arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 1912.03104

Evidencing Missing Resources of the Documentational Approach to Didactics. Toward Ten Programs of Research/Development for Enriching This Approach

Abstract

This chapter proposes a view from inside the DAD, starting from determining some essential resources missing of DAD, to proposing 10 programs of research/development for developing it. It could be considered as a follow-up of Chapter 1, where Ghislaine Gueudet situates the current state of DAD in looking back to its origin: chapter 12 proposes a possible future of this approach in analyzing its current state. It determines the missing resources of DAD in questioning current and past PhD students who have anchored their research in DAD. What did/do they learn in using DAD as a main theoretical resource; to which extent did/do they estimate that they have enriched DAD by their own work? Which are, according to them, the still missing resources of DAD? Which of these resources should be developed by DAD from itself, and/or in co-working with other theoretical framework? From this inquiry, this chapter proposes ten perspectives of research, aiming to develop some theoretical blind points of DAD, or to develop some methodological tools, or to deepen the cultural/social aspects of DAD in questioning the naming systems used by teachers when interacting with resources. This chapter echoes actually different perspectives of research already present, as promising germs, in previous chapters of the book.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Luc Trouche. 2019-12-06. Evidencing Missing Resources of the Documentational Approach to Didactics. Toward Ten Programs of Research/Development for Enriching This Approach. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20393-1_13

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Perspectives on the unit distance problem

This is a survey on an old open problem in combinatorics called the unit distance problem, and the field of mathematics around it, called incidence geometry. What do we know about the problem? Why is it difficult? How does it connect with other parts of math?

math.HO

A Categorical Approach to Euclidean Ratios and Proportions

A categorial approach to the non-metric geometry in Books V and VI of Euclid's \textit{Elements} is presented. Specifically, we introduce a diagrammatic syntax that can be overlaid immediately on his diagrams, thus bridging intuitive presentation with fidelity to Euclid's arguments. This syntax makes complicated definitions like V.5, and indeed the arguments throughout books V and VI, including arguments about similar figures, intuitively clear. We show in an appendix that this syntax can be used to solve a puzzle regarding ancient mathematics. Finally, we offer evidence that this approach to Euclidean diagrams is rooted in the Aristotelian tradition itself, and that a similar syntax was utilized, in antiquity, for related questions of numeric and proportions. Thus the syntax is plausibly faithful to Euclid's own thought-world, and not an outside-imposition.

math.HO

Some Early Results by Tutte Regarding the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture in 1948

OpenAI recently announced a proof of the Cycle Double Cover (CDC) Conjecture. Most media reports have characterized it as a 50-year-old open problem. In reality, according to a 1987 letter from Tutte to Fleischner, the Cycle Double Cover Problem has been open for at least 80 years. Two early results regarding the CDC conjecture were established in one of Tutte's 1949 publications.

math.HO