SpringerLink
Log in

An Embodied Cognition View on the KOM-Framework’s Aids and Tools Competency in Relation to Digital Technologies

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Mathematical Competencies in the Digital Era

Part of the book series: Mathematics Education in the Digital Era ((MEDE,volume 20))

  • 481 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter focuses on the KOM-framework’s aids and tools competency and investigates its application in the digital era for mathematical learning. The aids and tools competency may be viewed as distinguishing between more classical material or physical tools (e.g., centicubes, rod systems, abacuses, rulers, compasses, protractors, specially lined paper, cardboard for folding or cutting) and digital tools (e.g., calculators, computers and mathematical software, such as computer algebra systems and dynamic geometry environments). Although this distinction seems straightforward, new software somewhat blurs the picture, since now several virtual manipulatives serve the purpose of illustrating and explaining physical manipulatives. The chapter suggests a potential networking of the aids and tools competency with, on the one hand, the theoretical constructs of instrumental genesis and on the other hand, embodied cognition as manifested through the newly suggested idea of embodied instrumentation. A series of examples is provided to illustrate the potential of applying these theoretical frameworks in connection with each other.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 117.69
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 149.79
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
EUR 149.79
Price includes VAT (Germany)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1.

    See: https://www.mydigitalchalkboard.org/portal/default/Resources/Viewer/ResourceViewer?action=2&resid=60193.

  2. 2.

    This example and the subsequent analysis in terms of both the aids and tools competency and the instrumental approach was initially presented at the 2018 MEDA conference (Jankvist et al., 2018).

  3. 3.

    See: https://www.mathletics.com/uk/.

  4. 4.

    See: https://mathigon.org/ and https://youtu.be/vwyIZsi0b98 by following the link: https://mathigon.org/polypad.

  5. 5.

    See: http://touchcounts.ca/ and http://touchcounts.ca/touchtimes/index.html.

References

  • Alberto, R., Bakker, A., Walker-van Aalst, O., Boon, P., & Drijvers, P. (2019). Networking theories in design research: An embodied instrumentation case study in trigonometry. In U. T. Jankvist, M. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, & M. Veldhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the eleventh congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 3088–3095). Freudenthal Group & Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University and ERME.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Artigue, M. (2010). The future of teaching and learning mathematics with digital technologies. In C. Hoyles, & J.-B. Lagrange (Eds.), Mathematics education and technology—Rethinking the terrain. The 17th ICMI study (pp. 463–475). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-0146-0_23

  • Arzarello, F., Paola, D., Robutti, O., & Sabena, C. (2009). Gestures as semiotic resources in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9163-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakos, S., & Sinclair, S. (2019). Exploring the semiotic potential of TouchTimes with primary teachers. In J. Novotná, & H. Moraová (Eds.), Proceedings of international symposium of elementary mathematics teaching: Opportunities in learning and teaching elementary mathematics (pp. 53–62). Charles University, Faculty of Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv12101zq

  • Ball, D. (1992). Magical hopes: Manipulatives and the reform of math education. American Educator, 16(2), 14–18, 46–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartolini, M. G., & Martignone, F. (2014). Manipulatives in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_93

  • Bikner-Ahsbahs, A., & Prediger, S. (2014). Networking of theories as a research practice in mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05389-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Châtelet, G. (2000). Figuring space philosophy, mathematics, and physics. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, D. H. (2000). ‘Concrete’ manipulatives, concrete ideas. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2000.1.1.7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Freitas, E., & Sinclair, N. (2014). Mathematics and the body: Material entanglements in the classroom. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139600378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drijvers, P. (2019). Embodied instrumentation: Combining different views on using digital technology in mathematics education. In U. T. Jankvist, M. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, & M. Veldhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the eleventh congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 8–28). Freudenthal Group & Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University and ERME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drijvers, P., Godino, J. D., Font, V., & Trouche, L. (2013). One episode, two lenses: A reflective analysis of student learning with computer algebra from instrumental and onto-semiotic perspectives. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 23–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9416-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geraniou, E., & Jankvist, U. T. (2019). Towards a definition of “mathematical digital competency.” Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102(1), 29–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09893-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guin, D., & Trouche, L. (2002). Mastering by the teacher of the instrumental genesis in CAS environments: Necessity of instrumental orchestration. Zentralblatt Für Didaktik Der Mathematik, 34(5), 204–211. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02655823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, K. (1993). Confidence in success. In I. Hirabayashi, N. Nohda, K. Shigematsu, & F.-L. Lin (Eds.), Proceedings of psychology of mathematics education, PMEXVII (Vol. 1, pp. 17–31). University of Tsukuba.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, A. W., Nipper, K. L., & Nash, L. E. (2011). Virtual vs. concrete manipulatives in mathematics teacher education: Is one type more effective than the other? Current Issues in Middle Level Education, 16(2), 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankvist, U. T., Dreyøe, J., Geraniou, E., Weigand, H.-G., & Misfeldt, M. (2021). CAS from an assessment point of view: Challenges and potentials. In A. Clark-Wilson, A. Donevska-Todorova, E. Faggiano, J. Trgalova, & H.-G. Weigand (Eds.), Mathematics education in the digital age: Learning, practice and theory (pp. 99–120). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankvist, U. T., Geraniou, E., & Misfeldt, M. (2018). The KOM framework’s aids and tools competency in relation to digital technologies—A networking of theories perspective. In H.-G. Weigand, A. Clark-Wilson, A. Donevska-Todorova, E. Faggiano, N. Grønbæk, & J. Trgalova (Eds.), Research proceedings of the fifth ERME topic conference (ETC 5) on mathematics education in the digital age (MEDA) (pp. 123–130). University of Copenhagen and ERME.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankvist, U. T., & Misfeldt, M. (2015). CAS-induced difficulties in learning mathematics? For the Learning of Mathematics, 35(1), 15–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jankvist, U. T., Misfeldt, M., & Aguilar, M. S. (2019). Tschirnhaus’ transformation: Mathematical proof, history and CAS. In E. Barbin, U. T. Jankvist, T. H. Kjelsen, B. Smestad, & C. Tzanakis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eighth European Summer University on History and Epistemology in Mathematics Education ESU 8 (pp. 319–330). Oslo Metropolitan University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, M. W., & Misfeldt, M. (2020). Material representations in mathematical research practice. Synthese, 197, 3721–3741. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-018-02033-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lagrange, J.-B. (2005). Using symbolic calculators to study mathematics. The case of tasks and techniques. In D. Guin, K. Ruthven, & L. Trouche (Eds.), The didactical challenge of symbolic calculators. Turning a computational device into a mathematical instrument (pp. 113–135). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mariotti, M. A., & Montone, A. (2020). The potential synergy of digital and manipulative artefacts. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 6(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-020-00064-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maschietto, M., & Bartolini-Bussi, M. (2009). Working with artefacts: Gestures, drawings and speech in the construction of the mathematical meaning of the visual pyramid. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 143–157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9162-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNerney, S. (2011). A brief guide to embodied cognition: Why you are not your brain. Scientific American, 4 [Blog post].

    Google Scholar 

  • Menary, R. (2015). Mathematical cognition—A case of enculturation. In T. Metzinger, & J. M. Windt (Eds.), Open MIND: 25(T) (pp. 1–20). MIND Group. https://doi.org/10.15502/9783958570818

  • Moyer-Packenham, P. (2016). Revisiting the definition of a virtual manipulative. In P. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives (pp. 3–23). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32718-1_1

  • Moyer-Packenham, P., Bolyard, J., & Spikell, M. (2002). What are virtual manipulatives? Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 372–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niss, M. (2016). Mathematics standards and curricula under the influence of digital affordances: Different notions, meanings, and roles in different parts of the world. In M. Bates & Z. Usiskin (Eds.), Digital curricula in school mathematics (pp. 239–250). Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niss, M., & Højgaard, T. (2011). Competencies and mathematical learning—Ideas and inspiration for the development of mathematics teaching and learning in Denmark (No. 485). IMFUFA, Roskilde University. English translation of part I-VI of Niss and Jensen (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  • Niss, M., & Højgaard, T. (2019). Mathematical competencies revisited. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102(1), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-019-09903-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Núñez, R. (2009). Numbers and arithmetic: Neither hardwired nor out there. Biological Theory, 4(1), 68–83. https://doi.org/10.1162/biot.2009.4.1.68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roorda, G., Ros, P., Drijvers, P., & Goedhart, M. (2016). Solving rate of change tasks with a graphing calculator: A case study on instrumental genesis. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 2(3), 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0022-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shvarts, A., Alberto, R., Bakker, A., Doorman, M., & Drijvers, P. (2021). Embodied instrumentation in learning mathematics as the genesis of a body-artifact functional system. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(3), 447–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10053-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, N., Chorney, S., Güneş, C., & Bakos, S. (2020). Disruptions in meanings: Teachers' experiences of multiplication in TouchTimes. ZDM—Mathematics Education, 52(7), 1471–1482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01163-9

  • Sinclair, N., & Heyd-Metzuyanim, E. (2014). Learning number with TouchCounts: The role of emotions and the body in mathematical communication. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 19(1–2), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-014-9212-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soury-Lavergne, S. (2021). Duos of digital and tangible artefacts in didactical situations. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 7(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-021-00086-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tran, C., Smith, B., & Buschkuehl, M. (2017). Support of mathematical thinking through embodied cognition: Non-digital and digital approaches. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2, 16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0053-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trouche, L. (2005). Instrumental genesis, individual and social aspects. In D. Guin, K. Ruthven, & L. Trouche (Eds.), The didactical challenge of symbolic calculators. Turning a computational device into a mathematical instrument (pp. 197–230). Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vergnaud, G. (2009). The theory of conceptual fields. Human Development, 52(2), 83–94. https://doi.org/10.1159/000202727

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This chapter was partly written in the frame of project 8018-00062B under Independent Research Fund Denmark and project NNF19OC0058651 under Novo Nordisk Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Morten Misfeldt

  2. Aarhus University, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Uffe Thomas Jankvist

  3. UCL Institute of Education, London, UK

    Eirini Geraniou

Authors
  1. Morten Misfeldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Uffe Thomas Jankvist
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eirini Geraniou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Morten Misfeldt .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Danish School of Education, Aarhus University, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Uffe Thomas Jankvist

  2. Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment, UCL Institute of Education, London, UK

    Eirini Geraniou

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Misfeldt, M., Jankvist, U.T., Geraniou, E. (2022). An Embodied Cognition View on the KOM-Framework’s Aids and Tools Competency in Relation to Digital Technologies. In: Jankvist, U.T., Geraniou, E. (eds) Mathematical Competencies in the Digital Era. Mathematics Education in the Digital Era, vol 20. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10141-0_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10141-0_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-10140-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-10141-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation