Module EFPM324 for 2019/0
- Overview
- Aims and Learning Outcomes
- Module Content
- Indicative Reading List
- Assessment
Postgraduate Module Descriptor
EFPM324: Technology in Mathematics Education: Shaping Mathematical Knowledge in the 21st Century
This module descriptor refers to the 2019/0 academic year.
How this Module is Assessed
In the tables below, you will see reference to 'ILO's. An ILO is an Intended Learning Outcome - see Aims and Learning Outcomes for details of the ILOs for this module.
Formative Assessment
A formative assessment is designed to give you feedback on your understanding of the module content but it will not count towards your mark for the module.
| Form of assessment | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|
| Video/online presentation of critical reflections of reading & practice | 10-15 minutes presentation/edited video | 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-12 | Written peer assessment and tutor feedback |
| Constructive comments/discussion on presentations/videos from peers | No fixed word length | 1-12 | Written peer assessment and tutor feedback |
Summative Assessment
A summative assessment counts towards your mark for the module. The table below tells you what percentage of your mark will come from which type of assessment.
| Coursework | Written exams | Practical exams |
|---|---|---|
| 100 | 0 | 0 |
...and this table provides further details on the summative assessments for this module.
| Form of assessment | % of credit | Size of the assessment (eg length / duration) | ILOs assessed | Feedback method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Critical evaluation of learning environments with technology and how they influence on shaping students mathematical understanding | 75 | 6000 words | 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-12 | Written summative feedback |
| Designing a lesson / activity plan with digital learning environments with critical annotations | 15 | 1000 words | 1, 3, 4, 6, 7-12 | Written summative feedback |
| Contributions to online discussions | 10 | 500 words equivalent | 1-12 | Written summative feedback |
Re-assessment
Re-assessment takes place when the summative assessment has not been completed by the original deadline, and the student has been allowed to refer or defer it to a later date (this only happens following certain criteria and is always subject to exam board approval). For obvious reasons, re-assessments cannot be the same as the original assessment and so these alternatives are set. In cases where the form of assessment is the same, the content will nevertheless be different.
| Original form of assessment | Form of re-assessment | ILOs re-assessed | Timescale for re-assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical evaluation of learning environments with technology (6000 words | Critical evaluation of learning environments with technology (6000 words) | 1, 2, 4, 5, 7-12 | 6 weeks |
| Designing a lesson / activity plan with digital learning environments with critical annotations (1000 words) | Designing digital learning environments with critical annotation (1000 words) | 1, 3, 4, 6, 7-12 | 6 weeks |
| Contributions to online discussions | Reflection on online discussion experience (500 words) | 1-12 | 6 weeks |
Re-assessment notes
If students are referred/deferred with regard to their contributions to the online discussions, then they will be asked to submit written reflections on their experience of online learning in this module (max. 500 words)
Indicative Reading List
This reading list is indicative - i.e. it provides an idea of texts that may be useful to you on this module, but it is not considered to be a confirmed or compulsory reading list for this module.
Artigue, M. (2002). Learning mathematics in a CAS environment: The genesis of a reflection about instrumentation and the dialectics between technical and conceptual work. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 7(3), 245-274.
Balacheff, N., & Gaudin, N. (2003). Conceptual framework. In S. Soury-Lavergne (Ed.), Baghera Assessment Project: Designing a hybrid and emergent educational society (pp. 3–22). Grenoble, France: Laboratoire Leibniz-IMAG.
English, L. D. (Ed.). (2010). Handbook of international research in mathematics education. Routledge.
Gutiérrez, A., & Boero, P. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: Past, present and future. Sense publishers.
Hoyles, C. (2009). Mathematics education and technology: rethinking the terrain. New York, NY: Springer.
Hyde, Rosalyn and Edwards, Julie-Ann (eds.) (2013) Mentoring mathematics teachers: supporting and inspiring pre-service and newly qualified teachers, Abingdon, GB, Routledge
Jones, K. (2000). Providing a foundation for deductive reasoning: students' interpretations when using Dynamic Geometry software and their evolving mathematical explanations. Educational studies in mathematics, 44(1-2), 55-85.
Kazak, S., Wegerif, R., & Fujita, T. (2013). I get it now!. Stimulating insights about probability through talk and technology. Mathematics Teaching, 235, 29-32.
Kelly, A. E., & Lesh, R. A. (Eds.). (2012). Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education. Routledge.
Leung, A., Chan, Y. C., & Lopez-Real, F. (2006). Instrumental genesis in dynamic geometry environments. In Proceedings of the ICMI 17 Study Conference: Technology Revisited, Part 2 (pp. 346–353). Hanoi, Vietnam.
Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Sinclair, N., & Yurita, V. (2008). To be or to become: How dynamic geometry changes discourse. Research in Mathematics Education, 10(2), 135-150.
Stylianou, D. A., Blanton, M. L., & Knuth, E. J. (Eds.). (2009). Teaching and learning proof across the grades: A K-16 perspective. Routledge.
Trouche, L. (2004). Managing the complexity of human/machine interactions in computerized learning environments: Guiding students’ command process through instrumental orchestrations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9(3), 281-307.
Watson, A., Jones, K., & Pratt, D. (2013). Key Ideas in Teaching Mathematics: Research-based guidance for ages 9-19. Oxford University Press.
Wegerif. R. (2007) Dialogic, Educational and Technology: Resourcing the Space of Learning. New York: Springer-Verlag
Wegerif. R. (2013) Dialogic: Education for the Internet Age, Routledge.
