On the Representation of Algorithmic Concepts

  • Elmar Cohors-Fresenborg

Abstract

In the following paper we will report from the aspect of concept representation on fundamental experiments, which we have performed during the last few years. These experiments ask how thirteen-year-old pupils form concepts in the area of algorithms and in which way they use these concepts in problem solving. Our fundamental hypothesis is that the central problem in programming is to organize a sequence of actions which has to be executed by the computer. From this hypothesis we were led to develop didactical material and a suitable curriculum, by which pupils may readily acquire a fundamental insight in central concepts of automatization and computer programming (Cohors-Fresenborg, 1976, 1978; Cohors-Fresenborg,et al. 1982).

Keywords

Concept Formation Elementary Operation Computing Network Railway Network Symbolic Level 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Back, W., 1983, Der Know-How Computer, in: Mikrocomputer 5 /1983, Franzis-Verlag, München.Google Scholar
  2. Bruner, J.S. et al., 1966, Studies in Cognitive Growth, p. 1–67, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Cohors-Fresenborg, E., 1976, Dynamische Labyrinthe, in: Didaktik der Mathematik 1 /1976, p. 1–21.Google Scholar
  4. Cohors-Fresenborg, E., 1978, Learning problem solving by developing automata-networks, in Revue de phonétique appliquée, no. 46 /47, p. 93–99Google Scholar
  5. Cohors-Fresenborg, E., Griep, M., Schwank, I, 1982, Registermachines and functions, A School-book introducing the concept of function on the basis of algorithms. Osnabrücker Schriften zur Mathematik Series U, book 22E, 22 LE.Google Scholar
  6. Cohors-Fresenborg, E., Kaune, C., 1984, Sequential versus conceptual - two modes in algorithmic thinking. in: Proceedings of the 8th Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Sydney, p. 261–267.Google Scholar
  7. Cohors-Fresenborg, E., Strüber, H.J., 1982, The learning of algorithmic concepts by action. A study with deaf children; in: F. Lowenthal, ed., Language and Language Aquisition. New York: Plenum Press, p. 95–106.Google Scholar
  8. Davis, R.B., McKnight, C.C., 1979, Modeling the processes of mathematical thinking. In: J. Child. Math. Behay. vol. 2, no. 2, p. 91–115.Google Scholar
  9. Hasemann, K., 1984, Analysen mathematischer Lernprozesse mit Kognitionstheoretischen Modellen; inaugural disseration (unpublished), Universität Osnabrück.Google Scholar
  10. Hiele, P.M., van, 1976, Wie kann man in Mathematikunterricht den Denkstufen Rechnung tragen? In: Educational Studies Math., vol. 7, p. 157–169.Google Scholar
  11. Kaune, C., 1984, Kognitive Strategien von Schülern beim Programmieren; In: Informatik als Herausforderung an Schule und Ausbildung W. Arlt u. K. Haefner ( Hrsg. ), Springer, p. 241–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lowenthal, F., Marcq, J., 1982, How do children discover strategies? In: Proceedings of the 6th Conference for Psychology of Mathematics Education, Antwerpen, P. 156–161 and p. 287–292.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elmar Cohors-Fresenborg

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations