Two "participation frameworks" - linking and conjecturing - are examined in
the A. Susan Jurow paper "Generalizing in Interaction" to understand how
the subject students collaborate with one another and generalize about
mathematical relationships in their study of guppy populations.
"Linking" refers to "the process of creating and applying classification
systems." Things/situations etc. are compared for similarities and
differences. "The question addressed in a linking sequence is "Is this one
of those?" (page 287-288).
"Conjecturing" is the "process of describing and explaining the behavior of
objects and situations." Prediction of patterns is key. "Conjecturing is
important for generalizing because it allows one to answer the question,
"What would happen if?" (page 290).
In her Conclusion section, Jurow explains "This study found that when
students attempted to generalize they used talk, inscriptions, and embodied
activity to identify the relevant similarities and differences between
situations (linking) and to predict and explain what will happen in a
situation (conjecturing)." (page 297).
She also points out "The two participation frameworks described in this
article were those used by one group of students in a single classroom."
This implies that other participation frameworks besides linking and
conjecturing are common or possible. What are some examples?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 01 2005 - 01:00:06 PDT