The Sierpinski smoothie: blending area and perimeter
This study furthers the theory of conceptual blending as a useful tool for revealing the structure and process of student reasoning in relation to the Sierpinski triangle (ST). We use conceptual blending to investigate students’ reasoning, revealing how students engage with the ST and coordinate their understandings of its area and perimeter. Our analysis of ten individual interviews with mathematics education masters’ student documents diverse ways in which students reason about this situation through the constituent processes of blending: composition, completion, and elaboration. This reveals that students who share basic understandings of the area and perimeter of the ST recruit idiosyncratic ideas to engage with and resolve the paradox of a figure with infinite perimeter and zero area.
KeywordsConceptual blending Fractal Infinite processes Paradox Student thinking
This research was supported by the Israel Science Foundation grant no. 438/15.
- Apkarian, N., Rasmussen, C., Tabach, M., & Dreyfus, T. (2018). Conceptual blending: The case of the Sierpinski triangle area and perimeter. In A. Weinberg, C. Rasmussen, J. Rabin, M. Wawro, & S. Brown (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education (pp. 541–548). San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
- Fauconnier, G., & Turner, M. (2002). The way we think. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Gerson, H. & Walter, J. (2008). How blending illuminates understandings of calculus. In Electronic Proceedings for the Eleventh Special Interest Group of the Mathematical Association of America on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics. Retrieved from http://rume.org/crume2008/Proceedings/Gerson%20LONG.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2017.
- Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Larsen, S., Marrongelle, K., Bressoud, D., & Graham, K. (2017). Understanding the concepts of calculus: Frameworks and roadmaps emerging from educational research. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 526–550). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
- Rasmussen, C., Apkarian, N., Tabach, M., & Dreyfus, T. (in review). Ways in which engaging in someone else’s reasoning is productive.Google Scholar
- Rasmussen, C., & Wawro, M. (2017). Post-calculus research in undergraduate mathematics education. In J. Cai (Ed.), Compendium for research in mathematics education (pp. 551–581). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
- Sacristán, A. I. (2001). Students’ shifting conceptions of the infinite through computer explorations of fractals and other visual models. In M. van den Heuvel-Panhuizen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 25th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 129–136). Utrecht, The Netherland: PME.Google Scholar
- Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Tabach, M., Apkarian, N., Dreyfus, T., & Rasmussen, C. (2017). Can a region have no area but infinite perimeter? In B. Kaur, W. K. Ho, T. L. Toh, & B. H. Choy (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 241–248). Singapore: PME.Google Scholar