Student interactions during class activities: a mathematical model

Brunetto, D.; Andrà, C.; Parolini, N.; Verani, M.

doi:10.2478/caim-2018-0011

Abstract

This paper aims at bridging Mathematical Modelling and Mathematics Education by studying the opinion dynamics of students who work in small groups during mathematics classrooms. In particular, we propose a model which hinges upon the pioneering work of Hegselmann and Krause on opinion dynamics and integrates recent results of interactionist research in Mathematical Education. More precisely, the proposed model incorporates the following features: 1) the feelings of each student towards the classmates (building upon the so-called \I can" -\you can" framework); 2) the different levels of preparation of the students; 3) the presence of the teacher, who may or may not intervene to drive the students towards the correct solution of the problem. Several numerical experiments are presented to assess the capability of the model in reproducing typical realistic scenarios.

References

1. A. Sfard, There is more to discourse than meets the ears: Looking at thinking as communicating to learn more about mathematical learning, Educational studies in mathematics, vol. 46, no. 1-3, pp. 13-57, 2001.10.1007/0-306-48085-9_1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
2. A. H. Schoenfeld, What makes for powerful classrooms, and how can we support teachers in creating them? a story of research and practice, productively intertwined, Educational Researcher, vol. 43, no. 8, pp. 404-412, 2014.10.3102/0013189X14554450
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
3. M. Hannula, J. Evans, G. Philippou, and R. Zan, Affect in mathematics education-exploring theoretical frameworks. research forum., International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2004.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
4. P. Di Martino and R. Zan, The construct of attitude in mathematics education, in From beliefs to dynamic affect systems in mathematics education, pp. 51-72, Springer, 2015.10.1007/978-3-319-06808-4_3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
5. C. Andrà and P. Liljedahl, “I sense" and “I can": Framing intuitions in social interactions, in Pro- ceedings of the joint meeting of PME and PMENA, vol. 1, pp. 49-56, Vancouver, CA:PME, 2014.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
6. C. Andrà, D. Brunetto, N. Parolini, and M. Verani, 'I can - you can': Cooperation in group activities, in Proceedings of the Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (K. Krainer and N. Vondrová, eds.), pp. 1109-1115, Feb. 2015.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
7. C. Andrà, D. Brunetto, N. Parolini, and M. Verani, “Four fundamental modes of participation in mathematics group activities." (to appear).
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
8. N. Bellomo, Modeling complex living systems. Modeling and Simulation in Science, Engineering and Technology, Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2008. A kinetic theory and stochastic game approach.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
9. G. Albi, L. Pareschi, G. Toscani, and M. Zanella, Recent advances in opinion modeling: Control and social inuence, in Active Particles, Volume 1 : Advances in Theory, Models, and Applications (N. Bellomo, P. Degond, and E. Tadmor, eds.), pp. 49-98, Springer International Publishing, 2017.10.1007/978-3-319-49996-3_2
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
10. J. Lorenz, Continuous opinion dynamics under bounded confidence: A survey, International Journal of Modern Physics C, vol. 18, no. 12, pp. 1819-1838, 2007.10.1142/S0129183107011789
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
11. J. R. French Jr, A formal theory of social power., Psychological review, vol. 63, no. 3, p. 181, 1956.10.1037/h004612313323174
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
12. R. Hegselmann, U. Krause, et al., Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 5, no. 3, 2002.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
13. V. D. Blondel, J. M. Hendrickx, and J. N. Tsitsiklis, On krause's multi-agent consensus model with state-dependent connectivity, IEEE transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 54, no. 11, pp. 2586-2597, 2009.10.1109/TAC.2009.2031211
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
14. C. Canuto, F. Fagnani, and P. Tilli, An Eulerian approach to the analysis of Krause's consensus models, SIAM J. Control Optim., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 243-265, 2012.10.1137/100793177
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
15. J. Lorenz, Multidimensional opinion dynamics when confidence changes, Economic Complexity, Aix- en-Provence, 2003.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
16. J. Lorenz, H. Rauhut, F. Schweitzer, and D. Helbing, How social inuence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect, Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 108, no. 22, pp. 9020-9025, 2011.10.1073/pnas.1008636108
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
17. R. Kaur, R. Kumar, A. P. Bhondekar, and P. Kapur, Human opinion dynamics: An inspiration to solve complex optimization problems, Scientific reports, vol. 3, 2013.10.1038/srep03008380111324141795
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
18. S. Wongkaew, M. Caponigro, and A. Borzì, On the control through leadership of the hegselmann- krause opinion formation model, Mathematical Models and Methods in Applied Sciences, vol. 25, no. 03, pp. 565-585, 2015.10.1142/S0218202515400060
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
19. J. Lorenz, A stabilization theorem for dynamics of continuous opinions, Physica A: Statistical Me- chanics and its Applications, vol. 355, no. 1, pp. 217-223, 2005.10.1016/j.physa.2005.02.086
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
20. J. M. Hendrickx, G. Shi, and K. H. Johansson, Finite-time consensus using stochastic matrices with positive diagonals, IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 1070-1073, 2015.10.1109/TAC.2014.2352691
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
21. L. Radford, Three key concepts of the theory of objectification: Knowledge, knowing, and learning, Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 7-44, 2013.10.4471/redimat.2013.19
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
22. G. Williams and P. Liljedahl, Researching `thinking classrooms', in Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for PME and the 36th Conference of the North American Chapter of the PME (Vol. 1), p. 249, Citeseer, 2014.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
23. M. Huberman, The model of the independent artisan in teachers' professional relations, Teachers' work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts, pp. 11-50, 1993.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
24. A. H. Schoenfeld, Toward professional development for teachers grounded in a theory of decision making, ZDM, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 457-469, 2011.10.1007/s11858-011-0307-8
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
25. C. Andrà, N. Parolini, and M. Verani, BetOnMath. Azzardo e matematica a scuola. Springer-Verlag Italia, 2016.10.1007/978-88-470-3942-1
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
26. D. B. McLeod, Research on affect in mathematics education: A reconceptualization, Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, pp. 575-596, 1992.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
27. A. H. Schoenfeld, Chapter 2: On modeling teachers' in-the-moment decision making, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph, vol. 14, pp. 45-96, 2008.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
28. A. H. Schoenfeld, Toward a theory of teaching-in-context, Issues in Education, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1-94, 1998.10.1016/S1080-9724(99)80076-7
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Student interactions during class activities: a mathematical model

Abstract

Paradigm

My account