933-2823  Volume: 2 Source Issue: 1
  • Petrovici, A. & Sava, A.T. (2010).CABRI 3D-the instrument to make the didactic approach more efficient. Anale. Seria Informatica. Vol 8, 2.
  • Roberts, D.L. & Stephens, L.J. (1999).The effect of the frequency of usage of computer software in high school geometry. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(1), 23-30.
  • Sträßer, R. (2002). Research on Dynamic Geometry Software (DGS) - an introduction ZDM, Vol. 34 (3).
  • Stols, G. & Kriek, J.(2011). Why don't all maths teachers use dynamic geometry software in their classrooms? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(1), 137-151.
  • Weigand, H.-G. & Weth, T. (2002). Computer im Mathematikunterricht: Neue Wegezualten Zielen. Spektrum, AkademischerVerlag, Heidelberg, Berlin.

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.