scholarly journals Bringing a CURE into a Discrete Mathematics Course and Beyond

2022 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 771-784
Author(s):  
Lipika Deka ◽  
Peri Shereen ◽  
Jeffrey Wand
1997 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
pp. 328-332
Author(s):  
Anne Larson Quinn

I have always used concrete marupulatives, such as marshmallows and toothpicks, to create models for my geometry and discrete-mathematics courses. These models have come in handy when discussing volume, introducing the 4-cube, or illustrating isomorphic or bipartite graphs. However, after discovering what a dynamic geometry–software package could do for geometry teaching, which has been well documented by research (e.g., Battista and Clements [1995]), I realized that this type of technology also had much to offer for teaching graph theory in my discrete-mathematics course. Although this article discusses The Geometer's Sketchpad 3 (Jackiw 1995), any software that can draw, label, and drag figures can be substituted for Sketchpad.


2004 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 98-99
Author(s):  
Doug Baldwin ◽  
Bill Marion ◽  
Henry Walker

1988 ◽  
Vol 81 (5) ◽  
pp. 337-397
Author(s):  
Catherine A. Brown ◽  
Thomas P. Carpenter ◽  
Vicky L. Kouba ◽  
Mary M. Lindquist ◽  
Edward A. Silver ◽  
...  

This article is the second of two articles reporting on the seventh-grade and eleventh-grade results of the fourth mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) administered in 1986. The first article (Brown et al. 1988) presented the background, methodology, and the results of students' performance on discrete mathematics, data organization and interpretation, number and operations, and measurement. This article reports students' performance on variables and relations, geometry, fundamental methods of mathematics, and attitudes. An analysis of eleventh-grade students' performance by mathematics course background was possible, and these data will be reported here where appropriate.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document