USE OF APPARATUSES IN SCIENCE LABORATORY: Developmental Characteristics of Didactical Interactions

Keywords: Didactical interactions, Innovative pedagogy, Manipulatives, Laboratory, Mathematics education, STEM education

Abstract

Teaching and learning through the use of tools is evolving in response to new developments in pedagogy that aim to enhance students’ high-order thinking skills. This paper presents results from part of a research project investigating innovative teaching pedagogy, engaging with active learning through students’ manipulation of apparatuses in a series of mathematics lessons conducted in a science laboratory. The findings of the study include illustration of the development of didactical interactions, a modified framework yielding multi-directional transitions of interactive activities. This serves not only to promote interactive learning activities, including various active forms of productions, but also embraces innovation in STEM education.

Author Biography

Huey LEI, University of Saint Joseph

School of Education

Assistant Professor

References

Bartolini Bussi, M.G. (1998). Verbal interaction in mathematics classroom: a Vygotskian analysis. IN H. Steinbing, M.G., Bartolini Bussi & A. Sierpinska (Eds.), Language and communication in mathematics classroom (pp. 65-84). Reston, VA: NCTM.

Lei, H., Chan, Y.C., & Leung, A. (2018). Implementation of tool-based mathematics lesson: a duo of material and digital tools. In L.Deng, W.K.W. Ma & C.W.R. Rong (Eds.), New Media for Education Change – Selected paper from HKAECT 2018 International Conference. Hong Kong: Springer.

Lei, H., & Leung, A. (2017). Tool-based mathematics lesson: a case study in transitions of activities in didactical cycle. In B. Kaur, W.K. Ho, T.L. Toh, & B.H. Choy (eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 3, (pp. 145-152). Singapore: PME.

Loh, C.Y. (1984). The laboratory approach to teaching mathematics: some examples. Teaching and Learning, 5(1), 19-27.

Mariotti, M.A. (2009). Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective: the role of the teacher, ZDM Mathematics Education, 45:427-440.

Mariotti, M.A. (2012). ICT as opportunities for teaching-learning in a mathematics classroom: the semiotic potential of artefacts. Proceedings of the 36th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 1, pp. 25-42. Taipei, Taiwan.

Merriam, S.B., & Tisdell, E.J. (2016). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ng, Y.F., Chan, K.K.J., Lei, H., Mok, P., & Leung, S.Y. (2019). Pedagogy and innovation in science education: a case study of experiential learning science undergraduate course. The European Journal of Social and Behavioural Sicnece, XXV, 2910-2926. https://dx.doi.org/10.15405/ejsbs.254

Roehrig, G.H., Moore, T.J., Wang, H.H., & Park, M.S. (2012). Is adding the E enough?: investigating the impact of K-12 engineering standards on the implementation of STEM integration. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 31-44.

Stake, R.E (2010). Qualitative research: studying how things work. New Work: Guilford Press.

Travers, M. (2001). Qualitative research through case studies. London: Sage.

Yin, R.K. (2012). Applications of case study research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Published
2019-07-10
How to Cite
LEI, H. (2019). USE OF APPARATUSES IN SCIENCE LABORATORY: Developmental Characteristics of Didactical Interactions. The International Education and Learning Review, 1(2), 75-81. Retrieved from https://journals.epistemopolis.org/learner/article/view/2046
Section
Artículos