This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
REFERENCES
Balacheff, N.: 1991, ‘Treatment of refutation: Aspects of the complexity of a constructivist approach to mathematics learning’, in Glasersfeld, E. (ed.), Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education,Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, pp.89–110.
Cobb, P., Wood, T. and Yackel, E.: 1993, ‘Discourse, mathematical thinking and classroom practice’, in Forman, E.A, Minick, N. and Stone, C.A. (eds.), Contexts for learning. Sociocultural dynamics in children's development,Oxford University Press, New York, pp.91–119.
Cobb, P.:1996, ‘Constructivism and activity theory: A consideration of their similarities and differences as they relate to mathematics education’, in Mansfield, H., Pateman, N. and Bednarz N. (eds.), Mathematics for Tomorrow's Young Children: International perspectives on curriculum, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Netherlands, pp. 10–56.
Cobb, P.: 2000, ‘The importance of a situated view of learning to the design of research and instruction’, in Boaler, J. (ed.), Multiple Perspectives on Mathematics Teaching and Learning,Ablex Publishing, Westport, CT, USA, pp.45–82.
Cole, M.: 1996, Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline,Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
Confrey, J.: 1995, ‘Theory of intellectual development, Part 3’, For the Learning of Mathematics15(2) (June),36–48.
diSessa, A., Noss, R. and Hoyles, C. (eds.): 1995, Computers and Exploratory Learning, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Edwards, L.D.: 1995, ‘Microworlds as representations’, in diSessa, A., Noss, R. and Hoyles, C. (eds.), Computers and Exploratory Learning,Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 127–194.
Guin, D. and Trouche, L.: 1999, ‘The complex process of converting tools into mathematical instruments: the case of calculators’, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning3(3),195–227.
Harré, R. and Gillet, G.: 1994, The discursive mind,Sage, London.
Healy, L., Pozzi, S. and Hoyles, C.: 1995, ‘Making sense of groups, computers and mathematics’,Cognition and Instruction13(4), 505–523.
Hölzl, R.: 2001, ‘Using dynamic geometry software to add contrast to geometric situations: A case study’, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning6(1),63–86.
Hoyles, C., Healy, L. and Sutherland, R.: 1991, ‘Patterns of discussion between pupil pairs in computer and non-computer environments’,Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 7,210–228.
Hoyles, C.: 1993, ‘Microworlds/schoolworlds: the transformation of an innovation’, in Keitel, C. and Ruthven, K. (eds.), Learning from Computers: Mathematics Education and Technology NATO ASI Series, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp. 1–17.
Hoyles, C., Healy, L. and Pozzi, S.: 1994, ‘Groupwork with computers: an overview of findings’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning10,202–215.
Hoyles, C. and Noss R.: 1996, Windows on Mathematical Meanings: Learning Cultures and Computers, Kluwer Academic Publishers, the Netherlands.
Lerman, S.: 1996, ‘Articulating theories of mathematical learning: A challenge to the radical constructivist paradigm?’,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education27(2), 133–150.
Lave, J.:1988,Cognition in Practice,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Noss, R. and Hoyles, C.: 1992, ‘Looking back and looking forward’, in Hoyles, C. and Noss, R. (eds.), Learning Mathematics and Logo,Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts, pp. 431–46.
Nunes, T., Schliemann, A.D. and Carraher, D.W.: 1993,Street Mathematics and School Mathematics,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
O'Connor, M.C. and Michaels, S.: 1996, ‘Shifting participants frameworks: orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion’, in Hicks, D. (ed.), Discourse, learning and schooling,Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.63–104.
Steffe, L.P. and Thompson, P.W.:2000, ‘Interaction or Intersubjectivity? A reply to Lerman’,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education31(2),191–209.
Schwartz, B. (ed.): 2001, ‘Abstraction and Context’,Special Issue of Quarterly of Cognitive Science1(3&4), 237–424
Steinbring, H.: 1998, ‘Mathematical understanding in classroom interaction: the interrelation of social and epistemological constraints’, in Seeger, F., Voigt, J. and Waschescio, U. (eds.), The culture of the mathematics classroom, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.344–372.
Vergnaud, G.:1982, ‘Cognitive and developmental psychology and research in mathematical education: some theoretical and methodological issues’,For the Learning of Mathematics3(23),31–41.
Voloshinov, V.N.: 1973. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language.Seminar Press, New York.
Wertsch, J.V.: 1991, Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Wertsch, J.V.: 1997, Mind as Action,Oxford University Press, New York.
Yackel, E. and Cobb, P.: 1996, ‘Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics’,Journal for Research in Mathematics Education27,458–477.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hoyles, C. From describing to designing mathematical activity: the next step in developing a social approach to research in mathematics education?. Educational Studies in Mathematics 46, 273–286 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014019612105
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1014019612105