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.