Los niños no pueden re-inventar los números y las matemáticas por sí mismos. Absorben y reconstruyen las matemáticas de su cultura a través de la interacción con las personas, el mundo físico y artefactos culturales. La imitación debe jugar un papel en estos procesos reconstructivos. Los datos que se analizan en este artículo son observaciones de un niño (desde el año a los tres años de edad) en el curso de interacciones naturales en el hogar. Se describen, clasifican y discuten los modos en que el niño adopta o imita comportamientos matemáticos (principalmente en el área de la simbolización de números pequeños). El gradiente de clasificación se extiende desde imitaciones muy parciales a copias exactas. Emerge una distinción entre la imitación de procedimientos y la de signos semióticos.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DubinskyE. (1991). Constructive aspects of reflective abstraction in advanced mathematics. EnSteffeL. P. (Ed.), Epistemological foundations of mathematical experience (pp. 160–202). Nueva York: Springer Verlag.
2.
GaleJ. (1995). Preface. EnSteffeL. P.GaleJ. (Eds.), Constructivism in Education (pp. i–xii). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3.
GattisM. (2002). Imitation is mediated by many goals, not just one. Developmental Science, 5 (1), 27–28.
4.
GlasersfeldE. VON. (1990). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. EnDavisR. B.MaherC. A.NoddingsN. (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 19–30). Virginia: National Council of the Teachers of Mathematics.
5.
GlasersfeldE. VON. (1991). Abstraction, re-presentation and reflection: An interpretation of experience and Piaget's approach. EnSteffeL. P. (Ed.), Epistemological foundations of mathematical experience (pp. 45–67). Nueva York: Springer Verlag.
6.
HershR. (1997). What is Mathematics, really?Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
7.
HlebertJ. (Ed.) (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
HurfordJ. R. (1987). Language and number.Oxford: Blackwell.
9.
HorowitzA. (2003). Do Humans ape? Or do apes human? Imitation and Intention in Humans (Homo Sapiens) and Other Animals. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 117 (3), 325–336.
10.
LakoffG.NÚÑEZR. E. (2000). Where Mathematics come from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into Being.Nueva York: Basic Books.
11.
LawrenceJ. A.ValsinerJ. (1993). Conceptual roots of internalization: From transmission to transformation.Human Development, 36, 150–167.
12.
LermanS. (1996). Intersubjectivity in math learning: A challenge to the radical constructivist paradigm. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 21 (2), 133–150.
13.
NadelJ.GuérineC.PezéA.RivetC. (1999). The evolving nature of imitation as a format for communication. EnNadelJ.ButterwothG. (Eds.), Imitation in Infancy (pp. 209–235). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
MorikawaK.AgarwalS.ElkanC.CottrellG. W. (2003). A taxonomy of computational and social learning.Proceedings of the Developmental Embodied Cognition Workshop, Universidad de Edinburgo, julio.
15.
NehanivC.DautenhahnK. (2002). The correspondence problem. EnDautenhahnK.NehanivC. (Eds.), Imitation in Animals and Artifacts (pp. 41–61). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
PiagetJ. (1967). Biologie et connaissance.París: Gallimard.
17.
RogoffB. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context.Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
18.
TappanM. B. (1997). Internalization and its discontents. EnCoxB. D.LightfootC. (Eds.), Sociogenetic perspectives on internalization (pp. 221–236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19.
TomaselloM.KrugerA. C.RatnerH. H. (1993). Cultural Learning.Behavioral and Brain Science, 16, 495–552.
20.
UzgirisI. (1999). Imitation as activity: Its developmental aspects. EnNadelJ.ButterworthG. (Eds.), Imitation in Infancy (pp. 186–206). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21.
ValsinerJ. (1997). Magical phrases, human development, and psychological ontology. EnCoxB. D.LightfootC. (Eds.), Sociogenetic perspectives on internalization (pp. 237–255). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22.
VandervertL. R. (1994). How the brain gives rise to mathematics in ontogeny and culture. Journal of Mind and Behavior, 15 (4), 343–350.
23.
VygostkyL. S. (1978). Mind in Society.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24.
WantS. C.Y HarrisP. L. (2002). How do children ape? Applying concepts from the study of non-human primates to the developmental study of imitation in children. Developmental Science, 5 (1), 1–41.
