Investigation Of Warrant Types Of Arguments Of Prospective Teachers In Technology Enriched Environment

Türk Bilgisayar ve Matematik Eğitimi Sempozyumu-4 (TURKBİLMAT 4), , İzmir, Türkiye, 26 - 28 Eylül 2019, ss.151

In recent years, various methods have been put forward for the contribution and dissemination of learning

environments in which students actively share their thoughts and discuss. One of these methods is argumentation

which was claimed to improve individual’s higher order thinking, critical thinking and meta-cognitive skills. The aim

of the present study was to investigate the argumentation of prospective middle school mathematics teachers in

technology environment. A qualitative case study was conducted with eight participants from an Elementary

Mathematics Education undergraduate program of one of the public universities in Ankara. Two implementations

were conducted with the participants. In each implementation the participants discussed one triangle task in pairs

and class discussiın was done. Then, semi-structured interviews were conducted with working pairs.

Subsequently, the arguments of participants were determined and schematized with Toulmin’s (1958)

argumentation model. Lastly, all arguments of were classified based on Knipping’s (2008) local argumentation

classification which focused on the warrants of arguments. It was concluded that the participants preferred to use

mostly visual argumentation in their warrants. Moreover, it was concluded that GeoGebra was useful in

argumentation and promote visual argumentation. In conclusion, it was advised to teachers not to encourage

using solely empirical evidence as justification but to question student answers all the time for additional

theoretical support for better conceptual understanding.