Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Browse Sessions by Descriptor
Browse Papers by Descriptor
Browse Sessions by Research Method
Browse Papers by Research Method
Search Tips
Annual Meeting Housing and Travel
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Prospective secondary mathematics teachers’ (PSMTs’) understanding of ℜ2-to-ℜ functions was investigated using a task-based interview that required reasoning within and across registers (physical, graphical, symbolic). They were asked to: (a) describe graphs that represented given symbolic representations of functions of two variables; (b) choose the symbolic rules represented by sets of given three-dimensional graphs; and (c) connect their experience with the physical representation to the graphical and symbolic representations. Nuances of their conversations and treatments (Duval, 2006, 2017) involving ℜ2-to-ℜ functions included (a) flexibility in executing treatments within symbolic and graphing registers treating literal symbols as variables and as parameters) and (b) tendency to generalize conclusions of simpler examples rather than generalizing the conversion procedures.