DOI 10.1007/s11858-010-0269-2
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
L. Trouche (&)
INRP (National Institute for Pedagogical Research),
Lyon, France
e-mail: luc.trouche@inrp.fr
URL: http://educmath.inrp.fr/Educmath/recherche/educmath/
page_luc_trouche
P. Drijvers
Freudenthal Institute for Science and Mathematics Education,
Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
1 Introduction
Since its origin, mankind has developed tools to assist in
labour. In ancient times, stones were shaped and used as
fist hammers for carrying out handicraft work. Later, the
abacus was used for arithmetic tasks in trade and bargaining affairs. In mathematics, a diversity of tools have
been in use, such as clay tablets, compasses, rulers, books,
paper, pencils, and, in present times, calculators and
computers (Maschietto & Trouche, 2010). Seen in a historical perspective, handheld tools have a long tradition of
being at the heart of mathematical and scientific practice.
In the 60s of the previous century, four-function calculators and scientific calculators became very popular types
of handheld devices for mathematicians who had to do
computations. Engineers used relatively big and complex
calculator tools, requiring reverse polish notation and
offering programming facilities to carry out high-precision
calculations. An era of tremendous technological developments was heralded with the emergence of new devices
for information and communication: the digital society.
Computers were big and expensive, but handheld calculators penetrated all sectors of society, including schools.
In the 1990s, HHT became popular in mathematics
education in some countries. Graphing and symbolic calculators in particular became affordable and widespread,
not in the least because of enthusiasm amongst teachers,
educators and researchers, who were interested in the
opportunities technology offers. The numbers of desktop
PCs in homes and schools also increased exponentially, but
access to computers still was a matter of concern, not to
speak of constraints on communication and technical
support.
Nowadays, PCs are widespread. The development of
laptop and notebook computers has moved PCs in the
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
Fig. 1 Graphing calculator
applications on an iPhone
handheld device
123
Paul Drijvers
As a teacher trainer in the 90s, I was
fascinated by the phenomenon of computer
algebra, and excited that a machine was able
to carry out sophisticated procedures, such
as calculating limits and derivatives and
algebraic simplifications, techniques I
considered these procedures, we spent so
much time on teaching, to be at the heart of
mathematics.
Mathematics
trivialised?
Where is the heart of mathematics?
In the mid-90s, the availability of HHT
solved our infrastructural issues. Now
technology was really integrated! But what
do we want to teach? And why dont
students see the mathematics in the
techniques the way we see them? How to
approach this difficulty?
requirements. There was no need to make computer laboratory reservations, or to have to use technology during the
complete lesson because the room did not allow for anything else. It was always available without dominating the
classroom. In short, HHT made it possible to bypass the
infrastructural limitations within schools.
In addition to this, a second explanation is that HHT also
made the teachers lives easier. Lesson preparation was no
longer that laborious, and the initiative and responsibility
of using technology could eventually be handed over to the
students, who could themselves decide on when and how to
use the device. Different teaching techniques, including
individual work, group work and whole-class work, could
be used and intertwined. Integrating technology into
assessment, an important concern if one wants the assessment to reflect the teaching, became feasible through the
use of HHT. In short, HHT offered new possibilities for the
teacher who wanted to make use of the opportunities
technology brought about. So finally, technology in the
mathematics classroom was no longer beyond reach, but
manageable!
The assessment argument also convinced authorities and
policy makers that HHT could, on the one hand, bring
technology into the classroom, but, on the other, leave
assessment formats unchanged, even if the content of the
test might be questioned. In several countries, this led to
HHT entering national examinations, though this was not
as straightforward as it might seem in many cases (Brown,
2010; Drijvers, 1998, 2009). In its turn, such national
measures left teachers and students who were less
favourable towards technology with no choice: once the
national policy was decided upon, nobody would want to
put their students at a disadvantage. A third explanation,
therefore, is that national policies made it difficult for midadopting teachers to neglect HHT.
Luc Trouche
Beginning as a teacher (1975) facing the
introduction of scientific calculators,
following on as a teacher educator (1985)
facing the introduction of graphing
calculators, then as a researcher (1995),
facing the introduction of symbolic
calculators, my professional development
was, in some way, drawn by technological
development.
A threefold questioning rose: what are tools,
what is mathematics, what are learning
processes? Finally, what was the most
important question? Difficult to say, but one
element seemed to have been decisive:
calculators were in the students hands and
in the classroom. If we wanted to teach
mathematics, we had to teach with such
technology.
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
Fig. 3 A dialogue making use
of graphical exploration options
offered by HHT (Drijvers &
Doorman, 1996)
123
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
Fig. 7 A convincing image:
the limit of x ? ln x ? 10 sin x
should not exist (Guin &
Trouche, 1999)
123
reconsideration, as exploiting the benefits from the integration of HHT in mathematics education turned out to be
not as simple as expected.
3.3 Theoretical advancements
As a result of the experiences described above, there was a
need for new theoretical approaches, which would do justice to the observation that using tools is not just a matter of
transforming mathematical thinking into commands for the
tool, but that the relation between user and tool is a bidirectional one: the user shapes the techniques for using the
tool, but the tool shapes the users thinking as well:
Tools matter: they stand between the user and the
phenomenon to be modelled, and shape activity
structures. (Hoyles & Noss, 2003, p. 341)
The relationship between techniques for using a tool and
mathematical thinking is a subtle and delicate one, which
requires theoretical frames of equal subtlety. For example,
the notion of situated abstraction (Noss & Hoyles, 1996)
refers to the mathematical knowledge, which emerges
within the frame of using technological tools in a particular
situation, and which to a certain extent remains attached
to these technological experiences. Theories on semiotic
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
Fig. 10 Thinking on
calculators the required answers
(Trouche, 1998)
123
not that easy to design new mathematical problem situations, which, on the one hand, took advantage of technology and, on the other, required mathematical thinking
about what was beyond a given HHT result or image.
Examples of such mathematical situations are quite rare in
textbooks and essentially can be found in research literature (for example, Artigue, in Guin et al. 2005). Figure 10
shows an example of a situation, which has a great
potential for exploring and learning mathematics. To find
the second expected root, a student has to exploit both the
functionalities of the calculator (looking for a right
window) and his/her mathematical knowledge (transforming for example the equation, for the positive numbers, into
x = 20 ln(x) to get reasonable values). To be able to
design such tasks themselves, teachers need to master both
the functionalities of the artefact as well as the mathematical and didactical backgrounds of the mathematical
topic to be taught.
4.2 What about the tuning of instruments?
Once such a mathematical problem situation is designed
and presented, an essential question is how to make it
work in the classroom, how to organise students work in
time and space, how to combine individual and collective
phases within problem solving, and how to integrate each
students instrument into the orchestra as a whole? For
answering these questions, the notion of instrumental
orchestration was introduced (Trouche, 2005). The strength
of the metaphor is that it stresses the need for whole-class
management, even when individual technology is used.
Instrumental orchestration applied to a mathematical situation proposes didactical configurations for integration of
the available artefacts in the classroom activity and
exploitation modes for these configurations. Figure 11
sketches an example of an orchestration: the Sherpa
exploitation
configuration
can
modes
be
of
this
considered:
the
Sherpa-student
under
the
switched
to
different
students,
orchestration in which one of the students uses the technology in a way that all students can follow it, and the
teacher guides this students use.
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
123
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
Fig. 15 A duo of HHTPC
inviting the development of a
system of instruments (Aldon
et al., 2008)
(6)
The wireless connection works between the students HHT and the
teachers PC, not between the students HHT, which is certainly a
result of institutional constraints: the students are not allowed to
communicate during the examinations.
123
6 Conclusion
What do we learn from this history of the use of HHT for
learning mathematics from 1980 until today? First, we have
learnt to be less nave about machines and mediation,
primarily involving the learner who uses the tools and, at a
second level, the teacher who learns to integrate HHT into
her teaching. Machines are not neutral, but deeply influence activity, conceptualisation and, more generally, students and teachers development.
123
L. Trouche, P. Drijvers
References
Aldon, G., Artigue, M., Bardini, C., Baroux-Raymond, D., Bonnafet,
J.-L., Combes, M.-C., et al. (2008). Nouvel environnement
technologique, nouvelles ressources, nouveaux modes de travail:
Le projet e-CoLab (experimentation Collaborative de Laboratoires mathematiques). Repe`res IREM, 72, 5178.
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, 245274.
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactic situations. Dordrecht:
Kluwer.
Brown, R. G. (2010). Does the introduction of the graphics calculator
into system-wide examinations lead to change in the types of
mathematical skills tested? Educational Studies in Mathematics,
73(2), 181203.
Burril, G., Allison, J., Breaux, G., Kastberg, S., Leatham, K., &
Sanchez, W. (Eds.). (2002). Handheld graphing technology in
secondary mathematics: Research findings and implications for
classroom practice. Dallas, USA: Texas Instruments.
Doerr, H. M., & Zangor, R. (2000). Creating meaning for and with the
graphing calculator. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41,
143163.
123
123