Making Sense of The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

MAKING SENSE OF THE FUNDAMENTAL THEOREM OF CALCULUS
By
RALPH S. PANTOZZI
A Dissertation submitted to the
Graduate School - New Brunswick
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
Doctor of Education
Graduate Program in Mathematics Education
Written under the direction of
Dr. Carolyn A. Maher
and approved by
New Brunswick, New Jersey
January 2009
UMI Number: 3373679
Copyright 2009 by
Pantozzi, Ralph S.
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations
and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
UMI
UMI Microform 3373679
Copyright 2009 by ProQuest LLC
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest LLC
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
© 2009 by Ralph S. Pantozzi
All rights reserved.
Abstract of the Dissertation
Making Sense of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
By Ralph S. Pantozzi
Dissertation Chairperson: Carolyn A. Maher, Ed. D.
This dissertation provides an elaborated examination of how a group of students,
four years after first studying calculus, create an explanation of the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus for use by a figurative "novice student". The group of students
studied AP Calculus in 1999, and had participated for 15 years in a longitudinal study at
Rutgers University. In that study, students were invited to participate on a yearly basis in
mathematical activities that asked them to justify their conclusions and make their
thinking public.
The students were videotaped as they worked cooperatively on developing an
explanation during two sessions one month apart. The students structured their own
activity, using their own recollections, printed resource materials, and Geometer's
Sketchpad sketches provided for the students' use. The students' discussions are
examined with specific attention to the mathematical representations the students used,
the meanings students attached to those representations, how the students decided upon
those meanings.
The AP Calculus course description emphasizes "understanding the meaning" of
the Fundamental Theorem from multiple perspectives, but students' understandings of
the ideas of calculus have been found to be "poorly coordinated" (Judson & Nishimon,
2005; Thompson, 1994). Flexible use of representations has been suggested as a route to
ii
bring meaning to these ideas (Tall & Thomas, 1991). This dissertation illustrates in detail
how students can coordinate graphical, numerical, verbal, and numerical representations
to build meanings for the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. The students' discussions
provide evidence that students can develop meanings through engaging in non-evaluative
dialogue where they negotiate and refine the meanings of words, symbols, and graphs.
The students, who had grown accustomed to participating in mathematical
discourse (Maher, 2002), negotiated meanings in ways that may provide models for the
teaching and learning of calculus in the classroom. The students' use of representations
also has implications for those interested in how students might come to understand the
ideas of calculus and the Fundamental Theorem in particular. The ways in which the
students organized ideas serves as an example of how learners can build powerful
understandings in multiple ways.
m
Acknowledgements
In disagreement with Boyer in The History of Calculus and its Conceptual
Development, there is no strong temptation here to seek to ascribe the completion of a
dissertation to a single individual. Carolyn Maher understands that all learners, myself
included, arrive at understandings in unique ways. My wife, Shawna Hudson, has great
wisdom with regards to dissertations, their writers, and many other things. My parents,
Ralph and Gail, raised me to be a learner in all aspects of my life. My children, Mira and
Kara, remind me each day of the importance of learning. Romina, Angela, Magda, Mike,
Sherly, Robert, and Brian, ostensibly the students who took part in this study, are also
teachers from whom I had much to learn as an educator.
Many other people made this work possible through their advice, encouragement,
assistance, support, understanding, suggestions, and friendship: Claudio Burgaleta,
Warren Crown, Brad Halien, Yvonne & McKinley Hudson, Carol Koncsol, Pat Nyrgren,
Marjory Palius, Elena Steencken, Scott Steketee. Faculty and staff at the GSE, RBDIL,
ORSP, and RUL all made different aspects of the writing process possible. My staff at
the Mount Olive Middle and High Schools, and Kay Van Horn at the BOE office all
made it easier to concentrate on my writing.
To all of the above, and many others, including all my teachers in life, my deepest
gratitude. I will endeavor to take what you have taught me and pass it along to others.
In particular, I hope I can pass along the spirit taught to me by John Browning and Bob
Davis, two extraordinary yet humble individuals who possessed deep insights about
education, but knew that each of us must take the journey of learning ourselves.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract of the Dissertation ii
Acknowledgements iv
List of Figures viii
Chapter 1. Introduction 1
1.1. Origins of the Study 1
1.1.1. A Reflection upon "Meaning" 1
1.1.2. Reflecting Upon the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus 3
1.1.3. Teaching Calculus 7
1.2. Statement of the Problem 9
1.2.1 The Teaching of Calculus 9
1.2.2 Teaching the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus 10
1.2.3 Learning the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus 14
1.2.4 Potentials and Possibilities for Learning 17
13. Research Questions 21
13.1. Meaning and Representation 21
1.3.2. Using Representations 23
13.3. Guiding Questions 27
Chapter 2. Methodology 29
2.1. Background and Motivation for the Design 29
2.2. Background of the Students 33
23. Research Sessions 34
24. Conduct of Sessions 37
2.5. Examination of Data 40
2.6. Theoretical Background 42
Chapter 3. Literature Review 52
3.1. Representation and Meaning 52
3.1.1. General Terms 52
3.1.2. Application to the Study 57
3.1.3. Mathematical representations and Mathematical Ideas 59
3.1.4. Meanings in Practice 61
3.1.5. Dilemmas in the Use of Representations 64
3.1.6. Approaches to Learning About the Use of Representations 68
3.1.7. Deriving Meaning Through Connections 71
3.1.8. Summary 75
3.2. Representations in Calculus 76
3.2.1. Difficulties with Connectign Representations 76
3.2.2. Organization of Ideas 83
3.2.3. Research into Students' Thinking About the FTC 87
3.2.4. The Importance of Representations 90
V
Chapter 4. Meanings of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus 92
4.1. Perspectives Found in Selected Textbooks 93
4.1.1. Thomas and Finney 93
41.2. Larson, Hostetler, Edwards 97
4.1.3. Foerster 102
4.1.4. Hughes-Hallett and Gleason 105
4.1.5. Ostebee and Zorn 108
4.1.6. Bartkovich, Goebel, Graves, and Teague 111
4.1.7. Summary 114
4.2. AP Calculus 114
43. Additional Perspectives 118
4.3.1. Personal Perspectives 119
4.3.2. The Geometer's Sketchpad 123
4.3.2. Perspectives of Selected Mathematics Educators 127
44. Summary 127
Chapter 5. Description and Analysis of Data 138
5.1. Session 1, Group 1, June 25,2003 139
5.1.1. Segment 1: Lines 1-341 140
5.1.2. Analysis of Segment 1 144
5.1.3. Segment 2: Lines 342 - 663 145
5.1.5. Segment 3: Lines 664 -985 151
5.1.7. Summary Analysis of Segments 1 - 3 158
5.1.8. Segment 4: Lines 986 - 1312 159
5.1.10. Segment 5: Lines 1313 - 1451 164
5.1.12. Segment 6: Lines 1452 - 1686 167
5.1.14. Summary Analysis of Segments 4 - 6 170
5.1.15. Summary Analysis of Session 171
52. Session 1, Group 2, June 25,2003 174
5.2.1. Segment 1: Lines 1 - 690 174
5.2.3. Segment 2: Lines 689 - 1130 179
5.2.5. Segment 3: Lines 1131 - 1439 185
5.2.7. Segment 4: Lines 1440 - 2315 192
53. Session 2, Group 1, July 24,2003 201
53.1. Segment 1: Lines 5 0 - 475 201
5 3.2. Analysis Segment 1 207
53.3. Segment 2: Lines 476 - 810 210
53.5. Segment 3: Lines 811 --• 1215 217
53.6. Analysis of Segment 3 220
53.7. Segment 4: Lines 1216- 1788 222
VI
53.8. Analysis of Segment 4 228
53.9. Summary Analysis of the Session 230
5.4. Session 1, Group 2, July 24,2003 233
5.4.1. Segment 1 Lines 1 - 541 233
5.4.3. Segment 2: Lines 542 - 945 240
5.4.5. Segment 3 Lines 946 - 1756 244
5.5. Summary Analysis of the Four Sessions 255
5.5.1. Coordination of Representations 255
5.5.2. Meanings of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus 258
5.5 3 . Graphical Representations 260
5.5.4. Multiple Representations 262
5.5.5. Students' Reflections 264
Chapter 6. Implications 267
6.1. Multiple Representations 267
6.2. Organization of Ideas 270
63. Student Activity 272
64. Teaching Calculus 274
6.5. The Use of Graphical Representations 278
6.6. Conclusion 280
Appendix A: Transcript of Session 1 with Group 1, June 25,2003 282
Appendix B: Transcript of Session 1 with Group 2 , June 25,2003 326
Appendix C: Transcript of Session 2 with Group l,July 25,2003 377
Appendix D: Transcript of Session 2 with Group 2, July 24,200 416
Appendix E: Class Notes from AP Calculus in 1999 461
References 466
vn
List of Figures
Fi gure 1 The integral of/ is nearly equal to the area of the shaded rectangle 95
Fi gure 2 The carpet of variable width 96
Fi gure 3 Larson's illustration of Ay / Ax and (Ay)(Ax) 99
Figure 4: Larson's illustration of an incremental change in J{t)dt 100
Figure 5; Foerster's illustration of a differential 102
Figure 6 A graph of the accumulated area of rectangles under a function/. 120
Figure 7: A graph of the average rate of change of a function/ 125
Figure 8 The graph of the average rate of change on smaller intervals 125
Figure 9 Plotting the slope of amoving secant line 126
Figure 10: Plotting the accumulated area of rectangles under the graph of a function/
126
Figure 11 The accumulated area graph formed from rectangles of smaller width ..127
Figure 12 Tail's illustration for C f(x)dx = 1(b)- 1(a) whenZ'(x) = f(x) 129
Figure 13 Tail's illustration showing that/is "flat" when/is continuous 130
Figure 14: Approximation of the area under a curve 131
Figure 15 Approximation of the area under a curve on a smaller interval 131
Figure 16 "Missing area" under the graph of a function 133
Figure 17 "Missing area" when zoomed in on both axes 134
Figure 18 "Missing area" when zoomed in on x scale only 135
Figure 19 Romina's sketch of the area under a graph on the interval from a to b .. 140
Figure 20 Magda's sketch of a function and its integral 143
Figure 21 A function/and its accumulated area function 146
Figure 22 Part of test on integrals and the Fundamental Theorem from the students'
high school calculus class 148
Figure 23: Graphs drawn by Romina to illustrate Foerster's explanation
of the FTC 153
Figure 24. Romina's addition of a derivative graph to Figure 23 154
Figure 25 Romina's second graph to illustrate Foerster's explanation 155
Figure 26 Romina's sketch of the integral of the function from Figure 25 156
Figure 27 Magda's sketch of a Riemann sum 159
Figure 28 Angela and Magda's sketch of rectangles under the graph of y - x 2
161
Figure 29: Angela and Magda's calculations of accumulated area 162
viii
Figure 30: Magda's graph of accumulated area 163
Figure 31: Romina's graph of a function g prime 164
Figure 32: Romina's graph of a function and its integral 165
Figure 33: Magda's second graph of the accumulated area function 171
Figure 34: Mike's sketch to explain the Mean Value Theorem 178
Figure 35: Mike's sketch of the integral of a linear function 181
Figure 36: A "squiggly" graph 185
Figure 37: Mike draws rectangles under the graph in Figure 36 186
Figure 38: Additional rectangles 187
Figure 39: The graph of the accumulated area under the graph in Figure 36 188
Figure 40: Illustrating F(b) - F(a) 191
Figure 41: Mike's sketches of the integral of a parabolic function 193
Figure 42: Description of how to draw the graph of an integral 195
2
Figure 43: Magda's graph of y -x and its integral 202
Figure 44: Magda's graph illustrating the area under the graph from x = atox = b
204
Figure 45: Magda's graph of the integral of a cubic polynomial function 206
Figure 46: Magda's graph of the integral of a constant function 207
Figure 47: Graph of a function/and its accumulated area function from x - 2 211
Figure 48: Graph of the accumulated area of/to the left of x- 2 213
Figure 49: Graph of the function / from Figure 47 and its accumulated area function
from.x = 0 214
Figure 50: Graph of a function / and its accumulated area function from x - 0,
extended further to the right 214
Figure 51: Graph of thej{x) = (l/2).x and its accumulated area function from x = 2
.223
Figure 52 Graph of the/(x) = x2 and its accumulated area function from x = 2 224
Figure 53 Graph of J{x) = x2 and its accumulated area function from x = 5 225
Figure 54: Graph of j\x) = x2 and its accumulated area function from x = -A 225
Figure 55 Graph of J{x) = x2 - 1 and its accumulated area function from x = -A....226
Figure 56 Graph of a function/and its accumulated area function from x = 4 227
Figure 57 A function/, defined graphically 234
Figure 58 Brian's plot of the integral of the function/from Figure 57 234
IX
Figure 59: Brian's completed graph of the integral of the function/from Figure 57 ....
.' 235
Figure 60: Brian's graph of g'(x) 236
Figure 61: Graphs of f, g(x) and g'(x) 237
Figure 62: Adjustment made to g'(x) 238
Figure 63: Graph of/for the second task 240
Figure 64: Graph of/'(JC) in the second task 242
Figure 65: Some plotted points for the integral of /'(JC) 243
Figure 66: Robert's graph of the integral of /'(JC) 243
Figure 67: Mike pointing to the graph of /'(JC). 247
Figure 68: Mike pointing to the graph the integral of /'(JC) 247
Figure 69: Graph of accumulated area of a polynomial function created with
Sketchpad 249
Figure 70: Graph of accumulated area of the same polynomial function but with a
different initial value 249
Figure 71: Graph of two accumulated area functions for the same function/ 250
x
1
1. Introduction
1.1. Origins of the Study
1.1.1. A Reflection upon "Meaning"
In Freudenthal's book, Revisiting Mathematics Education, (Freudenthal, 1991), he
describes how children found the number halfway between 16 and 72 by halving the
difference and adding to the smaller side (page 36). Freudenthal suggests that one can
represent this idea algebraically with the expression (l/2)(b + a) + a, which can be
transformed into (a + b)l2, a standard expression for the average of two numbers. I was
satisfied with the algebraic equivalence of these two expressions, but I wondered if this
standard expression had a meaning on the number line. Why would the midpoint
between two points on the number line be found by adding the values and then dividing
by two? To investigate, I drew a number line, and represented the two initial points with
the variables a and b. I labeled the midpoint with the variable m, and then represented
the distance from atom and the distance from m to b with the variable c. This led me to
write the equations a + c = m and b-c = m . I added the equations, and arrived at the
expression a + b- 2m, and thus, (a + b)l2 - m.
This provided me with another proof that (a + b)l2 was the location of the
midpoint, but I still wished for a representation of "adding a and b and dividing by 2" that
I could represent with some action on the number line itself. In examining resources that
explained how the idea of average is introduced to young learners, I found an image of a
group of square tiles, in two unequal columns. To find the average, one moves tiles from
the larger column to the smaller column until the columns are of equal size. This action
fit my meaning of the word "average", in the sense of "balancing out" or "equal
2
distribution." The total number of squares in the two stacks is the sum of the two
numbers, and the creation of two equal columns, gives a meaning for dividing by 2. I
hoped I could make an image on the number line that was somewhat like this one.
Despite having used the word "average" myself many times, I could not recall
thinking about it from the perspective of a number line. Certainly one could find the
point at a + b, and then find the point halfway between there and 0, but it was not clear to
me why this point would be halfway between a and b. Then I read the next paragraph in
Freudenthal's book. He explains that the midpoint between the points at a and b is the
same as the midpoint between the points at a - 1 and b + 1, and between a - 2 and b + 2,
etc (Freudenthal, 1991). If one takes a steps to the left from a, and a steps to the right
from b, the midpoint will still be the same. Since a steps to the right of b is a + b, and a
steps to the left of a is 0, the number halfway between 0 and a + b is (a + b)/2. Here
was a reasons - one that dealt entirely with actions I could take on a number line - why
the formula (a + b) 12 found "the number halfway between two numbers".
In this investigation I felt I had learned something "new" about the meaning of
the word "average." The symbolic representation of (a + b)/2. "made sense" to me as an
expression of "sharing the total equally" but not as an expression for a midpoint on the
number line. In my investigation, I used algebraic symbols to represent, to carry out, and
to explain my thinking, but I also viewed the symbols as something that required
explanation. To arrive at an explanation, I used other representations - square tiles being
moved about, and distances on the number line. In my experiences with mathematics,
this movement between representations as a means of "making sense" of a situation is

3
one that I recall turning to often, sometimes without attending to the details of the
process.
As a classroom teacher, I have endeavored to listen to the meanings that students
assign to mathematical terms and procedures. I have also presented students with
questions where I believed finding an "average" might be appropriate. How do students
themselves decide if finding an "average" is appropriate? Discounting clues such as
"we're studying the section in the text about averages", students may need to think about
the meaning of the word average and how it might relate to the context at hand. For
students to whom the word "average" means only "add up all the numbers and divide",
this decision-making can be a difficult process. With respect to finding an average of two
numbers, some students may not realize that the word can mean an "equal sharing of the
total". The addition of the numbers and division process may be only a memorized
algorithm.
1.1.2. Reflecting Upon the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
I relate this reflection upon averages here to illustrate the interest that motivates
this dissertation: an interest in how learners assign meanings to mathematical
representations and how they use representations to "make sense" of mathematical ideas.
This interest became a pressing need as I prepared to teach Advanced Placement Calculus
for the first time in 1997, which included reading the Teacher's Guide to AP Calculus
(Kennedy, 1997), a book written to assist teachers in planning and teaching the course.
The text of the Guide includes specific references to meanings. Students should
"understand the meaning of the definite integral as both a limit of Riemann sums and the
net accumulation of a rate of change," and "understand the meaning of the derivative in
4
terms of a rate of change and local linear approximation." With regards to the
Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, students "should understand the relationship between
the derivative and the definite integral as expressed in both parts of the FTC." Kennedy
emphasizes that students "should understand 'both parts' of the theorem", and defines
these two parts. One "validates the use of antiderivatives to evaluate definite integrals,
f*
that is, f(x)dx = F(b)-F(a), where F is any antiderivative of/." The second
"involves the differentiation of functions defined by definite integrals, that is,

d rx
—Ja f(t)dt = f{x)." He notes that understanding such ideas requires an understanding
dx
of multiples meanings for derivatives and integrals.
Kennedy writes that the AP Calculus committee chose to emphasize "concepts"
and "multiple representations of functions" throughout the course. Upon reading these
statements, I reflected upon my own learning of calculus. While in high school, I learned
some of the techniques of calculus: rules for differentiation, and techniques of
antidifferentiation. My notebooks from that high school course contain my initial notes
on how to find the value of a definite integral - substitute given values into an
antiderivative function, and subtract. My notes include steps showing how to find the
value of I |x|dx: evaluate the antiderivative of the two functions fix) = x and/(x) = -x on
the appropriate intervals. There is no reference to the meaning of the definite integral as
an area, which one could use to either confirm the value of the integral or find it in the
first place.
Shortly afterward, I learned the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. My notes
from 1987 indicate an approach that introduced the idea of area. Up to that point my
notes indicate that the meaning of the term "definite integral" was "the difference
5
between two values of the antiderivative function." The approach to the theorem, as
recorded in my notes, proceeds as follows. To find the area between a graph and the x
axis on some domain, break up the domain into intervals and the area into rectangles that
approximate the area between the graph and the x axis. The area between the graph and
the axis on any particular interval has to be greater than the value of /(m)-Ax,
where/(m) is the minimum value of the function/on the interval. Similarly, the area
must be less than f(M)-Ax, where /(M)was the maximum value of/on the interval.
Thus, /(m) • Ax < AA < / ( M ) • Ax, where AA is the area on the interval. It follows that
AA
/(m) < — < / ( M ) , and since both /(m) and f(M) approach f(x) as Ax approaches 0,
Ax
AA
and lim — = A'(x) , then /(x) < A'(x) < / ( x ) , and thus /(x) = A'(x). Thus/is the first
derivative of area, or area is the antiderivative off. While the notation indicates that A is
a function, there is no evidence in my notes of a graph of A.
It may be indicative of what I learned about the FTC in high school that I never
wrote the statement f(x)dx = F{b) - F{a) in my notebook, although I evaluated many
integrals. I spent the majority of my time learning symbolic techniques, with symbolic
justifications. There are very few graphs in my notes; graphs were primarily something
that one could produce after symbolic procedures revealed the behavior of the graph.
While I cannot recreate my state of mind from 1987, I am fairly certain that I accepted
AA
the statement lim — = A'(x) in the sense of "If I take a limit of a change in A divided
At->0 AX
by a change in x, I'll get the derivative of A" since the word "derivative" meant
" lim Ay I Ax ". Now, I would ask myself what lim Ay I Ax represents graphically, and
At—>0 Ar->0
why one is using the difference in the antiderivative values to calculate the area.
In 1988, I took first-semester calculus in my first year of college. My notes
regarding the FTC contain the statement: "The rate at which area is swept out is
proportional to the altitude", with the word "altitude" referring to a segment from the x
axis to a point (x,J(x)) on the graph of a function. My notes refer to a function F, which
measures the accumulated area between the graph o f / a n d the x axis as the segment
sweeps from left to right. The higher the curve, the more area accumulated. The
rb
expression f(x)dx is used to represent the area swept by the segment from a to b. I
Ja
wrote, "the rate at which F(x) changes is equal to/(-*)" and F'(x) = f{x), and noted that
the calculation F(b)- F(a) represents the difference in area under the graph of/ at the x
values a and b. A picture of a "rug with a variable width" being unrolled accompanies
this explanation as written in my textbook (G. Thomas & Finney, 1988, page 280).
After writing that F is the antiderivative of/, I also wrote the following statement:
rb fb d j,
f(x)dx = —F(x) = F(x)\ = F(b) - F(a). That same day I recorded additional notes
a
Ja Ja Ax f n
b-a^
leading to a statement that f(x)dx was equal to lim V / a + — (b- a)
establishing that the definite integral was equal to a limit of a sum of the areas of
rectangles. A few days later, after some work showing that such limits would equal the
values found by using an antiderivative, I wrote "ifF'(x) = f(x) , then
I f(x)dx = F(b) - F(a) and then | F\x)dx = F(b) - F(a)". I referred to the expression
Ja «J a
F(b) - F(a) as "the net rise in the original function". That same day, I referred myself
back to "the rug picture" and wrote that the rate at which the area of the rug rolls out
d f*
equals/(x). Immediately after this, I wrote — f(t)dx=f(x).
dxJa
I recall thinking about the notes described in the previous paragraph, and finding
this idea of "rolling out a carpet" to be understandable - the area of the carpet is rolling
7
out faster if j{x) is greater. But I also recall that this notion was not particularly useful in
evaluating the derivative of J cos(t )dt. My notes show how to answer this question
procedurally, using substitution of variables. I also have the memory of sitting for my
final exam in this course, and struggling to answer a question involving the statement
rb
f{x)dx = F(b) - F{a). I recall that "following along with the symbols" did not seem to
Ja
provide me with an answer to the question posed.
The next year, as a undergraduate interested in teaching, I joined a group of
calculus "mentors" who would help students in recitation periods for a new course called
"Workshop Calculus." This course was designed for students who might struggle in the
"traditional" calculus course. I found that the students in this class worked on a variety
of questions that were unfamiliar to me. Many tasks included a graph that was not
defined by an algebraic expression and asked questions about the derivatives and
integrals of these graphs. I found myself asking myself new questions about calculus
because these kinds of questions were not previously within my experience.
1.1.3. Teaching Calculus
By the time I was preparing to teach calculus for the first time, I had taken many
courses in undergraduate and graduate mathematics where I was aware of a difference
between "following along with the symbols" and "making sense" of what I was writing.
In reflecting back upon my learning of calculus, the gap between what I had written in
my notebooks and what I felt I wished to discuss with students seemed wide. I began to
ask myself questions about the meanings of those words and symbols in my notebooks,
motivated by my experiences observing students in research settings and a personal need
to learn more about ideas that I had "followed" but not "understood". Upon reading a
8
statement like "understand the meaning of the definite integral as both a limit of Riemann
sums and the net accumulation of a rate of change" in the Teacher's Guide, I knew I had
more questions I needed to ask.
This dissertation originated with questions about calculus, and five years of
teaching the course. One year in particular my class consisted of a group of students who
were accustomed to constructing understandings through investigation and inquiry. Those
students in particular pushed me to ask more questions about my own understandings,
and present situations that would allow those students to see the FTC as something that
arose from their own questions about accumulation and rates of change. My research
questions for this study are motivated by such experiences with students and by my
experiences with the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. My experiences with the FTC
over the last 20 years have illustrated the importance of representations to the formation
and communication of ideas, and to whether an idea "makes sense." I believe that I am
still learning about the FTC, and hope that those who read this dissertation will learn
something about what it might mean to "learn mathematics".

9
1.2. Statement of the Problem
1.2.1 The Teaching of Calculus
Davis notes that when "one sees large numbers of inexperienced teaching
assistants presenting a 'notational' calculus to vast numbers of freshmen...it can seem
that only the existence of non-conceptual 'manipulative' notational alternatives allows
the whole enterprise to continue to operate" (R. B. Davis, 1986). Davis suggests that
students should learn the "concepts of calculus" in ways that illustrate how "symbols can
have meanings". He adds that "key ideas" should be presented carefully and thoroughly,
so that students can participate actively in the construction of "powerful and simple ways
of thinking". Davis spoke with a chorus of others at a conference of mathematics
educators at Tulane University in 1986, and a movement called "calculus reform" drew
momentum from these voices. Gantner (2001) and others, (e.g. Leitzel & Tucke, 1994)
report that colleges have changed their approaches to teaching calculus over the past 20
years, placing a greater "emphasis on concepts" and "multiple representations of
functions".
Kennedy describes these reform efforts as being motivated by a "dissatisfaction
with courses that drilled students in computations of calculus while slighting applications
and understanding" (Kennedy, 1997). Kennedy writes, "our traditional courses have
unfortunately graduated too many students who have been unable to communicate what
they were doing, or to translate a problem communicated to them in words without
variables". Roberts (1996) adds that students should "move comfortably between
symbolic, verbal, numerical, and graphical representations of mathematical ideas" in
order to learn calculus with meaning. In 1998, the course description of the Advanced
10
Placement course taught at the high school level was revised, incorporating many of the
ideas of "calculus reform." An explicit requirement that students should work with
functions in a variety of ways - graphical, numerical, analytical, and verbal - was a major
point of emphasis. The course description also included the explicit goal that students
should "understand the connections" between representations (Kennedy, 1997).
A number of researchers, however, have described how calculus students deal
with different representations of the same concept independently of each other, fail to
make connections between ideas, and have difficulty with tasks that involve multiple
representations. Ferrini-Mundi, Graham, and Lauten summarized this research through
1994, noting that students did not appear to view words and graphs using multi-
representational perspectives (Ferrini-Mundy & Graham, 1991, 1994; Ferrini-Mundy &
Lauten, 1993). Students viewed words as having a single meaning, mimicked symbolic
procedures, did not apply knowledge in context, performed symbolic actions without
meaning, and had difficulty interpreting or choosing solution methods for non-routine
questions. Recent research contains evidence that students continue to have difficulty in
such areas (Bezuidenhout, 1998, 2001; Carlson, 1998; Judson & Nishimori, 2005;
Thompson & Silverman, 2007; White & Mitchelmore, 1996).
1.2.2 Teaching the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
The mathematical result known as the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
formally connects two of the major concepts of calculus: the derivative and the definite
integral. These two concepts formalize notions about variation, approximation, rates of
change, accumulation, and calculations of area that fascinated mathematicians for
centuries. The FTC, in one of its forms, says that the calculation of the area between a
11
curve and an axis -"definite integration" - can be performed by evaluating a function
whose derivative is the curve in question. But while the theorem can be said to connect
most of the major ideas of calculus, the theorem can be stated and applied without
extensive attention to those mathematical connections. The theorem has at some points
in history been given very little attention beyond its existence (Rosenstein, 2002). In
recent texts, authors typically acknowledge the theorem's importance (Ostebee & Zorn,
2002), but the explore the connections or relationships between the FTC and other topics
to varying degrees.
Concern for how students make connections between the calculation of the area
under a graph (definite integration), the calculation of the instantaneous rate of change
(differentiation) and the construction of functions with a given rate of change
(antidifferentiation) has been of concern to educators long before the era of "calculus
reform". These processes can be expressed symbolically, graphically, numerically and
verbally. Prenowitz (1953) notes that the mode and order of presentation of ideas in
calculus would give students certain impressions. He notes, for example, that
antidifferentiation can be presented as "the essential idea of integral calculus", and that
"the limit of a sum" - a way to calculate the area under a curve - would then be "just an
interpretation or application of this idea", leaving the learner without a sense of the
importance of the FTC. He notes that certain "treatments of ideas impede the unification
of students' past ideas" and suggests the ideas should be examined from multiple
representations - geometric and algebraic.
Cunningham argues that the FTC is really two theorems, and that one should be
proven first (Cunningham, 1965). He argues that the reverse presentation will "obscure
12
the fact that the two theorems are saying different things" and that his recommended
presentation "connects with the applications of the definite integral in a way which
encourages understanding." Graham notes that differentiation may be viewed as a way of
discovering the rate of change of a given function, while the integral is understood as a
function with a given rate of change. The idea that the integral is also the "limit of a
sum", and can be used to calculate area, might then seem counterintuitive. Graham
reports that a "connection of some sort is indeed established arbitrarily by the so-called
fundamental theorem", which "declares the new integral equal to the old" (Graham,
1917). Graham notes that a student can simply "set a integral sign" before an expression,
find an area using the FTC, and think no further about the meaning of what he has done,
nor about any connection between areas and rates of change.
Bressoud(1992) suggests that if integration is first approached as "anti-
differentiation" followed by a sudden appearance of summation formulas, the
Fundamental Theorem of Calculus makes its appearance in a "hey presto!" fashion,
without an explanation of why antiderivatives can be used to calculate areas. Bressoud
suggests that educators' approach to the connection between derivatives and area is
important. Educators should be "clear about which approach we are teaching and how we
are building bridges between these concepts". Bressoud places the "power of
integration" in its "multifaceted nature." He suggests an approach to introducing
integration that builds a natural link between the idea of the antiderivative and the
measurement of areas, so that students can see that the antiderivative can be "interpreted
as area." Bressoud believes that for some students, the FTC "does not look like a
theorem... It looks like a definition". Looking at the theorem, students might simply
13
interpret the definite integral as the difference in the antiderivative evaluated at two
points (Bressoud, 2005) without giving further thought to why such a calculation would
find the area under a curve. Such students, he suggests, may view integration as merely
the "inverse of differentiation".
The current chief reader of AP Calculus exams notes that current AP exam
questions are designed to evaluate whether students understand the meanings of
derivatives, integrals, and the relationship between them, using a variety of settings and
contexts. Diefenderfer suggests that students need carefully planned experiences with
the FTC, with "subtle repetition of key concepts" to build an ability "to probe, discover,
question, and master the FTC and its applications" (Diefenderfer, 2005). Bressoud, a
past chair of the AP Calculus Development Committee, notes that when the committee
members put together each exam, they set out to tell how well students understand the
theorem. Bressoud adds that students can get confused about what the FTC really means
and why it is so important (Diefenderfer, 2005).
But what does the FTC "really mean" to students? Despite the potential
importance of the FTC to students' overall understanding of the major ideas of calculus,
research focused specifically on the meanings students associate with the FTC has been
infrequent (Carlson, Smith, & Persson, 2003). The theorem is mentioned in a number of
studies (Bezuidenhout & Olivier, 2000; Dubinsky, 1991b; Eisenberg, 1992; Mamona-
Downs, 2001), typically as an example of an idea that students would have difficulty
grasping. Researchers suspect that students need to connect representations and
understand multiple meanings for derivatives, integrals, limits, and functions to
understand the FTC. If students have difficulties in these areas, (Asiala, Cottrill,
14
Dubinsky, & Schwingendorf, 1997; Carlson, 1998; Judson & Nishimori, 2005; Porzio,
1995; Selden, Mason, & Selden, 1989; Selden, Selden, & Mason, 1994) it might seem
that an understanding of the FTC would be out of students' reach.
The existing research suggests that students have particular problems making
connections due to difficulties in using representations in flexible ways. Judson and
Nishimori, for example, describe the tasks used in their study as requiring "a sound
conceptual understanding of calculus but little or no algebraic computation." They report
that students knew about the FTC but "did not fully grasp the meaning of the theorem and
how the derivative and the integral are related". Students "apply arguments not globally,
but use different arguments suitable for each case" and have difficulty "selecting and
using appropriate representations". As students with such difficulties might be expected
to have difficulty developing meanings for the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus (Tall,
1993b), the paucity of research into the FTC may be not be surprising.
1.2.3 Learning the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
Carlson, Persson and Smith report that students displayed weak understandings of
the relationships expressed by the theorem (Carlson et al., 2003). Thompson investigated
the "ways of thinking" that might make the FTC "intelligible to individuals reflecting on
relationships between derivative and integral" (Thompson, 1994a). After presenting one
such way of thinking, he details difficulties students may have with ideas about rates and
functions, and how students can fail to "make sense" of the FTC. Thompson reports that
the students in his study could not make sense of the FTC due to "impoverished images"
of rate and accumulation. Students had particular difficulty using mathematical notation
to express their thinking, and difficulty assigning meanings to mathematical notations.

15
Thompson concluded that students could not coordinate the "ensemble of actions"
involving notations, graphs, and conceptions of how quantities change so as to form an
"operational understanding" of the FTC (Thompson, 1994a).
In a follow-up to this study, Thompson and Silverman suggest that the difficulties
students have with the FTC "are instructive for a larger set of issues in calculus" such as
relating symbolic and the graphical representations, and interpreting symbolic
expressions (Thompson & Silverman, 2007). Thompson and Silverman provide
additional examples of how students can use symbolic representations superficially,
explaining the meaning of the FTC with statements that lacked connections to other
meanings of the theorem. They suggest that further study is needed to examine the
meanings students are attaching to the words and notational actions that the theorem
involves FTC. Thompson and Silverman suggest research into how students might
achieve "well-developed meanings" as part of a "coherent calculus that focuses on having
students see connections."
Thomas proposes a possible set of understandings and capabilities for learning
the FTC with meaning (K. S. C. Thomas, 1995). In interview data, she found that college
students made tenuous connections between the meanings of definite integrals,
antiderivatives, and Riemann sums. Students used notations inflexibly; upon being
presented with a question, students had only one route to solve the problem because the
notation suggested only one meaning to the student. Students made statements about the
FTC that were true, but had difficulty applying individual pieces of knowledge to
communicate about the FTC or solve problems involving its use. Thomas concludes that
students must come to understand not only the processes that constitute the statement of
16
the FTC, but the meaning of those processes. She suggests instructional tasks that
motivate reflection upon the different meanings of the ideas that compose the FTC.
Schnepp & Nemirovsky suggest "encountering and reencountering a mutual
relationship between differentiation and integration" (Schnepp & Nemirovsky, 2001)
through classroom discussions where "revising the meanings of familiar words" can lead
to the development of in-depth understandings. Recommending an instructional
approach grounded in the context of motion, Schnepp & Nemirovsky suggest that
students can develop "multiple and complex capacities to recognize, say, graphical
shapes, forms of equations, number sequences, and so forth" through the examination and
discussion of mathematical representations. By negotiating the meanings of mathematical
terms and symbols, "acts of recognition become points of departure or arrival for
inferences", and the meanings of words can be refined and interpreted, leading to
understanding of the FTC and its significance.
Summarizing the first ten years of "calculus reform", Roberts suggests that
calculus can be "a culmination and a beginning" - a place where students might pull
together ideas from prior courses, and build a foundation for studies yet to come
(Roberts, 1996). Roberts suggests that in calculus, students might take "concepts apart,
understand where they come from, see how their elements are inter-related, and
ultimately see how they might be used in a new context to build insights that are, at least
for that individual, new and significant". Studies of how students might go about doing
what Roberts suggests, however, are few. Researchers have largely focused on students'
difficulties, and examined whether students express particular "understandings and
reasoning abilities" that the researchers propose are "involved in learning and using the
17
FTC" (Carlson et al., 2003). Researchers continue to report that students have difficulty
understanding that two different representations represent the same idea, and report that
students fail to connect a result in one representation with that in another (Hahkioniemi,
2004).
1.2.4 Potentials and Possibilities for Learning
Research focused on the differences between students' thinking and the well-
developed conceptions of the mathematical community suggest that students might arrive
at understandings through thinking like the mature learner. Such suggestions, while
grounded in observational research of students, take for granted that what seems to make
sense to the experienced learner must be what makes sense to the novice. To the mature
learner, looking back, it may seem that certain learning pathways are either necessary, or
more beneficial than others. However, some have pointed out that no amount of
comparisons may reveal the "correct" approach that leads all students to a certain
understanding at a certain time (Dubinsky & Schwingendorf, 1991; Schoenfeld, 1999).
Additionally, smooth transitions from incomplete, inconsistent, and limited ideas to more
complete, consistent, and global views sort may be largely a figment of educators'
imagination (Graeber, 1990).
It may be as important, then, to examine how students use representations to
communicate about the FTC as it is to examine the meanings students have at a particular
moment and how those meanings compare with that of the mature learner. Inquiry into
how students themselves choose representations to reason about the FTC would add a
new perspective to the research about how students connect ideas in calculus. Such study
would also inform educators who are teaching with "multiple representations" in
18
calculus, and expand the discussion about what it might mean to "understand" the FTC.
If, as Hughes-Hallett suggests, one believes that it is "seeing the links between various
approaches that constitutes understanding" then further study of students' reasoning
about the FTC is in order. While some research (e.g. Porzio, 1999) includes evidence that
students who learn in multi-representational environments exhibit improved responses to
conceptual questions, detailed examinations of how students build the ideas that they do
display are few.
Research that broadens educators' views of how students arrive at different
insights at different times may help educators learn how to listen to students' ideas, and
respond to the possibility that students' routes to understandings may differ from their
own (Tall, 1985). Davis and Vinner (1986), and others (Wagner, 2006), suggest that in
general, learners may hold "incomplete" notions of any idea as they work to revise and
refine their thinking. Novice learners, despite promising instructional practices, might be
expected to exhibit inconsistent responses to questions that experienced learners see as
the same (Dubinsky, 1991a; Sfard & Lavie, 2005; Tall, 1989; Thompson, 1999; Wagner,
2006). As it is likely that calculus will continue to be taught to students who have
incomplete notions of functions and other "prerequisite" topics, research focused on how
students work with incomplete or limited notions might prove informative to practitioners
(Dreyfus, 1991).
Some suggest that where students have not yet reflected upon ideas or
representations in depth, students might "work around" their incomplete notions (Berger,
2004; Rasmussen, Zandieh, King, & Teppo, 2005; Wagner, 2006; Zack & Reid, 2003,
2004). Some researchers also contend that mathematical knowledge, even for the
19
experienced learner, may involve construction, re-construction, and re-organizing of
ideas for particular situations (Cottrill et al., 1996; Dubinsky, 1991b). Learners may
experience, and perhaps continue to experience, conflicts, gaps, "incorrect" or
inconsistent ideas as their learning proceeds. However, studies of how students compare
and contrast ideas in a variety of contexts, see how important ideas fit together, or talk
about the significance of what they have learned are few (Francisco & Maher, 2005;
Maher, 2005; Mamona-Downs, 1996; Tall, 1978; Watson & Mason, 2002).
Some researchers have looked at how students use their representational
capabilities as they work to make sense of or invent their own representations (Berger,
2004; Bloch, 2003; Blum & Kirsch, 1991; diSessa, 2004; diSessa, Hammer, Sherin, &
Kolpakowski, 1991; Maher & Speiser, 1997; Speiser & Walter, 1994). Some have
suggested that an exploration of how students work around obstacles (diSessa & Sherin,
2000; Speiser, Walter, & Maher, 2003) would contribute much to efforts to improve
student learning. Learners need not be characterized as "having developed" a concept or
as "not having developed a concept" (Rasmussen et al., 2005). A study of how students
communicate about the FTC would add to this body of research. Given the reality of
calculus instruction in classrooms, where students are typically given only a brief amount
of time to consider how the ideas of calculus fit together, it may not be surprising that
students do not appear to display an in-depth understanding of the FTC when questioned
(Dubinsky & Schwingendorf, 1991; Tall, 1993b; Wagner, 2006).
Researchers have found that students construct personal versions of ideas, looking
for ideas that "make sense" to them (Erlwanger, 1973). Berger provides an example of a
student modifying prior conceptions about a symbol when faced with new uses for the
20
symbol. Berger uses her example to show that students, even when using symbols in a
procedural way, can compare their actions reflectively against the actions of others in a
search for meaning (Berger, 2004). A study of how students talk about the FTC - with
potentially incomplete notions in mind (Tall, 1991b) - would inform those interested in
the development of complex ideas over time and the role of students' own ideas as they
think about the ideas presented by others.
If educators do want students to "understand the meaning" of the FTC (Kennedy,
1997) it may be instructive to look at what the novice learner does think about the
theorem that may lay the groundwork for future refinement of ideas. A study that
examines the possibly "messy reality" (R. B. Davis & Maher, 1990; O'Connor, 1998) of
how students can use their representational capabilities to construct meanings may
provide a different perspective than that of existing research. Such study would also add
to the research that suggests that students do use their capabilities to make meaningful
statements about the ideas of calculus (Schnepp & Nemirovsky, 2001; Speiser & Walter,
1994; Speiser et al., 2003). Research that asks students how they take and interpret
elements of their mathematical experience to communicate meanings may also, as Maher
suggests, teach the researchers something they themselves do not know (Maher, 2005).
21
1.3. Research Questions
1.3.1. Meaning and Representations
When a student communicates about a mathematical result, he or she uses
mathematical representations - words, symbols, graphs, pictures, tables of numbers. Such
representations can be used in combination: words make an analogy, words explain
symbols, symbols explain diagrams, or diagrams explain the meaning of symbols, to
name just a few. Representations can also be produced and used procedurally, with little
other meaning attached (Bloch, 2003). In the study of calculus in particular, students
may make graphical, verbal, symbolic and numerical actions without attaching meaning
other than "this is the procedure to be used in this situation", or without expressing
connections between ideas or representations. Since the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus is seen by the mathematical community as a profound statement that connects
the "big ideas" of the subject, students who do not make such connections may not
appreciate the meaning of the theorem (Kennedy, 1997), or apply its ideas as a problem-
solving tool.
In the previous section, I noted that those interested in the teaching and learning
of calculus have for many years been concerned with the meanings students associate
with the mathematical representations they use. In this study, I will examine an extended
conversation about the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus between a group of students
who have completed a calculus course. This conversation is the students' response to a
prompt that asks them to explain the theorem to a current student of calculus. I choose
the FTC as the mathematical area for students to discuss because of its potential to elicit
the use of multiple representations. My interest in this study lies in which mathematical
22
representations the students in the research group choose to use in their conversation,
how they assign meanings to mathematical representations, and how they use
representations to "make sense" of the FTC.
Recent textbooks (Bartkovich, Goebel, Graves, & Teague, 1996; Hughes-Hallett
& Gleason, 1998; Ostebee & Zorn, 2002) offer a broad variety of approaches to calculus
and the FTC. Throughout these and other texts, the authors emphasize the use of multiple
representations and meanings of the FTC. Authors have created a variety of instructional
activities designed to involve students in using representations meaningfully (Berry &
Nyman, 2003; Bressoud, 1992; Clements, Pantozzi, & Sketetee, 2001; Diefenderfer,
2005; Dubinsky & Schwingendorf, 1991; Gordon & Gordon, 2007; Suzuki, 2003; Tall,
1986, 199Id). The AP Calculus Committee (Howell, 2007; Kennedy, 1997) and authors
in AP publications (Diefenderfer, 2005) also encourage multi-representational
approaches to the FTC. While a wide variety of resources exist to promote multi-
representational approaches, documentation of students' own learning pathways is sparse.
In this study, 1 do not intend to determine if students understand a particular
meaning of the FTC, and do not evaluate the meanings students express against a
theoretical model of students' thinking about the FTC (e.g. "mental actions" (Carlson et
al., 2003), "images" (Thompson, 1994a), or "mental constructions" (K. S. C. Thomas,
1995)). Instead, I examine students' choices of representations, meanings, and topics for
discussion after they are prompted to discuss the FTC. I will look at how students use
mathematical representations to discuss meanings of integrals and derivatives and the
connections between them. The students will be free to direct their own conversation, and
may choose which aspects of the FTC they wish to discuss. The students who
23
participated in this study completed a high school course in calculus three and one half
years prior to the research session. In that first course in calculus, these students were
exposed to a multi-representational approach, using symbolic, graphical, numerical, and
verbal representations of the FTC, and considered connections between integrals and
derivatives before encountering the formal statement of the FTC.
1.3.2. Using Representations
Studying how students use representations to communicate about the theorem
may contribute to the knowledge base of how students build ideas (R. B. Davis & Maher,
1997), and how students use their representational capabilities (Meira, 1995) to create
meaning through using and connecting representations (Hughes-Hallett, 1991). While
researchers have reported that students do not make many such connections, particularly
in calculus, Schoenfeld points out that researchers looking for "pre-determined transfer"
- the "connections they hope their subjects will make" - may often be disappointed
(Schoenfeld, 1999). Instead, by examining how ideas appear from the perspective of the
learner (Bloch, 2003; Steffe & Thompson, 1999), researchers can document which
connections students do make, and how they productively use these connections. A
number of researchers have examined students' use of representations, and the role
representations play in students' thinking (R. B. Davis & Maher, 1997; diSessa et al.,
1991; Goldin & Shteingold, 2001; Kaput, 1993, 1998; Maher, 1991; Maher & Martino,
2000; Meira, 1995; Radford, 2000).
In the tradition of such studies, I examine students' use of mathematical
representations, and the meanings students communicate. I focus on how students employ
different representations to communicate ideas, how students use representations to

24
create meanings, and how students use representations to draw conclusions (Goldin,
1998a; Vergnaud, 1998). While researchers have reported that students do not make
particular connections with respect to the FTC, I focus attention on the connections that
students do make, and how students' choice of representations may affect the meanings
they express. I will investigate the role representations play in the students' discussions,
how students' ideas arise from their own interactions with the examples they choose to
highlight, and the representational capabilities students are employing in their activity.
Students learn in a world where they encounter mathematical statements that have
already been created, refined, and accepted by a wider community (Tall, 1991b). These
statements are meant to capture the thinking that went into them. Students, however, may
f*
encounter statements like f(x)dx before they have thought through all the ideas that
la
led the community to accept the statement and its form (Radford, 2000, 2006). How
students assign meanings to mathematical representations is a question that has been
studied from a variety of perspectives, and students' difficulties in this area are well
documented (e.g. Alcock & Simpson, 2002; Berger, 2004; R. B. Davis & Vinner, 1986;
Harel & Tall, 1991; Presmeg, 1992; Radford, 2000; Sfard, 1991; Tall & Vinner, 1981;
Vinner, 1976; Vinner & Dreyfus, 1989). Radford, for example, notes that students' initial
exposure to algebra may restrict students' ability to communicate, as students are asked
to use a language without developing their own need to use that language. Alcock and
Simpson describe students' struggles in interpreting definitions as representations of
mathematical categories of examples.
The use of representations, however, is a daily activity for learners of
mathematics. Some researchers have used socio-cultural and semiotic perspectives to

25
examine how students learn accepted uses of particular representations (Cobb, Wood, &
Yackel, 1993; Ernest, 2006; Forman, 1996; O'Connor, 1998; van Oers, 1996; Voigt,
1996). Meira suggests that students' use of representations depends upon the goals that
emerge for learners as activity unfolds, and students' past and present participation in the
larger set of practices that give meaning to the activity itself (Meira, 1995). Some
researchers have noted how the representational forms students encounter, the students'
own choices of representation, and the forms of the questions students ask, influence
what avenues of discussion they pursue (Bloch, 2003; Even, 1998).
In this study, I will ask questions that may contribute to the discussion of how
students' thinking is influenced by their encounters with mathematical representations.
As students learn about a particular topic, they may make statements that appear to have
limited meaning, or appear to use representations in disconnected, inconsistent, or
incorrect ways (Berger, 2004). Acknowledging this possibility, I will focus on the role
representations play in students' communications about the FTC, not whether the
students make a particular statement about the theorem. If students identify links
between representations, how do students use those links? How do students' choices
about representations appear to influence what they communicate and how they
communicate with each other? While representations can sometimes reveal "what"
students may be thinking, I will focus on how students' use of representations may
influence the meanings of the FTC the students discuss.
I also focus on students' use of representations rather than students' conceptions
about the FTC because of an interest in how students' thinking may change over time.
The transition from novice use of representations to the mature use of representations
26
desired by the mathematical community may not occur as a single learning event
(Freudenthal, 1991). In this study, I will examine students' work with representations of
the FTC, in an effort to illustrate how the use of representations may contribute to
ongoing learning. By focusing upon students' use of mathematical representations, three
years after the students have completed calculus, I hope to investigate how students'
ideas about the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus might remain "under construction"
(Kieren, Pirie, & Reid, 1994).
Freudenthal also notes that while the mathematical community has achieved
great heights of knowledge, students are "consigned to much lower levels from which
they resume the learning process of mankind" (Freudenthal, 1991). He suggests that
students "reinvent mathematising rather than mathematics" so that they can experience
mathematical thinking, rather than mimic the ways they see other learners use
representations (Bloch, 2003). While the mathematical community has high hopes for
students' learning of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, how students might go about
reinventing calculus is an open question, despite the many approaches to calculus that
currently exist. In the process of reinvention, Harel and Tall note that students may work
first from examples, or "prototypes" of concepts. While the experienced learner may
view examples as "instantiations of the abstract concept" (Harel & Tall, 1991) the novice
may draw conclusions from individual examples (Alcock & Simpson, 2002; Watson &
Mason, 2002) at a pace that is not solely determined by the plans of the educator (Maher
& Martino, 2000).
Freudenthal and others (Tall, 1991b) suggest that students might appreciate the
need for particular definitions and organizations of the content for themselves if they can
27
be engaged in the process of "mathematising". Students ask their own questions, and
make their own decisions about when to use particular representations, and when a proof
of a result is needed. In the same spirit, Tall suggests that "if somehow the learner were
to get an intimation of the whole concept first, then he would be in a better position to
organise his thinking processes to cope with it" (Tall, 1985, 1991b). Similarly, Berry and
Nyman suggest that working with representations, particularly graphical ones, would help
students develop the "big picture" of calculus (Berry & Nyman, 2003). To develop a
sense of the "big picture", researchers have suggested that students encounter questions
similar to those that led to the development of the FTC, and experience the theorem using
multiple representations (Schnepp & Nemirovsky, 2001; Thompson, 1994a). Some
evidence suggests that engaging students in the use of multiple representations and
connections positively impacts student learning in calculus (Dubinsky & Schwingendorf,
1991; Porzio, 1999; Rasmussen & King, 1998).
1.3.3. Guiding Questions
In this study, I do not look to establish links between a particular approach to the
FTC and particular student responses, or determine if students have developed the "whole
concept" of the FTC. Instead, I will ask questions designed motivate students to express
and discuss meanings. I will not explicitly ask students to "reinvent" calculus or the FTC,
but note that as students work with given representations to explain the FTC, they may
revisit or need to reconstruct ideas they had first considered years earlier, in ways that
may differ from the logical order of a textbook. The FTC is of particular interest in this
respect, as the theorem was stated and explained long before the development of a
mathematically rigorous foundation (Kline, 1970).

28
The FTC is a result that can be expressed in multiple representations, and be
explained in a variety of ways. While the theorem does arise from "prerequisite" topics,
it can also be seen as a result that gives greater meaning to those topics. For this author,
the theorem has played such a role - it has caused me to think about the meanings of
integrals, derivatives, and limits and the notations used to express those ideas. The idea
that such reflection is important in the study of mathematics (Dubinsky, 1991b) leads me
to ask if students reflect upon the role representations play in their reasoning (Dreyfus,
1991; Harel & Sowder, 2005; Wagner, 2006). Students may make judgments about
choices of representation, express preferences for a representation, or consider how to
organize their use of representations in ways that advance their thinking about the topic at
hand, or contribute in indirect ways to the development of their thinking (Maher, 2005;
Maher & Martino, 2000; Maher, Pantozzi, Martino, Steencken, & Deming, 1996).
My specific research questions are as follows:
1. What representations do students use to communicate the meaning of the
FTC?
2. What meanings do students attach to the representations that they use?
3. How do students link representations to reason about why the FTC is true?
4. In what ways do the students reflect upon their use of representations?

29
2. Methodology
In this chapter, I will describe the motivation for the design of the study, detail the
research design, discuss the theoretical foundation for the design, and communicate the
procedures for data collection and analysis. As indicated in the previous chapter, the
focus of this study is students' use of representations as they communicate about a
particular mathematical result, the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. In the study, I will
examine students' choices of mathematical representations, and ask how students assign
meaning to those representations. I will investigate how students use representations to
communicate about the FTC, and focus attention on connections students make between
representations. In describing the design, I provide some background on the students
who participated in the study, with respect to their experiences with mathematics
education and with calculus in particular. This background influenced the design of the
study, and will provide the reader with a context for the results that I will later describe.
2.1. Background and Motivation for the Design
In this study, I look at how a group of students use representations as they
communicate with each other about the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. As I
indicated in the opening chapter, I have an interest in how individuals communicate
meanings to each other through mathematical representations, and an interest in situations
where communications with others (in person or through written or other means) appear
to change what individuals report about their understandings. My interest is partially
motivated by my experiences as a classroom teacher working to communicate with
students. I have observed students apparently develop new meanings for familiar words
after experiences with new contexts, new representations, or new mathematical tasks. I
30
have also observed students report new understandings or agreements with the ideas of
others after engaging in communicative activities (Berger, 2005).
My interest also grew from my work as a graduate student, where I participated
in research activities associated with a longitudinal study1 of the development of
students' mathematical ideas (Maher, 2005). The students who participated in this
longitudinal study worked together on mathematical tasks with minimal outside
intervention in research sessions that occurred at regular intervals over the course of ten
years. Maher describes this study as one designed to engage students in tasks requiring
"careful and convincing explanation" over extended periods of time - both in an
individual session and across sessions. Students in this study, upon encountering new
contexts or problem solving tasks, discussed and refined ideas that they had first explored
years earlier. This longitudinal study has provided "in-depth case analyses of the
development of explanation, reasoning and proof with a group of students who became
accustomed to conducting mathematical investigations where they discussed and debated
their ideas with each other (Maher, 2005).
My own involvement with the longitudinal study began as part of a undergraduate
honors project, part of which involved watching videotapes of the students as 1st graders
working on mathematics tasks. As part of my graduate work, I continued to observe the
students' work with the research team on videotape, and in 1997 had the opportunity to
interview some of the students while they were in their first year of high school. In the
fall of 1997, ten of the students enrolled in the newly-opened David Brearley High
School in Kenilworth, New Jersey. I began work there as a teacher that same year,
National Science Foundation grants MDR9053597 (directed by R. B. Davis and C. A. Maher) and REC-
9814846 (directed by C.A. Maher).
31
teaching four of the students in an Algebra II class. From September 1998 to June 1999,1
taught all ten in a Precalculus class. In this course, I worked to incorporate my
knowledge of the students' prior work with reasoning, representation, proof, and
communication into my daily lesson plans, and prepare the students for taking AP
Calculus the subsequent year.
As part of the longitudinal study, these ten students participated in research
sessions in the summer of 1999. These sessions were videotaped by a team from the
Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics for use in a teacher professional
development workshop, A Private Universe in Mathematics. That summer, the students
investigated ideas about rate of change and talked about these ideas in a group setting
using a variety of mathematical representations (Speiser et al., 2003). The ten students
then took AP Calculus at David Brearley High School from September 1999 to January
2000. As the teacher of this course, I attempted to incorporate ideas from the Teacher's
Guide to AP Calculus (Kennedy, 1997) in the presentation of content and the design of
instruction. I taught the course with the intent of engaging students in the goals and
content of the AP Calculus Course Description published in 1998. While certain lessons
of the AP Calculus course were videotaped by researchers from the longitudinal study
and the Harvard-Smithsonian team, I planned instructional lessons independently of the
research team.
After the students' graduation from high school in the spring of 2000, I did not
participate in the students' further meetings with the longitudinal study research team. I
kept in intermittent contact with three of the students from the class, and saved some of
the students' work from their Precalculus and Calculus classes. In thinking about a
32
possible dissertation proposal in 2002, I considered investigating how these students
might look back upon their learning of calculus. As a growing number of learners take a
course in calculus in high school and/or college, with research typically focused on
learning during or immediately after the course, I wondered if inquiry into the
experiences of these students might add a new perspective to this research. While having
learners leave a one-semester course in calculus with well-developed notions of the
concepts of calculus is a worthy goal, the development of learners' mathematical
methodology may be just as important of a goal.
By asking this group of students to explain the FTC to a current student of
calculus, I will investigate how the students might use mathematical representations to
communicate about the theorem, and how the students may reflect upon their use of
representations. While researchers have examined the results of certain instructional
treatments in the course, (e.g. Porzio, 1995, 1999) these studies have occurred during or
soon after the course. This time interval may not allow students time to think about the
implications of what they have been learning. Research into students' learning of the
ideas of calculus has also been focused on students' difficulties with limits, derivatives,
integrals, and the FTC (Carlson et al., 2003; Ferrini-Mundy & Graham, 1994; Judson &
Nishimori, 2005; Selden et al., 1994; Tall, 1993b; Thompson & Silverman, 2007; Vinner,
1989). In asking students to communicate about the theorem four years after they first
encountered it, students may have the opportunity to investigate questions that the
timeline of the typical calculus course may not allow. By working to attach meanings to
the representations that they recall or find in the resources I will provide, they may work
to make sense of what they have learned.

33
2.2. Background of the Students
The students who were participants in the study are unique in that they have
participated in a longitudinal study specifically designed to encourage communication,
sense-making, and reflection, without the time limitations of a classroom curriculum.
The students have extensive experience sharing ideas with other students and experienced
others (often in front of video camera). In presenting the unique events in which these
students have participated, I also note that in other respects, these students have
experienced a typical United States sequence of mathematics courses. They have also
reported, in interview settings, their reflections upon the kinds of mathematics that they
have experienced in the classroom (A Private Universe In Mathematics, 2000). These
students have noted that the typical timeline for learning leaves little time for in-depth
discussion of ideas and that the presentation of content can leave out the thinking that
went into that content.
The students who participated in this study had extensive experience discussing
mathematics, treating it as a subject where questions of purpose, meaning, and
understanding were permitted and encouraged. The communications that I will examine
are made by students who have experienced calculus and the FTC from multiple
perspectives, and were engaged in discussion and argumentation about mathematical
meanings over the course of multiple years. Extensive videotape data exists to document
the ways these students communicated about mathematics prior to taking calculus
(Regina Dockweiler Kiczek, 2000; Maher, 2005; Maher & Martino, 1996; Muter, 1999;
Powell, 2003), and videotapes of some sessions of the students' AP Calculus class also
exist as informal documentation the students' in-class experience.

34
In their high school calculus class, the students were exposed to dynamic
graphical representations of derivatives and integrals created with the Geometer's
Sketchpad computer program. Students saw, for example, rectangles constructed
dynamically along an interval under the graph of a function, with a graph of the
accumulated area of those rectangles constructed simultaneously. Students could ask for
the demonstration to be repeated, and could ask for adjustments in the given function. In
making such adjustments, the graph of the accumulated area would update accordingly.
Some of the activities used in the class were incorporated into the book Exploring
Calculus with the Geometer's Sketchpad (Clements et al., 2001). Using Sketchpad, I
often introduced these students to ideas and concepts graphically and verbally, and then
encouraged the students to attach notation to the graphs and to their ideas about the
graphs. In the class, the students were asked to interpret the meaning of symbols using
graphical representations, and write about the meanings they attached to graphical and
symbolic representations.
2.3. Research Sessions
I invited all of the students from the AP Calculus class to participate in two
research sessions in the summer of 2003; seven students accepted this invitation. The
research sessions would occur one month apart, with an initial and then a follow-up
meeting. In the invitation, the students were not informed that a particular theorem would
be the topic of the first research session, only that they would be asked to talk about a
calculus topic. Some of the seven students had taken a semester course in calculus in
college in the fall of 2000, while others had chosen courses of study that did not require
calculus. To begin the first session, I presented students with the following prompt:
35
A current student of calculus has asked you to help them

understand the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. The student, knowing
that you have taken calculus in the past, is interested in what the theorem
means, what the theorem is "for," and why the theorem is true.
You have agreed to the student's request. In preparing to respond

to the student, you can use any materials that you feel would be helpful to
you, including textbooks, other calculus resource materials, specific
calculus questions, calculators, and computers. You may also discuss your
ideas with the other students here with you today.
I chose this prompt so that the students might have the opportunity to
communicate openly about their ideas, in representational forms of their own choosing,
and to provide the students with a context that might encourage them to share and revise
ideas, and reflect upon their thinking. I chose this approach to allow the students to
express their ideas without concern for whether those ideas would be evaluated against a
specific model of understanding of the FTC.
The seven students were divided into two groups. In one group, two of the three
students had taken mathematics courses through Calculus II, while the third pursued a
program in liberal arts and had not taken additional courses past Calculus I. In the other
group of four students, two had continued in mathematics through Calculus II, one had
concentrated in the study of economics, and the fourth pursued a program in liberal arts
and had not taken additional courses past Calculus I. I did not expect that any of the
students participating had spent time in the previous two years paying particular attention
to the FTC, but if any had the prompt was designed to motivate the student to think about
the theorem from a different perspective.
At the time of the first session, I did not have any current knowledge about
students' thinking about the FTC, other than extant work from their high school calculus
class. I provided the students with a selection of calculus textbooks that typify some of
36
the current goals of "calculus reform" as well has some more "traditional" texts. I
provided students with the textbook they had used in their AP Calculus course, and a
selection of the students' work from their high school AP Calculus class. The student
work I provided were copies of tests, quizzes, and written reflections, designed solely for
the purposes of instructing the class in 1999 - 2000. I had saved some of the student
work from the class at the conclusion of the course without a particular future purpose in
mind, and thus their content ranged across a variety of topics. Students were free to look
at any of the papers available, which included the work of other students who were not
participating in the study or who were not present in their group.
While others (i.e. K. S. C. Thomas, 1995; Thompson, 1994a) have engaged
students in discussion about the FTC, it has been in a context where students were asked
particular questions or presented with particular situations. I intended to ask students to
communicate with each other about the FTC, leaving open what issues students might
discuss. With the design of this first session, I hoped to be able to observe what might
become a "study session" between the students, where they would question each other
about meanings as they saw fit, rather than at the specific request of a teacher or
researcher. By providing the students with a variety of written statements of the FTC, I
intended to communicate to the students that their recall of the FTC was not under
observation. I also addressed each group directly about this particular issue. I noted that
there would be second session, and that if the students decided they wished to talk about
calculus topics other than the FTC, they could do so and still provide valuable research
data.
37
2.4. Conduct of Sessions
I intended the direction of the first session to be determined by the students. After
presenting the task, I would leave the room and allow the students talk about the question
to the extent that they saw fit. During the session, my intent was to be a part of the
students' discussion only at their request. As the students former classroom instructor, I
planned to make a particular point of describing the difference between my role as a
teacher and my role as a researcher. Despite the students' experience with research
sessions in which evaluation was not a goal, a research session initiated by a former
teacher might bring the issue of evaluation to the students' thoughts about the goals of the
session. At the beginning of the first session, then, I explained that my role as a
researcher would not focus on the evaluations that teachers are make or are perceived to
make, but instead on interpretations that two people make in conversations with each
other.
When interacting with students, I looked to listen to what the students were saying
from their point of view, rather than steering them towards a particular point of view. If I
observed students espouse conflicting notions that to me, when taken together, seemed to
make "no sense" (Byers & Erlwanger, 1984; Erlwanger, 1973), I planned to eschew
"corrections" of what students had to say. I did intend to pose questions asking students
to make their knowledge explicit (Steffe & Thompson, 1999). These questions, however,
would be chosen with the intent of acting as a fellow learner looking to make sure I
understood what the students were saying to me, rather than as a teacher looking to check
the level of students' knowledge or point out a particular route to a solution. Steffe &
Thompson suggest that "everything is the students' knowledge as we strive to feel at one
38
with them", and I took care to make inquiries of the students that would indicate an
interest in sharing, rather than evaluating, their thinking. While in the prompt I included a
request that students consider why the FTC was true, I planned to not push the students to
do so through additional questions.
Cobb suggests that "it is crucial that the instructional developer distinguish
between the meanings that students give to representational systems in terms of their
current ways of knowing, and the mathematical structure that the system embodies for
adults who know mathematics" (Cobb et al., 1991). As a teacher, I believe it is easy to
think that I know what a student is thinking, and thus decide what a student does or does
not understand. The existing research into students' understanding of the FTC has
detailed the interpretations and misconceptions that students can form with respect to the
theorem. In the learning process, however, a student may encounter moments where
ideas "make sense" even if the experienced learner may judge that the novice's
perspective is limited. Dufour-Janvier, Bednarz, & Belanger (1987) suggest researchers
look carefully at how students might use representations to solve problems, noting that
context, and forms of questions, affect the strategies students choose to use.
In structuring the session for students in the ways I have described, I intended to
remain open to the idea that "it is quite possible for students to have intelligent
interpretations of mathematics which differ fundamentally" (Tall, 1985) from my own,
and attempt see the mathematics from the students' viewpoint. Speiser and Walter
illustrate how unexpected insights can be gained when students are presented with tasks
that do not demand a specific response, in contexts where dialogue group discussion, and
the sharing of perspectives are the norm (Speiser & Walter, 1994). By presenting
39
students with a situation that "demands discussion, even outright disagreement" Speiser
and Walter found that students examined the idea of derivative from new perspectives,
asking questions that demanded "verbal formulation, logical response, and hence a
consciously examined discourse." While disagreement is not built into the prompt I
presented to the students, I intended for the prompt to motivate an "examined discourse".
In both the research and the classroom settings, as a teacher and a student, I have
encountered situations where it appeared that different individuals did not hold the same
meanings for the symbols, words and graphs that we were both using. I have noted that
students sometimes held beliefs about the role of representations in mathematics that
caused them to work with graphs, and symbols as primarily as objects to be moved
around or produced upon request (Greeno, 1991). I have also noted that students - both
those who were part of the longitudinal study and those who were not - used symbols
differently when they were working to answer an exploratory question as opposed to an
"answer-known" question (Cazden, 1988). I noted how students sometimes made
meaning for themselves in the form of statements like "I know I'm supposed to put that
symbol there because that's what's done in all the other problems" (Pantozzi, 1997).
DiSessa and Sherin note that research into representations has been focused on a
"small subset of competence related to representations... In particular... how students
produce and interpret a small number of instructed scientific representations such as
graphs and tables," with an emphasis on "the mistakes students make, rather than on the
capabilities that students possess" (diSessa & Sherin, 2000). Similarly, Rasmussen,
Zandieh, King, and Teppo find "the notion of a 'final stage' unhelpful in thinking about
students' mathematical development" (Rasmussen et al., 2005). They observed

40
"symbolizing activities in which students shift from recording and communicating their
thinking to using their symbolizations as inputs for further mathematical reasoning and
conceptualization". By planning the first session as described, I hoped students would
consciously examine the ideas they communicated.
2.5. Examination of Data
After observing the videotapes of the first session of each group, I created a
preliminary transcript of each session, and made descriptive notes indicating the types of
representations the students chose to use. I noted the meanings the students appeared to
associate with the representations, and outlined the sequences in which students used
representations in their discussion. I viewed the tapes of the first session multiple times
without intentionally imposing a specific analytical lens. I described the sequence of the
events in the video data to create an objective description of the content of the videotapes.
Given that the participants were once my students, I re-read my descriptions to eliminate
subjective statements about the events in the sessions. I viewed the tapes multiple times,
looking to take the point of view of the participants and not draw conclusions about what
the students might appear to "understand" about the FTC. I did, however, look to
identify sequences of linked events within the students' discussion, again in an attempt to
see the discussion as it unfolded from the point of view of the students. I hoped this
methodology would allow me to focus on the students' use of representations, rather than
whether they "understood" the FTC.
After viewing the videotape data over the month's time between the first and
second sessions, I planned to have students continue to take their discussion into routes of
their own choosing in the follow-up session. While the students did express an interest in
41
knowing whether they understood the FTC, I explained to them that I did not have a
"understanding detection device" that would "tick faster" like a Geiger counter when
placed next to an individual. I made this suggestion to communicate that I did not have a
privileged view of what students were thinking (Steffe & Thompson, 1999). I explained
to the students that in the second session, I might state some of my thinking about the
FTC in response to their own questions about their own work. I also explained that I
might play the role of the fictional student that they had been asked to assist in the
prompt from the first session, and ask questions such a student might ask. I explained to
students that I was still learning about the FTC, and had experienced the situation of
explaining my ideas to learners more experienced than myself. I hoped that the sharing
of this personal anecdote about that situation would help the students take any comments
I might make in a non-evaluative fashion.
In response to the students' requests from the first session, however, I provided
students with a specific mathematical task in the second session. As their discussions had
led them, in the first session, to discuss different aspects of the Fundamental Theorem,
the task was different for each group. I asked one group to construct graphs of
derivatives and integrals of a function presented to them in graphical form. I asked the
other group to further explore one of their own questions from the first session - why the
graphing and evaluation of an antiderivative function could be used to evaluate the area
under the graph of a given function. I again noted that I was not looking to make
judgments about "how well" the students understood the theorem, and avoided extensive
questioning of "errors" that arose. I aimed to conduct a conversation about the meanings
the students were communicating and how they had decided upon those meanings.
42
2.6. Theoretical Background
In this next section, I will provide some theoretical background for the
methodology of this study. First, however, there is a mathematical motivation for the
methodology. The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is a result that can be
communicated through different selections and arrangements of symbols, graphs and
words. Different selections and presentations of mathematical representations create
different explanations, justifications, and proofs of the theorem.. To communicate that
the FTC says "every continuous function has an antiderivative and this antiderivative can
be defined by an integral", for example, requires a certain selection of representations and
the "presentation" of those representations in particular ways. Due in part to the fact that
the FTC can be represented and explained in multiple ways, I constructed the design to
encourage students to make their own representational decisions.
As mathematics learners encounter and reflect upon new experiences and new
representations (Berger, 2004; Maher, 2005; Radford, 2000), the understandings they
report can appear to be become more or less sophisticated (Pirie & Kieren, 1994).
Thompson notes that "the expression of an idea in notation" can provide an individual
with "an occasion to reflect" upon what was expressed, and "an occasion to consider if
what she said was what she intended to say, and if what she intended to say is what she
said" (Thompson, 1996). O'Connor notes that when students become explicitly aware
that "others are interpreting and assigning significance to what one is saying" (O'Connor,
1998) it can spur "expressive precision" where discussion and reflection about a previous
communication are welcomed".

43
Radford, following Vygotsky (Vygotsky, 1962), describes representations as the
"tools" that individuals use to accomplish actions, while noting that one's ideas can be
changed by the use of representations. Individuals also develop their own representations
to express ideas (Maher, 1991; Maher & Martino, 1996; Meira, 1995; Nemirovsky,
1994), and learning the use of representations "is not a once-for-all event of association
of meanings with a particular symbol" (van Oers, 1996). Rasmussen, Zandieh, King, and
Teppo suggest "the need for notation and symbolism arises in part as a means to record
reasoning and serves as an impetus to further students' mathematical development. In this
way, symbolizing is less a process of detachment and more a process of creation and
reinvention" (Rasmussen et al., 2005).
Radford notes that learners use mathematical representations while interacting
with others and in the historical context that has brought them conventions of signs and
notations. Meira adds that meanings that students ascribe to representations are
"negotiated and recreated by learners in activity". Likewise, in the history of
mathematics, the mathematical community developed new notations and representations
to develop mathematical theories, and mathematical representations opened up new
avenues for exploration that might otherwise been difficult or impossible to explore (R.
B. Davis & Maher, 1990; Goldin & Kaput, 1996; van Oers, 1996). When Newton worked
to develop a connection between the calculation of areas and calculation of instantaneous
rates of change, the representations (in the form of notation and definitions) to explain his
results in terms of limits had not yet been developed (Boyer, 1949). Before the idea of
the complex plane, imaginary numbers did not have the meanings they do now (Nahin,
1998).
44
So while Schoenfeld suggests that "If you really want kids to understand or do X,
you need to know what it means to understand or do X" (Schoenfeld, 1999), the phrase
"what it means to do or understand X" may not be a simple matter of mapping out the
representational system (Goldin & Kaput, 1996) that relates to a particular mathematical
idea. The meanings of representations may not be "separate from activities that use
them" (Greeno, 1991) and differences in students' responses to tasks can come from
"differences in how a task is perceived" (R. B. Davis, 1997). Understanding lies not in
the creation of the same meanings as others, but in the ability to find and use
representations to communicate with others.
Through their own communications, students "gradually learn what utterances
(about possible actions and methods) can and cannot be maintained in relation to the
problem at hand. By negotiating the meaning of their problem solutions they learn a pool
of systematically related propositions" (van Oers, 1996). Davis describes
"understanding" not as the event, but an ongoing process of fitting new ideas into a
"larger framework of previously assembled ideas". Examining how a student's thinking
has developed, as opposed to focusing on where the student stands "at the moment", is
likely to require extensive and careful observation that includes analysis of the contexts
in which students are working (R. B. Davis, 1992).
As Schoenfeld explains, researchers are typically looking for "pre-determined
transfer", asking if learners make the connections that the researchers hope learners will
make, or the connections the researchers themselves have made (Schoenfeld, 1999).
Schoenfeld notes that this may not happen very often. Instead, he suggests, researchers
can study which connections students do make, and what leads them to these
45
connections. Part of this process would involve examining learners' communications and
drawing inferences about "what the student is thinking" - part of what anyone does when
they communicate about meaning (Thompson, 1999). So while the researcher may have
mapped the representational system around a mathematical topic for him of herself, the
researcher can keep in mind that knowledge of what it may mean to understand or
mathematics need not dominate one's interpretations of what students say (Steffe &
Thompson, 1999). Schoenfeld adds that there may be "serious questions regarding how
well a student's performance on any particular task or collection of tasks reflects that
student's understanding of that content."
Duffin and Simpson, who define understanding as the making of and becoming
aware of links between ideas (Duffin & Simpson, 2000), contend that while one might
wish to know all of what the student might be able to do, researchers can only make
interpretations of the student's actions. Researchers should also be open to reflecting
upon "evidence of student thinking that didn't fit into the present context of the research
team's discussion" (Speiser et al., 2003). In these perspectives, researchers' descriptions
of understandings are necessarily provisional, and depend to a large extent on the
learner's communications and the researcher's interpretations of those communications.
As Speiser, Walter, and Maher suggest, "teaching experiments may begin with specific
questions posed by the researchers" but "may evolve" as the experiments unfold.
Students also come into their explorations with specific questions but "their questions can
evolve significantly as well" (Maher & Speiser, 1997; Speiser et al., 2003).
As Davis notes, "we should not limit our search for mental processes to the one
basic pattern that everyone uses" (R. B. Davis, 1997). Researchers can take into account
46
that there may be goals other than seeing the differences between students'
understandings and a predetermined state of understanding. However, the mature learner
may find it difficult to imagine why a particular idea was "not immediately obvious from
the very beginning" once he or she has developed connections and interpretations that
give meaning to a mathematical representation (R. B. Davis, 1997; O'Connor, 1998). The
researcher may find it difficult to re-experience a state of not understanding, or identify
the goals of the student. In the sense of Duffin and Simpson's idea of "natural,"
"conflicting" and "alien" experiences (Duffin & Simpson, 1993), students' ideas may
form a "conflicting" experience for the researcher. Placing oneself "with" the student,
where the student is currently, requires developing a sense of what the student is thinking,
and a sense of being in the position of the one who lacks both knowledge and experience.
Parnafes & diSessa suggest that educators should not "restrict students' use of
representations, but examine how their use emerges and how their use develops, and how
it promotes reasoning" (Parnafes & diSessa, 2004). They ask how students coordinate the
use of the various representations, and ask in which "contexts do students choose one
representation over the other". Pinto and Tall (2002) point out that students are capable of
constructing meaning in unique ways. They detail the reasoning of a student who
develops a verbal definition from a figure, rather than drawing a picture to illustrate a
definition, working from a figure to create a general argument from the specific picture
(Mason & Pimm, 1984). Noss, Healy, & Hoyles suggest that as students work with
representations, the "building of connections" rather than ascending "hierarchies of
decontextualisation" is the key to students' mathematical development(Noss, Healy, &
Hoyles, 1997). Rasmussen, Zandieh King, & Teppo also agree that students' use of
47
representations to "express, support, and communicate ideas" (Rasmussen et al., 2005)
helps them to "enact their understandings" and "enlarge their thinking and ways of
reasoning".
Despite the possible difficulty in taking the position of the student, research
methodologies have been developed that, while falling short of enabling the researcher to
re-experience what the novice learner is experiencing, allow for some level of shared
experience. Davis and Maher suggest that when students can form their own goals for
learning, they have conversations about mathematics that are "genuine" in the sense that
the students are looking to answer questions of their own making (R. B. Davis & Maher,
1990). Cobb , Wood and Yackel note that "genuine" conversations can be encouraged
when it is clear that the researcher or teacher is not "steering" participants towards a
desired, predetermined outcome (Cobb et al., 1993). Matos, van Dormolen, Groves, &
Zan describe their experiences as learners in a classroom of students (Matos, van
Dormolen, Groves, & Zan, 2002). The researchers' objective was to see how well they
could learn to "know how to listen" to the students, working to share meaning with the
student in addition to describing and explaining it.
It is one thing to observe students and note that "the student doesn't see the
derivative as a function", but another to share this perspective with the learner.
Researchers can observe student activity with the awareness that students form goals
during their discussions, goals that may differ from that of the researcher. This
"emergent" view (Saxe & Bermudez, 1996) guides the researcher to create models for
learners' activity that are valid from the learners' point of view as well as the
researcher's. The ideas that students develop may or not be knowable to the researcher
48
(von Glasersfeld, 1996), but the researcher can take the position of thinking with the
learner, in addition to thinking about the learner. By engaging in research that is more
about having a conversation with the student than about making judgments about the
students, the researcher can work to develop shared meanings with learners. Thompson
suggests that the "constructivist" asks the question "What is the problem that this student
is solving, given that I have attempted to communicate to him the problem I have in
mind?" rather than whether the student is solving the problem the researcher is asking
(Thompson, 1982).
While sharing meaning may be like sharing an apple pie - no two people can
taste the share the other is having (von Glasersfeld, 1996) - this research perspective may
help insure that the researcher is at least eating the same pie, and not their own (that is,
another) pie. The distinction between thinking about and thinking with may be a fine
one, but it may be an important one to consider if the goal is to understand how students
develop their own capacities for communicating mathematical meanings. Just as it may
be unhelpful to simply tell a student that they are "wrong" (von Glasersfeld, 1996) it may
be helpful if the teacher or researcher can say more than how the learners' ideas differ
from the ideas that researchers believe students "should" have in order to "understand".
Researching with students may make important differences in the outcomes researchers
observe. Corbett and Wilson note that adults define new goals and expect students to
comply with whatever goals have been externally set, and see students as beneficiaries of
their interventions. More rarely do educators think of students as participants in the
process of change (Corbett & Wilson, 1995).

49
The differential in authority and knowledge between the educator and the student
can, of course, influence what students will say during conversations with each other and
with educators (Cazden, 1988). Students may abandon or keep a line of reasoning to
themselves because they are accustomed to having their work in school be subject to
examination and judgment. In fact, this may be the defining aspect of school for many
students, rather than the process of learning, which may take paths that differ far from the
curriculum (R. B. Davis & Maher, 1990). Even in conversations between students, one
student may defer to another, and thus not communicate his or her own ideas. The
weight of authority, as evidenced by exisiting symbols, words and mathematical texts,
may also be daunting to students. Such students see an external "they" who developed
these symbols and results, and see the job of student as one of understanding what "they"
meant.
Students who hold such beliefs may see mathematics as an activity of "putting the
right thing on paper" (R. B. Davis, 1992) as opposed to a process of communication.
With respect to algorithms, Rasmussen, Zandieh, King, and Teppo describe "activity that
leads to the creation and use of artifacts, as opposed to the acquisition of artifacts". As
students do develop "beliefs about their own role" (Alcock & Simpson, 2004), students
who believe that their communications count as "mathematics" may focus upon
constructing meanings rather than finding the "right thing" to say. Speiser, Walter, and
Maher take this research perspective, through examination of students' drawings and
calculator generated graphs (Speiser et al., 2003). Speiser, Walter, and Maher examine
the meanings students assign to the standard representations, and how students have
50
chosen to work with these representations to accomplish their own personal goals of
communication, as opposed to comparing students to a predetermined model.
To create genuine conversations about meaning, Spieser and Walter (1994)
suggest a research perspective that does not take the usual agreed upon meanings as a
starting point. Instead, students can be presented with situations that motivate discussion,
disagreement, and agreement about meanings. O'Connor describes such conversations as
"negotiated defining": "extended and complex (and usually messy) discussions of word
meanings, the complex conditions of their use, and contention over exemplars of their
use" (O'Connor, 1998). O'Connor notes that these discussions are essential to
mathematical understanding. Nemirovsky points to symbol use as potentially a "dynamic
game" where the student can use symbols to talk about the same situation in multiple
ways. When students engage in debate about a situation, "unexpected symbol use is not a
redundant manifestation of what one already knows. Rather it is a conflictive attempt to
deal with the multiplicity of angles from which objects and ideas can be seen"
(Nemirovsky, 1994).
Speiser, Walter and Glaze describe such debate, where learners make their own
choices, as "mathematics in the making" (Speiser, Walter, & Glaze, 2005). Following
these authors, I emphasize understanding "central choices and decisions that the student
subjects make" and "how and why they make them" (Speiser et al., 2005) in this study.
To examine such choices, it is important to trace "the variety of alternatives that students
work with, both personally and in group discourse" and "the choices that the students
make among the possibilities they see". When researchers create contexts for students to
51
participate in this kind of communicative activity, to paraphrase Maher (2002), it is the
students who can teach the researchers.

52
3. Literature Review
3.1. Representation and Meaning
In this study, I provide an example of students' communication about the
Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. In their communications with each other about this
task, the students talk about the meanings of certain representations such as graphs, tables
of values, symbols, and words. They also used representations to communicate
meanings. This is a study about how learners construct meaning about representations
that were created by others, but it is also a study of how students can use representations
as tools to create meanings in ways that we may not be able to predict in advance
(diSessa et al., 1991; Maher, 1991).
In the Teacher's Guide - AP Calculus (Kennedy, 1997) the author states that
students should "understand of the meaning" of certain words such as "integral" in
particular ways. Kennedy uses verbal and symbolic representations to express his
intended meanings, in this chapter I will focus upon theoretical issues related to
meaning, representation, communication, and understanding in mathematics, with
curricular goals as a motivating context. First, I offer some general statements about
these fundamental terms.
3.1.1. General Terms
Consider the phrase "understand the meaning." In the Teacher's Guide, the
directions seem clear: understand the meaning of the "definite integral" as "a limit of
Riemann sums." But there are other meanings of the term "definite integral." You might
want to understand the meaning of the definite integral a "net accumulation of a rate of
change." What is an integral, then, exactly? Although the definite integral is not an
53
object I can hold, I can draw a picture of it. But is this picture an "integral," or "just" a
picture of a definite integral? One cannot claim that a picture of a dog is the dog. In
mathematics, as in other realms, when we talk about ideas, emotions, actions, objects,
organizations, we use representations - signs and symbols that allow us to communicate
about ideas, emotions, objects, etc. If I were standing in front of a dog right now, talking
to you about it, I will use representations as I talk, gesture, or write about the dog.
A picture of a "definite integral" is a representation. There is also (at least one)
symbol that represents the "definite integral." A representation can be any sign or symbol
used to communicate meaning. To talk to you about my fictitious dog, I will use the word
"dog" to communicate about the dog. Of course, since my dog is fictitious, what exactly
am I using the word "dog" to stand for? The idea of a dog, perhaps? Is my idea of a dog
the same as your idea of a dog? Only if we communicate meanings can we hope to
determine if we are communicating about the "same" object, and we will use
representations to communicate our meanings. In the case of the dog, we'll likely be able
to come to an agreement, even if we find we are not referring to the same object.2 With
regard to the "definite integral" if we draw a picture of one, we will use this picture to
communicate some meaning about the term. Just as a picture of a dog may not tell you
everything you might want to know about the dog, however, neither may a picture of a
definite integral.
When we communicate about objects and ideas, we communicate meanings rather
than the objects or ideas themselves. The term "definite integral" is not the same as the
object "definite integral," whatever that object might be. To communicate about the
2
Note that my dog is the dog on page 227 in Davis (1992) and that 1 am not, in this discussion, talking
about how the word dog is represented in the mind, as Davis does in his discussion. In my discussion ,
representations are what is 'external" and meanings are what individuals report, externally, to others.
54
"object" that is the integral, however, we will communicate meanings, and use
representations to conduct our communication. Representations refer to objects, but are
not the objects themselves, and meanings are communicated by using representations.
The phrase "limit of a Riemann sum" is a meaning, conveyed with words to
communicate about the "object" that the word "definite integral" represents. Note the
phrase "limit of a Riemann sum" also has a meaning, in addition to being a meaning of
something else. To communicate this meaning, you may need to use other
representations. Any communications about experiences and objects will involve the use
of representations as a means of conveying meaning. The meanings themselves would be
difficult to convey without representations.
I may appear to be talking around the word "meaning." The word "meaning" can
be considered the content of what we are trying to communicate (Dorfler, 2000). In this
sense, meaning does not exist without communication. This conception does not preclude
"having meanings" that one does not communicate to others; however, here I focus on
meanings that one can report to others, using representations. The questions of the
origins of meaning, and whether meanings can exist without representations, are beyond
the scope of this discussion. For my purposes in this study, meanings are how we share
objects and experiences with each other - without meanings, we could not talk about all
the things there are to talk about, from dogs to integrals.
One might say that meanings are the "roads" that connect us, and representations
are our "shoes." Communication is the act of walking along those roads. Without our
"shoes," it would be difficult to walk. Roads, shoes, and walking - they all gain purpose
from each other. Individuals and their prior experiences should also be considered when
55
thinking about how representation, meaning, and communication are related. One can
"speak" as a physical action without actually communicating, if sounds or gestures one
uses do not have meaning for others. In other words, the sounds or gestures are not
representations for the listener. Since representations have meanings in addition to
communicating meanings, one may also need to consider ones' shoes when going for a
walk.
Meaning can be expressed with more than one representation - figures, words,
symbols, and the like - and representations may communicate different meanings about
the "same" object. Any representation by itself, however, does not have meaning without
people to ascribe meaning to it. Without people, a mark on paper is simply a mark on a
paper. In converting "marks on paper" into representations, a person must employ other
representations, which may include gestures as "simple" as pointing, or other cognitive
tools which humanity has developed, such as metaphors. In describing representations as
"shoes," as I did above, I attempt to communicate the meaning of my words by evoking
in the reader an image. In this example, the use of the word "shoe" is the representation;
whether my words had any meaning to you will be unknown to me until you report your
"understanding" of what I have tried to communicate.
The same holds for an individual who has seen the term "definite integral."
Without representations beyond the term itself, the words may have no meaning. While
some may define the term "definite integral" as a "limit of a Riemann sum" a definition
is still a representation: it may have meaning for some, while for others it may be closer
56
to "marks on paper".3 While I do not mean to devalue the potential role of definitions in
helping people come to a common understanding of the meaning of a word, the definition
of the term "definite integral" exists because the thoughts of certain individuals led them
to give those thoughts a name. The term is in use because there is a meaning that humans
have a need to communicate about. The definition exists because definitions can be
highly useful for linking the different meanings that may be associated with the word.
However, a person can quote a definition, or use a term, without knowing the meaning of
the words involved (Vinner, 1997b).
Understanding can be viewed as the state of being able to communicate meanings
that others can report as matching their own in some way. In this view, the phrase
"understanding the meaning" depends upon acts of communication. If one speaks or
writes without being understood, one has made sounds or drew marks on paper, but
communication has not taken place. Understanding requires communication, and
communication requires understanding. I do not deny the feeling of understanding as one
works alone, but this communication of meanings to oneself is embedded within past and
future communications with others. One can also "misunderstand" another person's
meaning, but the state of misunderstanding will involve alternative meanings. Dorfler
(2000) writes, "The only available and observable indicator that a subject has grasped the
meaning - whatever that is - of a linguistic or symbolic entity is that the subject has a
thorough command of its social use." A person may claim to "understand", but without
being able to communicate a meaning to others, others may consider the claim to be a
dubious one.
Kline (Kline, 1970) suggests that "One doesn't learn even about dogs from a definition of dogs", but one
can consider the definition of a word as special kind of representation, usually formed from a combination
of verbal and symbol representations.
57
3.1.2. Application to the Study
Radford, drawing ideas from the philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce (Radford,
2006), places meaning at the center of our processes of understanding the world. He
concurs with Goldin in seeing meaning as the links between signs. "Signs", or marks on
paper such as words, symbols, and graphical displays - only gain the status of
"representations" within a representational system (Goldin, 1998b). Representational
systems include permitted configurations of signs, and rules moving from one
configuration to another. Using symbols in certain ways, using rules (such as rules for
transforming equations) is one method of giving meaning to the individual signs and
configurations. Representations do not exist in isolation from each other, or from the
humans who use them to communicate. A symbol that has no meaning to a learner is
simply a mark on paper, although, having lived in a world with representational system,
the learner may be aware that a sign does act as a representation for someone else. 4
Additionally, two individuals may report different meanings for the same sign. Again,
this is where communication with others becomes a determining factor in any discussion
about understanding. A person's claim to "understand the meaning" of a sign is always
subject to comparisons, through communication, with other individuals' uses of the sign.
My interest in this study lies in situations where a person can report a meaning for
a sign, or knows that a sign has potential meaning as a representation, and engages in
communication to determine a meaning for the sign. As I indicated in the introduction to
this study, the meaning that a representation carries has the potential to change, and
One can "understand" a sign such as "?$@*" as a "meaningless string of symbols" or as an expression of
some other meaning. The use of the word meaningless, however, arises from and is determined by a
representational system.
58
communicative activities that involve other representations may be part of what causes
the change. If representations are the components of thinking we can observe, and our
thinking is affected by the representations we use (Radford, 2000), then it may fruitful to
examine how learners give meaning to representations. The FTC can be expressed with a
variety of representations, and might be said to owe its existence to mathematicians'
creative use of representations. How students use representations to communicate about
the theorem, then, is of potential interest to those interested in what "understanding the
meaning of the FTC" might look like in practice.
Yet there exists a conundrum. Thompson & Sfard (1994) note that students
encounter mathematics through representations that they find in books or in
communications with others. These others are presumably using these representations to
communicate meaning, but the novice may not know what the representations mean, or
may have already assigned meanings to the representation that differ in important ways
from others' meanings. So how does the learner "get in" on the meaning of the words, or
come to assign new meanings to the words? The initial encounter is a first step, although
encountering a word in context is not helpful if the context is unfamiliar. The learner
needs to be aware of the part of the representational system that places the new word in
relationships with other words, and to avoid associations that are not part of the
representational system. In the case of the FTC, there are a number of associations that
students may make when communicating about the theorem. Since some of these are not
the types of understanding some educators hope students will build (Kennedy, 1997) the
processes that students use to give representations of the theorem meaning are of interest
to calculus educators.
59
3.1.3. Mathematical Representations and Mathematical Ideas
For a variety of reasons, mathematics educators care about the differences
between representations, meanings, and mathematical objects. One reason may be our
nature as communicative beings - we want to know that others "understand" what we
said, and are not just moving symbols around "without meaning." Greeno writes,
"It is possible to learn about an environment, by

studying maps and descriptions about the place and the
activities of its people. Such learning, however, is largely
limited to interactions with symbolic expressions -
speaking or writing or drawing maps - which are very
different from the abilities needed to live and work in the
environment successfully. In learning a conceptual
domain, it is possible to confuse representations of
concepts with the concepts themselves and learn how to
manipulate symbolic expressions rather than how to find
and use conceptual resources." (Greeno, 1991, page 176)
In the preceding sections, I outlined the idea that mathematical objects are given
meaning through communication and representation. What are the these objects we are
actually communicating about - and does it matter?
"Throughout the ages, mathematicians have considered

their objects, such as numbers, points, etc, as substantial
things in themselves. Since these entities had always defied
attempts at adequate description, it slowly dawned on the
mathematicians of the nineteenth century that the question
of the meaning of these objects as substantial things does
not make sense within mathematics, if at all... What
matters and what corresponds to "verifiable" fact is
structure and relationship... For scholars and layman alike,
it is not philosophy but active experience in mathematics
itself that alone can answer the question: "What is
mathematics?" (Courant & Robbins, 1941, page XX)
With Courant and Robbins, one can turn one's attention to how mathematical objects are
used, to determine "what" they are. As Goldin (2003) and Dorfler (2002) have observed,
60
some take the position that mathematical objects are the things that learners with the
requisite capabilities have grasped. This position, however, is not particularly helpful for
those in the business of educating students who do not already understand mathematics.
Other theories turn their attention upon the learner of mathematics, and the
representations that they use. Mathematical objects might be viewed as cognitive
reflections upon structures, patterns, and regularities in human actions and mental
operations (Beth & Piaget, 1966). One could argue that the objects are "discursive,"
(Sfard, 2001) gaining "existence" through the act of human communication. Otte
postulates that the mathematical object exists through the range of representations that
may people associate with it, but should not be confused with any particular
representation (Otte, 2001). Radford conceives different representations as ways of
conferring meaning on mathematical objects (Radford, 2006), while acting to highlight
different aspects of the "same" object. Sfard writes, "What I call the 'linear function
7x+4' is such a unifying entity (it is neither the formula, nor the graph — it's an abstract
being)" (Thompson & Sfard, 1994).
In this study, I will not attempt to resolve the question of the nature of
mathematical objects. However, as I do take the position that meanings, representations
and communication are central to mathematical activity, my conception of mathematical
objects leans towards the views of Sfard and Otte. For an individual, the mathematical
object "is" what that individual can say about it, even if one may not be able to say all
that someone else can say about it. Speaking for myself, I believe in the existence of
certain mathematical objects because others seem to speak about them with meaning,
although I do not know the meanings of the words. From an educational standpoint, I am
61
interested in activities that expand students' abilities to speak meaningfully about
mathematical objects and use them to create new meanings, whether these objects are
"real" or not. The idea that a mathematical representation should not be confused with the
mathematical object is important to this interest (Thompson, 1994b, 1996).
3.1.4. Meanings in Practice
"Understanding," in the sense of being able communicate meanings, is not a
platonic ideal - it is operationalized in school and other environments where individuals,
in concert with others, come to conclusions about what kinds of meanings are "sufficient"
for the purpose at hand (Zack & Reid, 2003, 2004). Our perception of understanding is
also shaped by our interpretations of how others use representations. I may conclude that
"I do not understand as well as you" because I have observed your mathematical activity
and have seen you use representations in ways that did not have meaning for me. I also
know that I do not understand all there could be to understand about mathematics, since 1
have had experiences such as the one in the introduction. This perspective adds to the
preceding discussion about representations, because the meaning I attach to a
representation is not necessarily synonymous with the meaning of the representation as
understood by others.
As I have defined communication, one has not communicated if another has not
understood the meaning of the representations one has used. However, humans tend to
ascribe meanings because they know that is what communication is for. In mathematics
teaching, talk occurs, but communication of meaning may not - after a lesson, students
may report meanings different from those of their teachers. "Ritualized perception of
mathematical symbols" is insufficient, according to Steinbring, because this "perception

62
does not advance to the genuine essence of the symbol but remains on the level of
pseudo-recognition" (Steinbring, 1997). Davis notes that "it is all too easy to get a
student to say something" without he or she necessarily understanding it (R. B. Davis,
1992). Vinner (1997b) notes that meaning can only be inferred from student behavior, but
where meanings are not present, "words are associated with words; ideas are not
involved." Skemp writes about "knowing how and not knowing why versus knowing
how and also knowing why" (Skemp, 1986). For example, a student can calculate the
area of a rectangle by multiplying the length of its sides without knowing why this
product really is the area of the rectangle.
The word "area" does have meaning for the student: its meaning is, perhaps, the
carrying out of the procedure for finding an answer using the formula. This may not be
the meaning that a teacher would hope that the student would report, but the student may
see it as sufficient, because they have communicated an answer. It is possible, as
Brownell (1935) pointed out, that the meaning of the phrase "7 and 5 are 12" may be
"restricted to merely making the appropriate noises and to reading and writing the
symbols which stand for the combination." (See also Ginsberg, et al., (1992).) Gray
(1991) observed that children saw security in carrying out procedures, rather than seeking
to derive facts from other known facts. Within my formulation of meaning, carrying out
a procedure qualifies as a meaning, but it may be that the representations used within the
procedure do not have meaning. Or as, in Brownell's addition example, a learner may
know the meaning of individual symbols, but may not be able to report a meaning for the
procedure itself.
63
Such meanings may not be sufficient for further mathematical activity, but they
may allow one to operate until further meaning is built. Sometimes, in mathematics as in
other realms, one uses a word without a great deal of understanding of its meaning.
After further experiences, new meanings may be attached to words one was only using
tentatively (Berger, 2004, 2005; van Oers, 2001) How this might happen through
communication is a focus of this study. Some believe that students will "understand"
because they mature, or if they practice enough. Mason and Watson, referencing Kant,
that a succession of experiences is not necessarily the same as the experience of that
succession (Watson & Mason, 2005). One may practice the same procedure over and
over without attaching any meaning to the actions. When one has thought about the
process itself, however, a meaning may be built (Sfard, 2000; Sfard & Linchevski, 1994).
These issues highlight the need to gather information about the meanings students report
and how students use representations in their reasoning.
In some formulations of teaching mathematics, "teaching" means talking with
students and demonstrating the use of representations that have been created to
communicate mathematical meaning (van Oers, 1996, 2001). Many professions use
mathematics to produce answers without needing to "care" about the meaning of the
procedure other than the fact it produces the answer the person needed. When I learned
how to compute eigenvalues, I used them in procedures, but was unsure about their
meaning in any other sense. If the goal is for students to be able to do more than
produce answers, however, then educators may need to be concerned with the meanings
students report for procedures and the representations involved. The meanings one
needs for further communication in mathematics depends upon the goals educators set for
64
student learning. It is possible to show students, for example, how to produce equations
for derivatives of given functions without the students knowing the meanings of functions
or derivatives.
Some meanings can be communicated through the use of metaphors (Goldin &
Kaput, 1996). The meaning of the symbol " - 3 " might be found in the phrase "giving
away 3 dollars." Meanings may be stated in terms of a correspondence like, "I think the
definite integral means the area under the graph between two points." Definitions can
also be used to communicate meanings; for some, the formal definition of the term
"limit" may represent the meaning of the term. Meanings can also be context dependent;
students may only call upon a certain procedure when certain cues are present (Rasslan &
Tall, 2002; Wagner, 2006). These different possibilities do not mean that "meaning" does
not exist. Instead, it points to the importance of listening to the meanings that students
report, and communicating with students about their meanings (Maher, 2002; Speiser et
al., 2005; Speiser et al., 2003).
3.1.5. Dilemmas in the Use of Representations
In this section, I will discuss the dilemmas and possibilities that students might
encounter when associating meanings with representations, and in using representations
to communicate with others. In this discussion I do not examine how ideas might be
stored in our minds. Davis (1984) provides a wide selection of examples that illustrate the
capacity of the human mind to encode our experiences and bring them to bear in
communication. His examples illustrate how the meanings that students report arise from
a variety of human metal capabilities. In this study, however, I focus on the "external"
65
representations students choose to use, and how they use them in communication, rather
than explaining how the ideas are "represented" in the mind.
My discussion up to this point draws from a semiotic view of the learning of
mathematics, in that I have focused on "signs" and the use of signs (Ernest, 2006). The
semiotic view, as described by Ernest, does not focus exclusively on mental structures or
observable student behaviors. Instead, this perspective highlights the personal
appropriation of signs by persons within their social contexts, on individual creativity in
sign use, and the recognition of the existence of socially accepted uses of signs.
Individual learning is initiated by participation in activity, but private construction of
meaning is a necessary component of learning and communication with others.
For example, when a learner first sees a mark on paper that looks like "2" and
sees others point out or write this inscription after counting two objects, the learner may
take the verbal and physical actions as a communication of what the sign "2" means. The
sign "2" is elaborated through communication as it is used when pointing to birds, stones
and a variety of objects. The learner learns to use the sign "2" in communication with
others and receives feedback about the use of the sign. Later, the learner may see the
symbol "2" used to denote two sets of ten, two sets of any number, or two equal values
being multiplied (x2). What then, is the meaning of the sign "2" to the learner? The
meaning would be illustrated by the ways in which the learner uses the symbol in
communication with others: how do students appear to use the sign "2" in practice?
What meanings do they report about the number 2? The answers to these questions
appear as one observes students using the representation.

66
In calculus, when an individual first sees the term "derivative" a number of
choices of representation are possible. The choice of representation can depend on the
goal; one can introduce derivatives to students as "rules for changing one algebraic
expression into another." These rules are a highly useful aspect of whatever the term
"derivative" actually refers to, but may not be useful when the individual needs other
meanings of the word "derivative." The term "derivative" has a definition, and one can
make the choice to introduce the derivative with the representation that is accepted to be
the definition. In either case, no one representation is equivalent to the mathematical
object known as "derivative." As in the case of the number "2" however, we can observe
what meanings the student associates with the word derivative, how the student uses
representations of the derivative, and what meanings these representations have for the
student. We can also observe whether the learner reports connections between
representations, or appears to see each representation as independent of the others.
To learn about students' meaning, one must communicate with them using
representations. Thompson (1996) gives an example of a mathematics major
demonstrating the graphing of linear inequalities to a group of high school students. The
student demonstrated how to create the graphs, but when the author asks where "are these
y's that are greater than 2x + 3?" the student "waved his hand up and down the y axis."
Thompson does not state if he asked the student any further questions about what the
student meant by this gesture, but makes the point that the student was not concerned
about the question because the students in the class "caught on" to the procedure for
graphing inequalities. This example may illustrate that the student's meaning of "linear
inequalities" is the procedure for producing the graphs, and that the representation of
67
linear inequalities - the graph - is the mathematical object itself. Thompson also
describes students who solve an equation and arrive at a result such as "x = x" or "2 = 2"
and conclude that they must have made an error. Why students make this conclusion
may depend upon the students' meaning of "solving equations."
These examples illustrate that one needs mathematical representations to do
mathematics, but one needs mathematical activity in order to know what the
representations mean (Duval, 2006). Hence a dilemma: a graph is a representation of
something, but students may not view it as such. Ernest (2006) observes that "explicitly
formulated mathematical theories are not conducive to students' learning of mathematics
for the reason that they do not and cannot communicate the meanings underlying the
signs and rules." He adds that signs can only be understood as part of representational
systems that have developed through social and historical practice. But while formulas
and theories exist to encompass the meanings that led to their development, but students
were not part of the development of the representational system.
Steinbring (2006) states that mathematical knowledge must be interpreted from
signs, and that interpretation requires experiences and implicit knowledge, which come
from immersion in a cultural environment. Steinbring also points out that the reading of
the introduced symbols is "determined strongly by the conventional rules" used in the
classroom context (Steinbring, 1997), Radford also sees meaning arising out of social
experience, as representations of objects are used to convey meaning to others (Radford,
2006). This is the dilemma in another form: how can students come to the classroom to
learn mathematics from a social experience if the mathematics is required to participate
in the social experience?

68
Sfard asks whether mathematical objects or the use of symbols should "come
first" (Sfard, 2000). She acknowledges that some believe that representations should
only be used when students have something to say with them (e.g. Thompson, 1994a).
She suggests instead that thought comes into existence through words, and that discourse
and objects are "mutually constitutive." Gravemeijer & Doorman call this process
"guided reinvention," where symbolizing proceeds alongside with the development of
meaning (Gravemeijer & Doorman, 1999). Students, when encountering a new symbol or
word, will project meaning onto it by the way it is used in discourse - as a noun or a verb,
as a process or an object (Tall, 1995). In interpreting new signs in "old" ways, students
extend what they know. Davis and Maher (1997) analyze videotape data showing
students using representations as "tools to think with." Creating a representation gives
students "something to talk about" and allows them to extend their thinking and negotiate
meaning through questions that would not have occurred without the representation.
3.1.6. Approaches to Learning Meanings
One approach is to choose representations that students are already familiar with
or that represent perceivable actions or objects. With "derivatives," for example, there
are physical actions one can perform, such as drawing a tangent line, or computational
actions such as computing a limit, with which students may have experience. Since
students' participation in mathematical communication depends on the meanings students
assign to representations, how students work with the new representations may be
critical. If the experiential starting point causes students to abandon participation in
further experiences, or if the experiential starting point is considered by students to be an
end unto itself, further making of meaning may not occur (Thompson & Sfard, 1994).
69
One way to work with a new representation is to use it in a variety of ways, and
to call students' attention to the idea that different representations may be referring to the
"same object" while conveying different meanings for that object (Goldin & Kaput,
1996). Students might be made aware of the notion that representations such as "3(x+5)"
can mean "a concise description of a computational process, a certain number, a function,
a member of a family of functions" (Sfard & Linchevski, 1994), among other possible
interpretations. To distinguish "pre-conceptual behavior" where students have
developed some meanings for a term, from "pseudo-conceptual behavior" (Vinner,
1997b) where students use symbols without discussion about meanings, one may need to
dialogue with the student. Shared meaning is most likely to develop when both
participants are working to "understand" the other (Thompson, 1999; van Oers, 1996).
Miera suggests that meanings emerge in social interaction from prior
understandings, and that the use of representations can help students organize their
learning activity (Meira, 1995). Whether students come to share meanings may depend
upon the opportunities and motivations for students to use the representations in certain
ways. Students might be given the opportunity to ask questions such as "what do you
mean by that?". Van Oers sees pupils gradually learning "what utterances (about possible
actions and methods) can and cannot be maintained in relation to the problem at hand.
By negotiating on the meaning of their problem solutions, they actually learn a pool of
systematically related propositions that can be validly used in the process of orientation
on the solution of a problem" (van Oers, 1996). He notes, however, that the opportunities
and motivations for shared activity must be "genuine". Students should be encouraged to
associate meanings with representations in discussions with others, including teachers.

70
Voigt points out that students and teachers must do more than share knowledge,
they must communicate in ways that allow them to determine, as much as possible, the
extent to which their meanings for terms match (O'Connor, 1998; Voigt, 1996). Von
Oers highlights the role of symbols in the process of negotiation, noting that the
attachment of meaning to a symbol can be an ongoing process (van Oers, 1996).
Symbols allow the learner to bring their meanings into the open so that these meanings
can be negotiated. Speiser, Walter, and Maher (Speiser et al., 2003) Schwarz &
Hershkowitz (Schwarz & Hershkowitz, 2001), Schoenfeld, Smith, & Arcavi
(Schoenfeld, Smith, & Arcavi, 1993) and Cobb, Wood, & Yackel (Cobb et al., 1993) give
four different extended examples of what negotiation of meaning might look like.
Tall notes, however, that some students focus their efforts with symbols upon
mastering procedures without looking for any commonality among questions they
encounter (Tall, 1992). When acquiring proficiency with procedures is viewed by
learners or educators as an isolated activity, this may certainly be the result. Consider
Sfard's example of transforming 3(x + 2) into 3x + 6 (Sfard, 2000). The question for
students can center upon why, in mathematical discourse, these expressions are
interchangeable, as opposed to focusing on the rule for transforming them. Rather than
informing students that these expressions represent the same function, discussion and
negation of meaning can lead to the idea that there is something "the same" that both
these expressions refer to.
Davis and Maher (1997) provide examples where students use representations and
negotiate meaning, based upon extensive personal experiences with concrete objects or
with other representations. Although a particular meaning might be suggested by the

71
social use of numbers, Davis and Maher observed that students would not call a particular
Cuisenaire rod "two-fifths" because they did not see the rod as "two of anything." Davis
and Maher also observed students appropriating symbols in order to express their ideas
where a representation was not suggested to them. Sfard notes that students can be told
that 2/3 and 8/12 represent the same number through a process of multiplying the
numerator and denominator by the same number (Sfard, 2000). Students, however, may
have questions about such processes, which may lead them to ask what "2/3" actually
represents, and why it is considered to be equal to 8/12.
From the viewpoint of negotiation, definitions, which may be considered "the
meaning" of a word, take on a different character. Definitions are the result of years of
debate and refinement, as meanings were compared and examples selected or discarded.
Definitions have proven useful over time; when definitions have not been proven useful,
they have been changed (Borasi, 1992; Lakatos, 1976). It is widely reported, however,
that students do not use definitions in consistent ways (Alcock & Simpson, 2002;
Giraldo, Carvalho, & Tall, 2003; Vinner & Dreyfus, 1989). It may not be surprising that
students do not use definitions extensively; students may not have participated in the
activity of definition-making, where the rationale for the definition is negotiated.
3.1.7. Deriving Meaning Through Connections
Sierpinska asks, "What do we want understanding to be? Or: What to we mean
by 'to understand?'" (Sierpinska, 1992). In answering this question, Sierpinska writes,
"It is only when we have seen instances and non-instances of the object defined, when we
can say what the object is and what it is not, when we have become aware of its relations
with other concepts, when we have noticed that these relationships are analogous to
72
relations we are familiar with, when we have grasped the position that the object defined
has inside a theory and what are its possible applications, that we can say we have
understood something about it." Thompson (1994b) construes "areas of representational
activity" among which, we have "built rich and varied connections" (see Moschkovich,
Schoenfeld, & Arcavi, 1993). Thompson speculates that connections among
representations are what produces "a subjective sense of invariance" that proves useful in
mathematical communication. He suggests focusing on situations that engender
representational activity, and orienting students toward drawing connections among their
representations with regard to the questions that engendered them.
Wilensky (1991) writes "the more connections we make between an object and
other objects, the more concrete it becomes for us. The richer the set of representations of
the object, the more ways we have of interacting with it, the more concrete it is for us.
Concreteness, then, is that property which measures the degree of our relatedness to the
object (the richness of our representations, interactions, connections with the object), how
close we are to it, or, if you will, the quality of our relationship with the object. As
Minsky writes in Society of Mind, "The secret of what anything means to us depends on
how we've connected it to all the other things we know. That's why it's almost always
wrong to seek the 'real meaning' of anything. A thing with just one meaning has scarcely
any meaning at all" (Minsky, 1987 p. 64).
Tall notes that switching to one representation to another as it proves useful is a
hallmark of mathematical success (Tall, 1992). He terms this movement between
representations "versatile thinking" (Tall & Thomas, 1989). Pinto and Tall describe a
particular case where a student interprets a definition in terms of "old knowledge" and
73
experiments with graphical representations to give meaning to a new definition that uses
symbolic representations (Pinto & Tall, 2002). Tail's "proceptual thinker" can find
results by employing connections between representations (Tall, 1992). Presmeg &
Balderas-Canas (2001) provide examples of the power of alternating visual and symbolic
modes of cognition.
Dennis and Confrey (1996) describe their views of evolution of knowledge in the
history of mathematics as "the coordination and contrast of multiple forms of
representation... often one sees a particular form of representation as primary for the
exploration, whereas another may form the basis of comparison for deciding if the
outcome is correct". Duval (1999) notes that representations are central to mathematical
activity, and that the "coordination of registers" is not a consequence of learning math,
but an essential condition for understanding. He sees the "cognitive architecture" of
connections between ideas as defining the practice of mathematics. Streefland sees
"increasing coherence" as the result of "connecting and integrating different
mathematical ideas and theories" (Sfard, Nesher, Streefland, Cobb, & Mason, 1998).
Davis and Maher relate how students determine if their answer was reasonable by
checking one representation against another (R. B. Davis & Maher, 1997).
Stylianou & Silver note how college students who employed visual
representations in coordination with other presentations solved problems in markedly
different ways (Stylianou & Silver, 2004). Those who used visual representations in
tandem with other representations found solutions to questions that were procedurally
difficult. Arcavi notes that visualization can have a powerful complementary role in at
least three ways: illustration of symbolic results; resolving conflict between (correct)
74
symbolic solutions and (incorrect) intuitions, and re-engage with and recover conceptual
underpinnings which may be easily bypassed by formal solutions (Arcavi, 2003).
Parnafes & diSessa suggest that particular representations differentially support and
enhance different cognitive processes, allowing students to develop different forms of
reasoning (Parnafes & diSessa, 2004).
Developing the habit of flexible and competent translation back and forth between
representations can be a "long-term, context dependent, nonlinear and even difficult
process for students" (Schoenfeld et al., 1993). Forming connections, however, gives
something for students to negotiate - "Is there a connection between this representation
and that?" - thus potentially supporting the building of meanings. In discussing multi-
representational computer environments, Ainsworth suggests that one representation can
contain information complementary to another, constrain possible interpretations in the
use of another, and encourage learners to construct a deeper understanding of a situation
(Ainsworth, 1999). Students who focus on meanings that lack further connections may
find it difficult to have a conversation that focuses on another aspect of the relationship
between the mathematical terms, or the implications of the statement (Tall, 1995; Tall &
Vinner, 1981).
Noss, Healy, and Hoyles (1997) also suggest that mathematical meanings derive
from connections between representations; through connections, meanings are elaborated,
refined, and enhanced, and different meanings exist together as part of the meaning of a
mathematical object. Noss, Healy, and Hoyles state that "abstracting - considered as a
process - can be seen as a way of layering meanings on each other, rather than as a way
of replacing one kind of meaning (concrete, referential) with another (abstract,

75
decontextualised)" (Healy & Hoyles, 1999; Noss et al., 1997). Using representations can
be seen as a process of creation and reinvention of meaning, grounded in students'
previous representational activities (Rasmussen et al., 2005). By using representations to
communicate with others, students have a material basis for inferences to be made;
understanding is not a state, but an ongoing process.
3.1.8. Summary
I began this section with the phrase "understand the meaning." While I may have
not defined this term, the preceding discussion locates the meaning of the phrase with
processes of communication, representation, and negotiation of meaning. Most
importantly for this study, I have outlined the perspective that "understanding the
meaning" of a term is not an activity that can happen in isolation from other people, or
from other meanings and representations. There may also be "roads less traveled" for
individuals as they travel with their representational shoes. I believe that investigating
"understanding the meaning" requires a focus on students' communicative activities, and
an awareness that each question we ask of students may change the very understandings
we are hoping to study.

76
3.2. Representations in Calculus
In the previous section, I discussed viewpoints regarding "understanding" and
"meaning" in mathematics, and the role of representation and communication in creating
meaning. The authors of the Teacher's Guide to AP Calculus (Kennedy, 1997) use these
words often. The authors state that students can only "understand the FTC" after
understanding the "meaning of the derivative in terms of a rate of change and local linear
approximation", the "meaning of the integral as a net accumulation of a rate of change
and a limit of Riemann sums". With these understandings, students should know that the
FTC validates the use of antiderivatives to evaluate definite integrals, and how to
construct, analyze, and differentiate functions defined by definite integrals. With these
statements as a backdrop, in this section I will examine how perspectives on meaning,
representation, communication, and understanding have been used to describe students'
learning of the concepts of calculus. I will also describe suggestions researchers have
made to improve student learning.
3.2.1. Difficulties with Connecting Representations
Tall summarized students' difficulties in calculus (Tall, 1993b). He quotes
Williams (Williams, 1991), who reported that some students used "neither formal nor
dynamic models of limit" when working with limits, instead relying on procedures and
symbols that students used in ways that were "largely separate from their conceptual
knowledge". Students might use different meanings of limits "according to the particular
context being considered, without being concerned about possible overall consistencies".
Williams also found that students held on to particular meanings of limit across short-
term instructional interventions. Tall summarizes other studies that provided evidence
77
that students had "difficulties in selecting and using appropriate representations".
Ferrini-Mundy & Graham also report that students appeared unconcerned with
conflicting conceptions of an idea, but do actively formulate their own theories, build
their own connections, and construct meaning, influenced strongly by their previous
experiences, familiar examples, and frequently used patterns (Ferrini-Mundy & Lauten,
1993).
In their summary of research, Ferrini-Mundy and Lauten paint a picture of
students using local strategies and explanations based upon visual evidence or symbolic
evidence, with a lack of coordination between the two. Ferrini-Mundy & Lauten noted
that students often view algebraic and graphical data as independent, and use
contradictory methods of reasoning in each setting. They suggest a focus on multiple
representations to help students develop more global, connected thinking and to help
students recognize the importance of understanding why methods work. Ferrini-Mundy
& Graham (1994) noted students had difficulty determining functions from non-
functions, but also noted that students can "do" many things in calculus without facing
this issue. They report that students may not see much difference between symbols that
appear similar but have different meanings, such as those for antiderivative and definite
integral. For example, to a student the definite integral may simply be a signal to "do
something" that is "more definite" than some other, unspecified action. Lauten, Graham,
& Ferrini-Mundy (1994) noted how students would answer what the researchers
considered "equivalent problems" quite differently if they were presented using a
different representation.
78
Selden, Mason, and Selden (Selden et al., 1989; Selden et al., 1994) illustrate the
variety of difficulties students have in answering non-routine questions, finding that
students who otherwise achieve high marks for their mathematics work exhibit methods
of solution that demonstrate a lack of coordinated knowledge. Meel reported honors'
students use of a variety of methods that did not generalize beyond the question at hand
(Meel, 1998). Thompson found, in an extended teaching and research sequence with
advanced students, that their notions about the ideas of calculus were "poorly
coordinated" (Thompson, 1994a). The students reported that they had, for many years,
talked about notations and notational actions "without mentioning an interpretation of the
notations themselves." Thompson conducted the teaching experiment with special
reference to uses of notation and the construction of explanations. He found that it was
difficult for students to see the use of notation as an activity upon which one might
reflect. White & Mitchelmore (1996) reported that students had a "manipulation focus",
approaching calculus questions by looking for symbols upon which they could apply
known manipulations, rather than searching for, or using, meanings.
The observation that students use representations in a compartmentalized way is a
theme that runs through the literature. Bezuidenhout reports that first-year calculus
students' understanding rests largely "upon isolated facts and procedures" and that "their
conceptual understanding of the relationships between these concepts is deficient"
(Bezuidenhout, 2001). Bezuidenhout noted that students would work with a "personal
principle" such as "the first derivative of distance is velocity" but would not coordinate
this meaning with other meanings (Bezuidenhout, 1998). Hahkioniemi (Hahkioniemi,
2004) observed students making some progress in this area, connecting geometric images
79
with symbolic processes. Hahkioniemi notes, with Porzio, that students showed a
preference for the kinds of representations that they were most often exposed to in
classroom experiences (Porzio, 1995). Porzio noted that when students had experience
using technology that integrated symbolic and graphical representations, they were better
able to use and recognize connections between those representations.
Judson & Nishimori (2005) found that students in two different countries had a
solid grasp of the "mechanics" of calculus, understood the derivative as a rate of change,
and could use this understanding to sketch graphs of functions. They note, however, that
students lacked a sophisticated understanding of functions, and lacked the skills and
experience to link several concepts to solve a difficult problem or understand the "full
meaning" of the FTC. They noted students' use of accumulation arguments with
reference to the FTC, but found links between certain ideas to be missing. They noted
errors in interpretation of questions as students extracted meaning from only part of the
statement and failed to coordinate the information provided in the question. Carlson
reports students' difficulties in making sense of variables varying in relation to each
other, and students' difficulty accessing knowledge soon after instruction in that
knowledge (Carlson, 1998).
Researchers have suggested that an understanding of the FTC requires students to
to work with different mathematical representations of functions, limits, derivatives, and
integrals in flexible ways (Eisenberg, 1992; Mamona-Downs, 1996). Tall and Vinner
(1981) detail the meanings and explanations given by students who were asked to
consider questions involving limits and continuity. They noted that students developed
"restricted notions" of mathematical ideas: a student might report that a function must be
80
defined by an algebraic formula, or that a sequence can never have a term equal to the
limit of the sequence. Davis (1984) observed that while the concept of a limit of a
sequence can be represented in various ways, students who relied too heavily upon on a
particular representation would tend to draw incorrect conclusions. Davis and Vinner
(1986) speculated that as students encounter examples of mathematical terms, a tendency
to focus on specific examples or representations would make "misconceptions" an
unavoidable part of students' development of mathematical ideas. Students would use
meanings that were linked to non-technical usage of mathematical terms or meanings that
were drawn from specific examples whose features were not representative of a wider
range of cases.
Carlson, Jacobs, Coe, Larsen, and Hsu report that students did not interpret
information about rates when presented in graphical form, instead relying upon learned
rules such as "positive first derivative implies function increasing" (Carlson, Jacobs, Coe,
Larsen, & Hsu, 2002). Norman & Prichard (1994) found that some students interpreted
the meaning of the definite integral as a process that requires a symbolic action of
evaluation, rather than representing an instance of an action - an instance of Davis'
"name process" dilemma or Tail's "process-object" dilemma. Norman and Prichard
found that students, when asked, could find that the antiderivative of x2 was }x3, but did
not interpret the meaning of the statement \x3 = \x2dx as a statement of equivalence;
i.e. the students did not interpret \x2dx as an antiderivative. Norman and Prichard note
a variety of other learning and problem-solving difficulties that resulted from students
failing to use more than one meaning or check a result in more than one mathematical
representation.
81
Tall suggests that "those who tend to succeed in an analysis course are those who
are more versatile in using different representations - using visual, numeric, or verbal
cues, whichever proves the more appropriate at a given stage". Such students "turn to the
representation that will prove to be useful in the particular case. It may be that calculus
works for those more able students who can think flexibly and fails for those who look
for more procedural guidance to get them through their problems" (Tall, 1993b). Tall
suggests that mathematicians focus on the most useful representation, rather than multiple
representations at the same time, and that "versatile movement between representations"
could lead students to develop insights.
Orton( 1983a; 1983b), in surveying students' understanding of differentiation
and integration, describes how students did not connect meanings, symbols and
processes, and students' difficulty in conceptualizing the limit processes underlying the
notions of derivative and integral. Eisenberg (1992) suggests that visualizing functions
is a needed component in a variety of mathematical situations, but that students are
reluctant to do so because of their experiences with, and beliefs about, mathematics. He
notes that visual explanations, while they may demand more talk about meanings and
about generality, might help students develop a better sense of how different
representations interconnect, and helps students solve problems more successfully.
Rasmussen reported upon students who felt that math was not "about" anything, and who
appeared to have little understanding of the certain notions of calculus "beyond knowing
how to do it." He also suggests that students' use of representations may be influenced by
students' experiences with learning mathematics (Rasmussen, 1998).

82
Researchers investigating why students have difficulties with calculus continue to
focus on students' use of representations (Thompson & Silverman, 2007). Thompson and
Silverman note that students may use representations as a "shorthand," thus avoid
thinking about the actual meaning of the representations. Thompson (Thompson, 1994a)
suggests that if students do not develop more than a "figural" notion of what a function
is, or do not view the Riemann sum as a quantity that can change, they will not be able to
develop an operational understanding of the FTC. He suggests that what he calls "image-
building" regarding accumulation, rate of change, and rate of accumulation, must precede
synthesis into the FTC. Thompson (Thompson, 1994b) noted that "the situation being
represented must be paramount in students' awareness" and that students must "see
something remaining the same as they move among tables, graphs, and expressions" in
order to develop a deeper understanding of this aspect of the ideas of calculus. The
"something" that students might debate about itself continues to be a matter of debate
(Tall, Thomas, Davis, Gray, & Simpson, 2000).
Tall, Thomas, Davis, Gray, & Simpson suggest that when "the individual
becomes aware of the totality of the process, realizes that transformations can act on it,
and is able to construct such transformations," then the "something" exists. If students'
actions and reflections upon their actions help them think about what the "something" is,
then more flexible learning may occur. Hong and Thomas suggest that when students
focus on "how to" and "why" (Hong & Thomas, 1997) the meaning of symbols will not
be "left behind" when a procedure using the symbols is learned. The authors note that a
student should be able to determine the integral from 2 to 4 ofJ{x -1), for example, when
the student knows the integral from 1 to 3 of f(x), so long as the student is thinking about
83
meanings, multiple representations, and procedures. If symbols are solely a signal to
perform manipulations, then such questions can appear quite difficult to the student.
3.2.2. Organization of Ideas
Judson and Nishimori (Judson & Nishimori, 2005) note this phenomena, stating
that students seem unable to do what they "should be able" to do, given other indicators
of their knowledge and skills. Eisenberg, however, reminds the mathematical community
that "lucid explanations" that include direction in how to use all the "necessary skills" are
not enough to make an idea self-evident to the students, particularly when students have
difficulty moving between representations, or difficulty giving meaning to a particular
representation (Eisenberg, 1992). Mills and Tall agree:
Mathematical concepts are more than just the logical

sequence of definitions and deductions which make up the
formal framework of the subject. In mathematical research
it is first necessary to develop a framework of linkages
between ideas before they are sorted out into a precise
deductive sequence. Yet, in teaching, the subject is so often
presented in its final organized form in a way that the
majority of undergraduates seem to find notoriously
difficult. (Mills & Tall, 1988)
Cornu (1991) notes that the concept of limit, while central to continuity and the
integral and differential calculus, contains aspects that "cannot be generated purely from
the definition", following Davis (1984) who observed that "the definition of a term does
not necessarily tell one what that term 'is'." Cornu suggests that students must see first
see limits as a useful tool to answer questions that students have asked for themselves,
and that making students aware of the different meanings their words can have can help
build understanding. Mills and Tall suggest that "fundamental principles in the calculus"
are "somewhat different from the definitions of the concepts, yet form the basis for a
84
better understanding of the concepts" (Mills & Tall, 1988). Artigue reports an increase
in students' understanding after students had engaged in "scientific debate" where
students built meanings for the integral in context (Artigue, 1991). Artigue concludes,
from a review of other studies that engaged students in construction of meaning using
multiple representations, that students develop greater understanding from such
approaches.
Speaking generally, Vinner and Dreyfus (1989) suggest that students' behavior
differs from what instructors expect when "the set of mathematical objects considered by
the students to be examples of the concept is not necessarily the same as the set of
mathematical objects determined by the definition." Students unsuccessfully evoke a
particular picture, verbal description, definition, or procedure. Vinner and Dreyfus
recommend discussions with students to determine what examples students are using to
draw their conclusions. Referring to function as "the central underlying concept in
calculus," Vinner (1992) illustrates learning problems with the concept of function and
derivative. He observed that students would recall methods and tools, but forget
meanings, allowing "instrumental aspects" of the concept to replace the concept itself.
Eisenberg (1991) noted students' difficulties with functions as well. Students could
answer a question when phrased in one form, but not in others, although students could
demonstrate the individual skills that would seem to be necessary to answer the question.
Gray, Pinto, Pitta, & Tall (Gray, Pinto, Pitta, & Tall, 1999) theorize that the
learning of calculus and beyond is difficult because
It involves the creation of new mental worlds in the

mind of the thinker which may be entirely hypothetical.
Mathematicians do this by reflecting on their visual and
symbolic intuitions to suggest useful situations to study...
85
...Definitions... face in two ways. They face back

to previous experiences which suggest what ideas are worth
studying and forward to the construction of theorems which
are true for any structure that satisfies the given criteria.
They can cause great cognitive problems for a learner who
must distinguish between those things in the mind which
suggest theorems and other things that have already been
proved from the criteria...
...In practice, this often proves extremely difficult.

Whereas mathematics researchers may have had experience
at making new structures by constructing their own
definitions, students are more likely to only be initially
involved in using definitions which have been provided by
others.
Alcock and Simpson (2002) note that mathematicians themselves often "face
both ways", as described above, with respect to definitions. They report that some
students can operate in this way, using representations in a way that is consistent with
formal theory. Other students appear to focus on isolated symbolic characters without
relating these to the underlying mathematical concepts (Alcock & Simpson, 2005), or
offer single diagrams as justification, assuming that other examples have the same
properties. Those who use symbolic arguments may fall into the trap of not questioning
whether their manipulations relate to statements they are trying to justify. Math does not
need to be "about" anything for such students. Students who "have a drive to construct an
integrated understanding" and can conceive of a "something" that they are talking about,
search for links between representations, and adjust their own initial conceptions.
Such students resolve their difficulties with formal theories with less difficulty
than others (Alcock & Simpson, 2004). Students who focus on the "easiest"
representation because they "understand it" find less success, as do students who try to
use definitions in routinized ways rather than seeing definitions as the one of many
86
representations of an idea. As noted by Gray, Pinto, Pitta, & Tall, students tend to lack
experience asking the questions to which definitions might be the answer, and lack the
experience reflecting upon and organizing ideas, having seen mathematics presented only
in its organized form (Mills & Tall, 1988).
Berry and Nyman suggest that "understanding in calculus is not merely a set of
loosely connected actions" but the "ability to explore the facts, rules and concepts and
how they connect within the mathematical context". Their study of students' graphical
understanding of the derivative suggested that "students need to be encouraged and given
the opportunity to reflect on the connections among various mathematical topics so that
they can identify equivalent representations of the same concept" (Berry & Nyman,
2003). Eisenberg (1992) notes that if a student sees the integral of a function as more
than just "the area", the student may be able to answer a wider range of questions. Kaput
notes that since complex ideas are seldom adequately represented with a single
representation, linking representations helps reveal different facets of an idea (Kaput,
1992). Porzio interviewed students in calculus classes that emphasized the use of
different technologies for creating representations. He found that the ways in which
students were taught to use representations influenced their responses to questions where
multiple representations were possibly useful (Porzio, 1999). Without instruction using
multiple representations, he found that students were unlikely to use them.

87
3.2.3. Research into Students' Thinking about The Fundamental Theorem
of Calculus
Those who have written specifically about students' understanding of the FTC
have looked at how the meanings students associate with integrals and derivatives arise
from their use of representations. Carlson, Smith, and Persson (Carlson et al., 2003) state
that "reasoning about and with the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus involves mental
actions of coordinating the accumulation of rate-of-change with the accumulation of the
independent variable of the function. The accumulating quantity can be imagined to be
made of infinitesimal accruals in the quantities, which when thought of multiplicatively,
make up the accruals in the accumulating quantity". In examining students
understanding of the FTC, Carlson, Smith, and Persson focus upon how students attend to
the ways variables change in a situation, or "covariational reasoning" (Thompson,
1994b). The authors provide a framework for understanding the FTC, focusing on the
meanings students associate with symbols, and whether students can associate verbal,
symbolic and graphical representations of the variables that are changing. (See also
(Bezuidenhout & Olivier, 2000).)
As part of their framework, Carlson, Smith, and Persson state that understanding
how the "instantaneous rate-of-change" of a function varies with "continuous changes in
the input variable" is a foundational ability needed to understand the FTC. They suggest
that "Understanding that the average change of a function (on an interval) = the average
rate-of-change (multiplied by) the amount of change in the independent variable" is an
example of covariational reasoning that is necessary to understand the FTC. The authors
also include students' ability to associate the symbolic statements of the FTC with verbal
88
statements about their meaning as part of their framework. Carlson, Smith, and Persson
found that students could coordinate "the accumulation of a function's input variable with
the accumulation of instantaneous rate-of-change of the function from some fixed starting
value to some specified value" in context, and use the notation | f(t)dt when analyzing
a graph. They concluded, however, that students' "understanding of the statements and
relationships of the FTC" was not as strong; fewer students in their study were able to
d r-t
explain the meaning of expressions like —Ja f{t)dt . Thompson and Silverman
dx
(Thompson & Silverman, 2007) add that students can use a notation like J f{t)dt
without being able to "unpack" the meanings it represents, and "educe mathematically
correct results from incorrect reasoning".
Thompson and Silverman state that students must understand that a graph
represents a picture how x and/(x) vary, be able to imagine those quantities varying
simultaneously, imagine the bounded area under the graph of f{x) accumulating, and
understand accumulations as functions in their own right. With respect to the function
I f(x)dx, Thompson and Silverman state "When students do not see t as varying, it is
difficult, if not impossible, for them to conceive that the accumulation function has a rate
of change for every value of t at which it is defined". They also voice their concern that
even when students can describe the operation of, and answer questions about, this
function correctly, students may be exhibiting evidence of "pseudo-analytic" and
"pseudo-conceptual" behavior (Vinner, 1997b), using words and symbols to refer to other
words and symbols without communicating mathematical meanings.
For example, although the "paint metaphor" can be found in calculus textbooks
(G. Thomas & Finney, 1988), Thompson and Silverman suggest that students can view
89
the function [ f{t)dt using this metaphor as a "shorthand" that "has nothing to do with
Ja
the meaning of integration as the limit of Riemann sums". When thinking only of paint,
they suggest, students are "using the notation nonmathematically". Thompson and
Silverman contend that students' understanding of the FTC depends upon students
"explicating an inherent relationship between accumulation of quantities in bits and the
rates at which an incremental bit accumulates" and upon students being able to interpret
this idea using multiple representations.
Schnepp & Nemirovsky analyze a classroom discussion with high school students
working on the ideas leading to the FTC (Schnepp & Nemirovsky, 2001). Their
investigation was motivated by their belief that "students are left with a formally proved
statement about the inverse relationship between differentiation and integration without a
clear intuitive sense of why the relationship exists". They suggest that students should
learn that "accumulation always occurs at a certain rate, and this rate at any given point
is the value of the function being accumulated." They see opportunities for students to
see that "rate of change is cumulative, and that the amount that what has been
accumulated up to a certain point is the value of the function being differentiated". They
use representations as means to recognize ideas in other representations, with acts of
recognition becoming "points of departure or arrival for inference", for example,
recognizing acceleration in a position-time graph.
Schnepp & Nemirovsky state that their approach to the FTC involves introducing
students to differentiation and integration for a numerical perspective, with both ideas
examined from the point of view of their mutual relationship, in different contexts, levels
of analysis, and representations. Schnepp & Nemirovsky believe that students should
90
engage in frequent discussions where they "revise the meaning" of familiar words, so as
to realize the complexity inherent in the meanings. In the classroom episode described,
the authors illustrate how students might build intuitive notions of the relationships that
underlie the FTC, while observing the motion of a real object, describing it with graphs,
symbols, and words, and debating their ideas. Schnepp & Nemirovsky point to the verbal
explanations and dialogues between students as evidence of students' development of
these intuitive notions.
3.2.4. The Importance of Representations
The importance of representations is a central theme throughout the research into
students' learning of calculus. While students demonstrate facility using one or another
representation, students appear to miss connections between these representations and
thus fail to grasp meanings like those stated for students of AP Calculus. Tall states:
one of the reasons why the teaching of the calculus is in

disarray is that concepts which expert mathematicians
regard as intuitive are not "intuitive" to students. The
reason is quite simple. Intuition is a global resonance in the
brain and it depends on the cognitive structure of the
individual, which in turn is also dependent on the
individual's previous experience. There is no reason at all
to suppose that the novice will have the same intuitions as
the expert, even when considering apparently simple visual
insights. Mathematical education research shows that
students' ideas of many concepts is not what might be
expected. (Tall, 1991a)
In the traditional time frames for students' learning of calculus, learners may not have a
significant amount of time to refine each element of mathematical knowledge before their
education takes them to the next topic that follows in the curriculum. Moreover, the
logical order of the textbook or curriculum may differ from the order in which students
build knowledge (Kline, 1970). Davis and Vinner also suggest that complex ideas are
91
unlikely to "appear instantaneously in complete and mature form" in the mind of the
learner (R. B. Davis & Vinner, 1986). Speiser and Walter suggest that students' "ways of
understanding their experience do not conform to certain particular, traditionally set
patterns", and that learners' interactions with representations can motivate unexpected
questions (Speiser & Walter, 1996).
If this is the case, the study of how students "perceive something that was
previously inaccessible" through the use of representations (Hershkowitz, Schwarz, &
Dreyfus, 2001) is particularly important. How learners develop "intuition" is a largely
unexplored area with respect to the topic of first semester calculus, although studies in
other areas (Blum & Kirsch, 1991; Rasmussen, 1998; Weber & Alcock, 2004) point
towards the importance of students views' of and uses of representations in more
advanced studies. Rather than a process whose path is relatively continuous, students'
understandings in calculus may develop in a discontinuous fashion (Speiser et al., 2003).
In using representations and working to create meanings using representations, students
may create meanings in ways that are "highly sensitive to context" (Wagner, 2006) or
that depend upon individual choices of example and imagery (Pinto & Tall, 2002; Weber
& Alcock, 2004).

92
4. Meanings of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus lends itself to a variety of presentations
and interpretations. In this section, I will outline the approaches found in 6 textbooks and
as well as the Teacher's Guide to AP Calculus, all of which were made available to the
students during their sessions. The students made some reference to five of these texts
and the Guide during the research sessions. Secondly, I will summarize selected
perspectives on the FTC taken from mathematics education literature. To give the reader
a background for the ideas the students in this study were exposed to, I will detail some
of the my own thinking about the FTC as illustrated by materials created for the students
while in high school and materials I created for the book Exploring Calculus with the
Geometer's Sketchpad.
In presenting the FTC, different authors highlight different meanings, and use
different mathematical representations to explain and communicate about the FTC. I
present these descriptions to provide the reader with a sense of the different approaches
that might be taken to explain the theorem. At the end of this chapter, I will look back at
the approaches presented and relate the content and form of the approaches to some of
the issues of representation, meaning, and communication discussed in the previous
chapters. In reviewing the resources to write this chapter, I became newly aware of those
same issues. What meanings are the authors intending to communicate? How does one
"understand" what the author may be intending to communicate? How do one's previous
experiences with the mathematical representations affect the meanings one draws from
what one reads?

93
4.1. Perspectives Found in Selected Textbooks
4.1.1. Thomas and Finney
In the introduction to Chapter 4 of Calculus and Analytic Geometry, 7th Edition
(G. Thomas & Finney, 1988), Thomas and Finney state that to integrate a function is "to
find all the functions that have it as a derivative - to find all of the given function's
'antiderivatives,' so to speak." They note that there is a connection between this meaning
of the word "integrate" and the use of the word that means "to give the sum total o f and
hint that these two kinds of integration are closely related. In sections 4.1 through 4.4,
the authors detail methods of integration for a variety of functions. In section 4.5, the
authors define the area under a curve as the limit of a sum of areas of inscribed rectangles
of equal width. In the same section, (without, to quote the authors, the "rigors of an
complete proof) they detail how the existence of this limit is a consequence of the
existence of another limit. This other limit, a limit of a sum of rectangles that need not
have equal widths, is called the Riemann integral.
At this point, the authors introduce the symbol f(x)dx to represent the
Ja
Riemann, or definite, integral. They remind the reader that this symbol represents a
number defined as a limit of approximating sums, and that this symbol is used as a way to
define the area of arbitrary shapes under the graphs of continuous nonnegative functions.
Figures are provided to illustrate how the difference between an upper Riemann sum and
a lower Riemann sum can be made arbitrarily small, thus defining the area of such
regions using limits. In the next section, they use the definition of the integral as a limit to
compute areas exactly for a selection of functions, by means of known algebraic

94
formulas, to contrast the non general methods of finding areas that preceded the
development of the FTC.
In section 4.6, the authors state that the definite integral of any continuous
function from t = a to t = x defines a number, F(x) = \ f{t)dt, that can be treated as a

Ja
function of x. They introduce the idea that defining numbers and functions in this way is
valid, since the values can be calculated as accurately as desired. Writing the value of
f2l
ln(2) with the integral Jl
-dt , they state, is no different than writing the symbol JT as the
t
ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle. Immediately, they then state that
the formula F{x) = \ f{t)dt provides the connection between antiderivatives and
integrals.
To explain this connection, the authors state: "If/ is any continuous function,
dF
then F is a differentiable function of x, and — = f(x). The authors add, "If you were
dx
being sent to a desert island and could take only one formula with you, the equation
^-\Xf{t)dt = f(x)
dF
might well be your choice. It says that the differential equation — = f(x) has a
dx
solution for every continuous function /. It says that every continuous function is the
derivative of some other function, f(t)dt. It says that every continuous function has an
Ja
d rx
antiderivative." They go on to state: "(the equation) — f(t)dt = f(x) is so important
dxJa
that we call it the First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus."
Up to this point, the argument has been entirely verbal and symbolic. No graphs
or numerical examples are included. The statement of the FTC follows:

95
If / i s continuous on [a, b\, then F(x) = | f(t)dt is differentiable at

Ja
dF d r-f
every point x in [a, fc|, and — = — f(t)dt = f{x)
dx dxJa
The theorem as expressed in this text states that functions can be defined by
integrals, and that functions so defined are differentiable. An implication, stated as a
corollary, is that for any function /(x) continuous on [a, b\, an antiderivative of that
function exists: the function F(x), as defined above.
Thomas and Finney proceed with a proof of the theorem with an argument based
upon an examination of the derivative of the function F. Using the definition of the
derivative of a function and properties of integrals they established earlier, the authors
write
X+&JC
J* f(t)dt
y F{x + Ax)-F(x)
hm — ^- = hm —
^-^ Ax A*-*0 Ax
To illustrate what the right side of this equation represents geometrically, they include
x+Ax
Figure 1 to illustrate that the area under the graph of/from x to Ax, or \ f(t)dt, is
X
approximately equal to /(x)Ax .
vV
A 'y =fW
f{X)
_^L
x x + Ax
Figure 1: The integral of/is nearly equal to the area of the shaded rectangle
96
Dividing through by Ax; gives

x+Ax
J f{t)dt
Area
, or
Ax Ax
which is approximately equal iofix) . The authors conclude by saying that in taking the
limit as Ax approaches zero, the equality
amF(x + *x)-F(x) = A )
A*-»O Ax
will result.
Thomas and Finney suggest that the equation % = -^\ f(t)dt = f(x) can be
thought of dynamically. They suggest that one can imagine "covering the region under
the curve y =fit) from left to right by unrolling a carpet of variable width fit)" (Figure 2).
Figure 2: The carpet of variable width
They state, "the rate at which the floor is being covered as the carpet rolls past is
fix)." The authors conclude the presentation by giving a formal proof that shows that
px+Ax
J AW
lim ^ = f{x).
AtÔ Ax
97
This proof relies upon the idea that the function/has a minimum and a maximum on the
rx+Ax
interval from x to x + Ax, so that the area f(t)dt is between the minimum and
JX
maximum values f(c)Ax and f(c')Ax. Thus,
rx+Ax
J f(t)dt
J X
Ax
is between /(c) and f{c'), which both approach j{x) as Ax approaches zero.
Later in the section, the authors present the Integral Evaluation Theorem, or the
Second Fundamental Theorem of Calculus: "If / i s continuous at every point of [a, b\,
and F is any antiderivative o f / o n [a, b\, then f(x)dx = F(b)-F{a) ". The authors
Ja
state that the second theorem "says" that one can find the value of the integral of/over
the interval [a, b\ by finding a function F that is an antiderivative o f / and then
calculating the number F(b) - F(a). Their proof begins by defining the function G(x) as
f{t)dt, which is already known, by the first FTC, to be an antiderivative of/ By a
Ja
corollary to the Mean Value Theorem, if F(x) is any other such function, it must differ
from G(x) by a constant. Thus,
F(b)-F(a) = [G(b) + C]-[G(a) + C]

rb pa rb
which equals G(b) - G(a), which is f(t)dt - f{t)dt, or simply f{t)dt. In the
Ja Ja Ja
next chapter, the authors present "net change in position" as an application of integration,
using the expression v{t)dt. Applications to area between curves, volumes, and lengths
Ja
of curves follow.
4.1.2. Larson, Hostetler, Edwards
These authors begin their chapter 4 with a proof of why any antiderivative of a
function/must differ by a constant. They present the function F as an antiderivative of a

98
function/on an interval / if F'(x) = f(x) for all x in the interval /. They then prove that
if F is an antiderivative of/on an interval /, then G is an antiderivative of/on the interval
/ if and only if G is of the form G(x) = F(x) + C. The authors give the symbol J for the
operation of antidifferentiation (also called indefinite integration). They state that the
expression J f(x)dx is read as the antiderivative of/with respect t o / , and that the
term indefinite integral is a synonym for antiderivative. They define the sentence
I f(x)dx = F(x) + C to mean that F is an antiderivative of/on an interval.
Next, they state that the inverse nature of integration and differentiation can be
verified by substituting F'(x) forf(x) in the previous definition, to obtain the statement
\F\x)dx = F(x) + C. Adjacent to this sentence they write "Integration is the 'inverse' of
differentiation".
In addition, they write, if
jf(x)dx = F(x) + C,
then
j-[\f{x)dx] = f{x).
Next to this sentence, they write "Differentiation is the 'inverse' of integration." They
immediately note that those two equations allow the reader to obtain integration formulas
directly from differentiation formulas. Next, in section 4.2, the authors introduce the
problem of finding the area of a region in the plane. They note that antidifferentiation
and finding area may seem unrelated, but that the student "will discover that they are
closely related by an important theorem called the FTC." They then define a Riemann
99
sum as a sum of the areas of inscribed rectangles, which need not have the same width,
and then define the definite integral in much the same way as Thomas and Finney.
To introduce the FTC, the authors state that antidifferentiation and integration are
inverse operations, in the same sense that multiplication and division are inverse
operations. They include a figure that illustrates how the slope of a tangent line is
approximated by Ay I Ax, and that the area of a region under a curve is approximated by
(Ay)(Ax) (Figure 3). The authors write, "at least in the primitive approximation stage, the
operations of differentiation and definite integration appear to have an inverse
relationship in the same sense that division and multiplication are inverse operations".
Av av
Slope = -•— Slope — -—- Area = AvAv Area ~ Ay AT
A.i' &x
(a) Differentiation (b) Definite integration
Figure 3: Larson's illustration of Ay I Ax and (Ay)(Ax)
They then present the fundamental theorem: If a function / is continuous on the
closed interval [a, b], and F is an antiderivative of / on the interval [a, b\, then
f(x)dx = F{b)- F{a) . They then present a proof, which begins with the statement,
"The key to the proof is writing the difference F(b)- F(a) in a convenient form." They
n
show that the sum ^ [ ^ ( - X , ) - ^( x ;i)]> which equals F{b)- F(a) by pairwise addition of
;=o
terms, can also be arrived at through applying the Mean Value Theorem on subintervals
of \a,b\.
The authors do this by converting difference quotients on intervals,

100
Ax,
into products of the form F'(c,)Ax:, = F(xi,) - F{x;_x ) , which, when summed, equal
n n n
^ / ( c , ) Axr So F(b) - F(a) must equal ^ [ ^ ( x , . ) - F(x(._j)], which equals ^F'(cj)Axl.
/=0 „ «=0 „ ,=0
They note ^ F'(c,) Ax(. can also be written as ^/*"(<:,. )Ax,., since F'(x) = / ( x ) . Since the
;=0 (=0
limit of > /(c,)Ax as Ax approaches zero equals f(x)dx, F{b) - F{a) must equal
= 0
b '
\ f(x)dx .
The authors establish what they call the Second Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus by stating that the definite integral can be a function. They ask the reader to
evaluate the function F(x) = j cos(t)dt at different values of x, but note that it would
be easier "fix x (as a constant) temporarily and apply the FTC once, to obtain sin(x) -
sin(0). They note that the derivative of result is the original function - cosine - "with
only the variable changed". They then state that this result can be generalized as the
d rx
Second Fundamental Theorem of Calculus: I f / i s continuous, then — f{t)dt = /(x).
dxJa
They prove that the derivative of F is the function/, using the definition of the derivative,
in a manner similar to that of Thomas and Finney, using a similar area model for integrals
x+Ax
to draw a diagram that represents the approximation /(x)Ax ~ j f(t)dt (Figure 4).
X
fin
fix)
w_
x x + Ax
Figure 4: Larson's illustration of an incremental change in f(t)dt
They do not suggest an image similar to that of the "rolling carpet" however.
101
Both these texts present the FTC as a way of connecting two seemingly unrelated
problems - defining the tangent line to a function and calculating its slope, and defining
the area under the graph of a function and calculating that area. In Thomas and Finney,
the FTC says that "functions can be defined by integrals, and that functions so defined are
differentiable." The idea that areas can be calculated using the theorem is a result that
follows from this idea. In Larson, the theorem says that "provided you can find an
antiderivative of/, you now have a way to evaluate a definite integral with having to use
the limit of a sum". The idea that the integral can be a function is presented later, and
independently. The meaning of the theorem is different in each text; in Thomas and
Finney, the authors stress that every continuous function has an antiderivative. In Larson,
the authors, through their explanation of the statement of the theorem, rely upon a
connection of the calculation of area to the calculation of slope.
Before describing the approach in a third text, I note that the authors have made
choices about the meanings of the FTC they wished to convey, and how to convey them.
The meanings conveyed in one text are not necessarily absent in the other, but the choices
of words, symbols, graphs, and explanations highlight some meanings while leaving
others in the background - at least to this reader. What I report here is what the authors
have communicated to me through the representations they have used, and through the
way they have organized and presented those representations. In both texts, the meanings
were covered verbally and symbolically, with graphs used to illustrate the symbolic
statements. (One could imagine symbolic arguments being used as a means of explaining
what appears to be happening with a graph or a table of numerical values.) These choices,
and these interpretations, are part of the process of communication about the FTC.
102
Awareness of these choices is an important part of putting oneself in the position of the
learner who is working to "make sense" of the FTC.
4.1.3. Foerster
In section 1-3, Foerster presents the definite integral as the process of evaluating a
product in which one factor varies, and explains that the definitive integral can be
evaluated by finding the area between a graph of a function and an axis. Foerster
mentions the fact that there is more than one kind of integral in the introduction to the
chapter, but does not discuss the "other" kind of integral. In section 3-9, the author gives
a definition of the antiderivative: "the function/is an antiderivative of the function g if
and only if f'(x) - g(x) for all values of x in their domains". The author states that an
antiderivative is known as an indefinite integral, and states that the reader will learn why
this alternative name for the antiderivative is so similar to that of the name of the definite
integral. He states that indefinite integration can be considered to be the operation
performed on a differential to get the expression for the original function. In section 5.2,
Foerster defines the differential dy as the product f\x)dx. In this text, the author
explains that dx represents a change in x, and dy represents the change in y for a linear
function whose slope is given by the derivative of/.
y / y
fixed point / s
~~ ~~~ ,.' ^~~~~ linear function

x
Figure 5: Foerster's illustration of a differential

103
He suggests that this definition of differentials allows for the dy and the dx in the symbol
for derivative to the treated as separate quantities.
In section 5.4, Foerster defines the indefinite integral with the statement
"g(x) = [ f(x)dx if and only if g'(x) = f(x)". He notes that the indefinite integral is the
same as the antiderivative. In section 5-5, the author gives a definition of a Riemann sum
as the sum of the areas of rectangles, and that the integral - the area between the graph
n
and the x axis - is approximately equal to 2*f(ck)Ack. He introduces the symbol

k=l
f(x)dx as the value of the limit of a Riemann sum and the definite integral.
Ja
After introducing and proving the Mean Value Theorem in section 5-7, the author
states that it is possible to pick sample points for creating a Riemann sum, based upon the
MVT, in a way that will allow the exact evaluation of definite integrals. He presents an
exploration designed to lead the reader to conjecture how to such pick sample points. In
section 5-8 Foerster then shows a graph of a function/for which one wishes to find the
value of f(x)dx. He states t h a t / has an antiderivative, g, and because g is

Ja
differentiable, the Mean Value Theorem applies to it on the interval [a, b\, and any sub-
interval of [a, b\.
Dividing the interval \a, b\ into n sub-intervals, he writes
v v
' Ax ' Ax
and
5 v
"' Ax
where q, c 2 , ... cn are the values of x at which the conclusion of the MVT is true. He
then points out that the values cx,c2, ... c„ can be used to create a Riemann sum of the
104
form/(c 1 )Ax + /(c2)AxH \- f(cJAx. Since f{x) = g'(x), this sum can also be written
as g'(Cj)Ax + g'(c2)Ax -\ \- g'(cJAx . By replacing the g prime terms in this sum with
the equivalent values of the form
g(*„)-g(* w -i)
Ax
the delta x terms cancel out. Writing out the new sum in this way, the expression
becomes gix^)-g(a) +g(x2)-g(xi) + --- +g(b)-g(xn _,), which is equal to
g{b) - g(a). Foerster notes that the value of the Riemann sum just constructed using the
c, as sample points does not depend on the number of intervals. He then states the FTC
in this way: "If / is an integrable function, and g(x)= \f{x)dx , then

rb
f(x)dx = g(b) - g(a)." He ends the exposition in this section with a short proof that
Ja
the Riemann sum constructed in this way has the value of the definite integral f{x)dx
as its limit.
Later, in section 6-3, Foerster suggests creating a definite integral of a function/
with a variable as the upper per limit of integration. He evaluates a specific integral
using the FTC as he has previously defined it, and points out that because the resulting
function g is a function of x, the original definite integral is a function of x. He then
shows that the derivative of g is the original function/, and explains that since g(x) is the
area of a region, g'(x) is the rate of change of the area. The value of g'(x), he points out,
is equal to the altitude of the region at the boundary of the region where the change in
area is taking place. He suggests imagining a brush whose width is the height of the
graph of/at any value of x. As the region is painted, "the wider the paint brush, the faster
the region gets painted for each inch the brush moves." He then states what he calls the
105
second form of the FTC, which he names "Derivative of an Integral Form": If
g(x) = f(t)dt, where a is a constant, then g\x) = f(x). The author concludes with a
Ja
brief proof that the derivative of function g(x) - \ f{t)dt is the function f(x), which
depends entirely on the first form of the FTC and not the just presented argument using
area.
Forester's approach highlights certain meanings, both different and similar to the
previous text. Foerster highlights the idea that the area between a graph and the x axis
can be found exactly be using the Mean Value Theorem, while Larson uses the MVT to
highlight the "inverse" relationship between integration and differentiation on the way to
arriving at the FTC. Foerster views the FTC as a property that says that the quantity
g(b) - g(a), where g\x) = f(x), is the exact value of the definite integral f{x)dx. In
Ja
Foerster's text, readers encounter meanings for the definite integral at the very beginning
of the text, and the author uses the section on the FTC to link derivatives with the definite
integral. The notion that the integral is a function, while explained with the "painting"
analogy, is presented as a second form of the FTC that follows from the first, rather than
an idea with an independent meaning.
4.1.4. Hughes-Hallett and Gleason
This text focuses on an exploration of the idea of a total change of a quantity,
given information about the rate of change of the quality. In the Hughes-Hallett text
(Hughes-Hallett & Gleason, 1998), the authors begin Chapter 3 by explaining that now
that the reader has calculated velocity from distance traveled, the reverse problem will be
considered: "given the velocity, how can we calculate the distance traveled?". The
authors state that the definite integral "computes the total change in a function from its
106
rate of change", and can also be applied to computing other quantities, such as area. The
authors note that the chapter will end with the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, which
"tells us that we can use a definite integral to get information about a function from its
derivative", and that "calculating derivatives and calculating definite integrals are, in a
sense, reverse processes".
In section 3.1, the authors present a table with velocity data of a car in feet per
second. After calculating an estimate for the distance traveled by the car by multiplying
velocity time on discrete intervals, they illustrate how this calculation can be represented
as the area of rectangles drawn between the graph of the velocity of the object as a
function of time and the t axis. They demonstrate that the limit of the sum of the areas of
inscribed rectangles is equal to the total distance traveled by the object. In section 3.2,
they show how the limit of a sum of the areas of rectangles can be defined for any
function /, whether or not it represents a velocity. Here they define the symbol
f*
f{t)dt as the definite integral, which they define as the limit of a sum of inscribed
la
rectangles. In this text, the authors have not previously addressed the topic of
antidifferentiation.
In section 3.3. the authors describe interpretations of the definite integral. For
example, they suggest that if fit) is the velocity of a object at time /, then/(/)<i/ can be
thought of informally as "velocity times time". They also explain that the area under a
graph can be used to define the average value of a function f(x). In section 3.4, the
authors give v(t) as the velocity function for an object, and s(t) as the position function, so
that v(t)-s'(t). The authors then state "we know that total change in position =
107
s(b) - s(a) = s'(t)dt", and that this result can be generalized to explain why the integral
J a
of the rate of change of any quantity gives the total change in that quantity.
They approach this task by asking the reader to suppose that F'(t)is the rate of
change of some quantity function F{t). The authors divide the interval [a, b] into n
subintervals, each of length At, and ask the reader to assume that the rate of change of F
is approximately constant on those intervals. As a result, they note that they can write
" AF ~ rate of change of F x Time elapsed ", and on any subinterval, then, AF ~ F'ifÂt.
n-l n-\
Thus, the total change in F, or ^ AF , will approximately equal j^F'^tÂt. The limit
<=o ;=0
as n approaches infinity of ^F'(?,.)A? should then be equal to the total change

n-l '=" b
F(b) - F(a). Since ^,F'(r ; )Af is the meaning of [ F'(t)dt, then it must the case that
F(b)-F(a) = F\t)dt • The authors rewrite this equality in the form F{b)-F{a) =
Ja
rb
f(t)dt, calling it the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. They add, "In words: the
definite integral of a rate of change gives the total change."
In the next sentence the authors note that the argument they have just given does
not constitute a mathematical proof, since each of the approximations AF ~ FXtÂt
involves a small error. To prove that the total change in F is approximated by the
n-l
Riemann sum ^FytÂt, they explain that one would need to show that the sum of all
the errors is as small as one would like by choosing n large enough. The authors proceed
to do this with an outline of an argument that calls upon a property of local linearization:
AF
by choosing At small enough, the error in the approximation F'(f ; )« — is as small as
one would like. The authors suggest that an alternative proof can be found in an exercise
in another section.
108
After the study of rules about and applications of derivatives in chapters 4 and 5,
the authors introduce antiderivatives and differential equations in chapter 6. In section
6.4 the authors introduce a second FTC under the heading "Construction of
Antiderivatives Using the Definite Integral". They note that some functions may not
have elementary antiderivatives, and wonder if this means that perhaps some functions do
_ 2
not have antiderivatives. They note, however , using the example of f(x) = e x , that its
antiderivative F, if it exists, has the property F(b) - F(a) = e dt. By replacing the
Ja
constant b with a variable x, and setting x = 0, the authors create the statement,
F(x) - F(0) = \ e dt, and by assuming F(0) = 0, create the function F(x) = \ e dt.
Jo Jo
They note that for any fixed x, there is a unique value for F(x), so that F is a function.
Defining a function F by the expression F(x)= \ f(t)dt , the authors state,
Ja
creates a function that is an antiderivative off. More formally, the authors state, if/ is
continuous on an interval, and if a is any number in that interval, then the function
defined by F(x) = f(t)dt is an antiderivative of/. They note also that if G is any
Ja
other antiderivative of/ then G(x)-G(a)= \ f(t)dt , and since F(x)= | f(t)dt, then
G(x) - G(a) = F{x), and F and G differ by a constant and thus are both antiderivatives of
/ They provide a justification that F(x) = f(t)dt is an antiderivative of/by examining

Ja
lim(F(x + h) - F(x)) I h , showing graphically what this limit represents, and then
h—>0
symbolically why the limit must equal f(x).
4.1.5. Ostebee and Zorn

Ostebee and Zorn (Ostebee & Zorn, 2002) state that for a function defined on the
rb
interval [a, b\, the expression f(x)dx denotes the signed area bounded by x = a, x = b,
Ja
and y = fix). Unlike the other texts described here, the authors do not define the integral
109
as a limit of sums until after the presentation of the FTC. Instead, in the next section, the
authors define the area function: "Let/be a function and a any point of its domain. For
any input x, the area function is defined by the rule A^x) = l f(t)dt". This function is
described as the "signed" area defined by/from a to x. The authors then present an
example where/(x) = 3, and show that Afix) = 3x. They write immediately that the reader
should notice that the area function is also the antiderivative of the function/(x). In the
next example, the authors ask the reader to consider the area function for/(x) = x. Using
the formula for the area of a triangle, they arrive at the result A Ax) = x212, which, they
note, is again an antiderivative of/
Ostebee and Zorn then present an additional two examples, both times using the
function f(x) - 2 - x, but with two different values of a. They note that in both cases,
the area function is an antiderivative of/ and that the two results differ by a constant.
Lastly, Ostebee and Zorn present an area function for which is not possible to calculate
values using geometric formulas. They suggest that the reader make estimates by using
the square units on an x-y grid. They conclude the section by noting the importance of
the relationship between Afx) and/(x), listing the properties that they observed.
At the very beginning of the next section, the authors state that the evidence in the
preceding section points to the conclusion: "For any well behaved function/and a base
point a, Af is an antiderivative of/'. The authors call this statement "The fundamental
theorem of calculus, informal version". They note that the formal statement of this fact
is the single most important theorem of elementary calculus: "Let/be any continuous
function defined on an open interval / containing a. The function Ay with the rule
Af(x) = f(t)dt is defined by every x in /, and —{A Ax)) - f(x) ". Ostebee and Zorn
110
explain that the "FTC means, graphically, that the rate of change of the area function is
the height of the original function". They then find an antiderivative for a given function
and note that the graph of this antiderivative appears to graphically describe the behavior
of the signed area under the/graph, based at 0.
The authors go on to discuss why the FTC is fundamental: "It's fundamental
theoretically because it connects the two main concepts of the calculus: the derivative and
the integral. Each is a sort of inverse of the other. The FTC's practical consequences are
at least as important: implicitly or explicitly, we'll use them again and again." They use
this paragraph as an introduction to another version of the FTC: "Let/be continuous on

r*
\a, b\, and let F be any antiderivative of/. Then f(x)dx = F(b) — F(a) . They prove
that this fact follows from the first version of the FTC using the same symbolic argument
used by Thomas and Finney. They note that this second version can be restated slightly
without changing its meaning: " L e t / b e a function defined on [a, b\, with continuous
derivative/' Then f* f'(x)dx = f(b)- f(a)". Immediately after this statement, they
give the fact "in words": "Integrating/' (the rate function) for [a, b] gives the change in
/(the amount function) over the same interval".
Note that in contrast to the approach used in the Hughes-Hallett text, Ostebee and
Zorn introduce the idea of finding the total change as an idea that follows from other
ideas, rather than as a central meaning of the FTC. Here, unlike the previous 3 texts, the
first given meaning of the FTC is the idea that functions can be defined by integrals and
that these area functions are antiderivatives. Unlike Thomas and Finney, Ostebee and
Zorn use graphical and numerical representations of area to establish this idea, and do not
d
first examine Riemann sums. A proof that —(A Ax)) = f(x) follows these presentations
Ill
to give logical support to the ideas previously discussed. The proof is similar to that in
Thomas and Finney and Hughes-Hallett. Riemann sums are introduced at the end of the
chapter, as another interpretation and definition of the definite integral, and as a way to
find values of the area function when an elementary antiderivative does not exist.
4.1.6. Bartkovich, Goebel, Graves, and Teague
In Contemporary Calculus with Applications, (Bartkovich et al., 1996) the authors
take almost the reverse approach. They begin with the idea that given the rate of change
of a function, one can reconstruct the actual function using a process of recursion, making
the connection between finding an antiderivative and calculating area more prominent
than in any of the other texts. They do this both symbolically and graphically.
To perform this "reconstruction" the authors begin with a starting value
(x 0 ,/(x 0 )) of the unknown function and the value of the derivative at x0. By using the
relationship that the change in y of a function can be approximated by multiplying the
slope by the change in x, the authors give / ( x 0 ) + /"'(x0)-Ax as an approximation of
/(x,). The smaller the value of Ax, they note, the better the approximation. One can then
approximateJ{x2) given the actual value of /'(x^), using the calculation
(f(x0) + f'(x0)-Ax) + f'(x^-Ax.
In general, the authors explain, f{xn) can be approximated by
f(x0) + f'(x0)-Ax + f(xx)-Ax + f'(x2)-Ax + --+f'(xn_l)-Ax,
or
112
/ ( x 0 ) + (/'(x 0 ) + /'(*,) + f'(x2) +- + f'(x^))-Ax.
The authors explain this idea verbally and later illustrate it graphically. The authors note
that the expression can be written more succinctly using summation notation:
/ ( x J « / ( x 0 ) + £/'(x,)-Ax.
Rearranging terms, this expression is equivalent to f(xj- f(xQ) ~ 2^f'(x:)- Ax.
The authors note that in this form, the quantity fix„) -fix0), which represents the actual
net change in the function/, is approximated by the expression ^/'(x.)- Ax . In this
sum of n terms, each term represents the product of a slope and a change in x, and the
approximation of the net change for a particular interval from x = x0 to x = x„ is better for
n-l
larger n and smaller Ax . The authors state that taking the limit of 2*/'(*,•)' Ax as Ax
approaches zero will change the approximation into the equality
f(xn)-f(x0)=Yim%f'(xi)-Ax.
,=o
n-\
an
The authors call the expression £jf'(x.)' Ax example of a Riemann sum, and they
;=0
rb "~]
introduce a new symbol, | f'{x)dx , to represent lim V f'(x ) • Ax , where x, = a and
/=0
rb
xn-b, Ax-(b-a)ln, and x. = xt_x + Ax . They call I f'{x)dx a "definite integral"
and use the transitive property to equate f\x)dx and fib) -fid).
Ja
The authors then call the relationship expressed by the symbols

rb
f'(x)dx = f(b)- f(a) the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. They call the result
fundamental because it links derivatives and integrals, the two central concepts of
calculus (although this is the first mention of the word integral in the text). Immediately
afterward, they explain that the Riemann sum that was used to approximate the net
113
change in/can be interpreted as the area of rectangles between the graph of / ' ( * ) and the
x axis, and that these rectangles, when iSx is close to zero, approximate the area between
the graph of f'{x) and the x axis on the specified interval. In the next section, the authors
show how to use the FTC to find areas between curves, and in subsequent sections
examine a small selection of applications of integrals. Only after these sections do the
authors introduce the word "antiderivative" and write the FTC in the form
j f'(x)dx-f(b)-f(a) , where F'(x) = f(x) . They introduce the symbol \f(x)dx to
represent the situation where one is interested in the antiderivative but does not want to
evaluate it over an interval.
In these selections, symbolic and verbal representations dominate - words are
used to explain symbolic statements, symbolic statements are used to summarize an idea
presented verbally, and both symbols and words are used in tandem. Each the textbooks
described here state what the FTC says, the meanings it can have it practice, and explain
why the FTC is true. With these mathematical representations, however, the authors
create a variety of approaches to the FTC that emphasize different interpretations and
meanings of the FTC. For example, the choice of interpreting the FTC first as a way to
evaluate the limit of a Riemann sum instead of first as a statement about the existence of
antiderivatives leads to the use of a certain sequence of mathematical representations.
These sequences, separate from their use as logical proofs of the FTC, embed the FTC in
a certain place with respect to the major ideas of calculus. In one formulation, the FTC
expresses a connection between the process of finding an antiderivative and creating a
graph of accumulated area. In another, the FTC expresses the idea that the area between a
114
graph and the x axis on a fixed interval can be found as a result of consequences of the
Mean Value Theorem.
4.1.7. Summary
Whenever a person wishes to communicate about the FTC, the individual has
choices of meanings and mathematical representations. The person might represent the
theorem with a verbal statement, and explain this verbal statement with graphical
evidence. Alternatively, a person may present graphical examples and describe the
examples symbolically. When a person uses mathematical representations to
communicate an idea, the person must implicitly or explicitly communicate about
"something". When that something is the FTC, the descriptions provided above indicate
that the "something" is more than any one approach or description. Moreover, each of
these choices, and any others, potentially communicate different meanings to the person
on the other side of the communication. Thompson, for example, explains his view that a
certain explanation of the FTC "is presented as modeling static situation" as opposed to
describing how variables are changing in relation to each other (Thompson, 1994a).
Given a statement of the FTC, one learner may see a dynamic situation represented while
another sees only a set of symbols that are being manipulated to achieve a result. Such
differences are a fundamental area of interest for mathematics educators.
4.2. AP Calculus
Despite the possibility that one reader will read the same words and make
different interpretations, the AP Calculus Development Committee has the duty of
creating descriptions designed to allow teachers across the world to teach a common
calculus curriculum . To supplement the AP Calculus course description, the committee

115
created a Teacher's Guide (Kennedy, 1997) to further explicate the specific goals for
student understanding of the ideas of calculus in an AP course. The course is described as
one that emphasizes "a multi-representational approach to calculus, with concepts,
results, and problems being expressed graphically, numerically, analytically, and
verbally... the connections among these representations also are important." The authors
suggest that rates of change and approximations should be threads that run through the
entire course. The AP test development committee attempts to ask questions on the AP
exams that use multiple representations, and require students to be conversant in the
different meanings and interpretations that the ideas of calculus can have.
Although no one approach to the teaching of calculus is prescribed in the guide,
the verbal and symbolic descriptions of goals are specific. In the Teacher's Guide to AP
Calculus (Kennedy, 1997) one goal for students is to "understand the meaning of the
definite integral both as a limit of Riemann sums and as the net accumulation of a rate of
change". Another asks students to "understand the meaning of the derivative in terms of a
rate of change and local linear approximation". Kennedy notes that "A student who
understands principally that a definite integral is 'something you do to a function using
the derivative rules in reverse, then plug in two numbers' has certainly not met this goal".
He suggests, in particular, that if a teacher's approach "to the integral could just as easily
precede... as follow" his or her approach to the derivative, then the teacher would likely
be teaching towards the AP goal for integrals.
As for the FTC itself, "Students should understand the relationship between the
derivative and the definite integral as expressed in both parts of the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus." Kennedy notes that students can only understand the FTC after
116
the previous two goals concerning derivatives and integrals have been met. He states that
students should understand "both parts" of the theorem: the part that validates the use of
antiderivatives to evaluate definite integrals, and the part that involves the differentiation
of functions defined by definite integrals. Kennedy adds that students who view
integration from the outset as the "opposite of differentiation" are understandably less
than impressed by the profundity of these results, note that this is why the test AP
Calculus Committee decided to state these three goals separately.
Kennedy specifies that students should learn the concept of the derivative
geometrically, numerically, and analytically, and interpret the derivative as an
instantaneous rate of change. They should know the concepts of the "derivative at a
point" and "derivative as a function." In the Guide, the definite integral is listed before
antiderivatives intentionally, Kennedy states, so that students have a firm understanding
of the definite integral as the limit of a summing process. Building on this understanding,
Kennedy highlights the AP course guideline's interpretation of a definite integral: "a
definite integral of the rate of change of a quantity can be interpreted as the amount of
change in that quantity" as expressed by the statement f'{x)dx = f{b) - f(a). Kennedy
Ja
notes that although this symbolic statement looks just like the Fundamental Theorem, it
should be interpreted first as an idea in its own right (Kennedy, 1997, p. 20). He adds that
properties of definite integrals can, and should be, learned without reference to
antiderivatives or the FTC. In discussing Fundamental Theorem itself, Kennedy points
out that the AP course outline specifies two uses of the FTC: to evaluate definite
integrals, and to represent and graphically analyze a particular antiderivative.

117
These meanings for the FTC are expressed verbally in the Teacher's Guide.
What the goals mean in practice for the AP development committee can be made clear by
describing some of the questions that appear on AP exams. As described in the 2007
edition of the Teacher's Guide, "The philosophy statement in the Course Description is
more than window dressing" (Howell, 2007). Recent questions have asked students to
use a given function that defines the rate of change of a quantity, and use this function to
find the total change in the quantity. In addition, questions have asked students to use a
given rate function / to determine the maximum or minimum of a given quantity, g{x),
although the given rate function cannot be antidifferentiated. Students must recognize
that the maximum will occur when the given rate function changes from positive to zero
fb
to negative, and then calculate f{x)dx, where a is the initial x value in the situation
Ja
and b is the point at which/changes sign. To find the actual maximum g(b) students
rb
must then find the value g(a)+\ f{x)dx.
Ja
Some might consider the previous symbolic statement a "simple" extension of the
rb
idea that g(b)-g(a) = f(x)dx, but for students who see the FTC as a recipe for
Ja
finding the area under a graph by evaluating the antiderivative at two points, such
applications may be non-trivial. On AP exams, students are often asked to "explain the
meaning" of a given integral without evaluating any numerical quantity (although they
might do so if they wish), distinguish between average rate of change and average value
of a function, and use the FTC to create approximations for the solutions to a differential
equation (similar to the one in the previous paragraph). Students are also expected to
analyze functions of the form [ f(t)dt when given a graph of f(x), determine local and
global extrema, points of inflection, and equations of tangent lines.

118
By itself, no single statement or application of the FTC, (such as those above) is
likely to be sufficient for the AP Calculus student of today. Students must be able to
switch between mathematical representations, hold different interpretations of the FTC,
and use multiple representations to find or explain a result. Students are asked to apply
the connection between the accumulation of a quantity and the rate of change of the
accumulation, or the fact that every continuous function is the derivative of some other
function, in situations that do not explicitly call for those connections. Students are asked
to make these connections "on the fly" on exams, although it is expected that they will
have studied the ideas in depth in class. While published studies involving AP students
did not suggest that the majority of students are making such connections in non-routine
problems (Howell, 2007; Judson & Nishimori, 2005), the descriptions from the textbooks
and the AP Calculus Teacher's Guide provide some sense of the kinds of interpretations
and mathematical representations to which students may be exposed.
4.3. Additional Perspectives
With the approaches from the texts and the goals from the AP curriculum as a
foundation, in the next section I will further detail the representations one can use when
communicates about the FTC. This section will include some of my own perspectives on
the FTC. My own understanding of the FTC has, as indicated in the opening chapter,
evolved over time. I have read each of the textbooks referenced above, as well as others,
and listened to the thinking of students as they responded to my use of certain approaches
and mathematical representations when teaching. I have examined the expectations of the
AP curriculum and AP exam questions, and conducted my own personal explorations
using these materials. In the opening chapter, I related one of my initial exposures to the
119
FTC, and here I will give some sense of my current thinking, as well as the perspectives
to which students were exposed four years previously in their high school class. The
reflections I report upon in this next section informed the design of this study and its
focus on students' use of representations.
When I think about the FTC and then attempt to communicate it to others, I am
often aware, as I indicated above, that any one statement fails to communicate the
"meaning" of the theorem. When one communicates a meaning to another, the other
person will use their own knowledge and experiences, along with mathematical
representations used, to infer other meanings that are not explicitly stated. Sometimes a
person may not pick up on these intended meanings. I can report the personal experience
of first reading an approach to the FTC and thinking "that's different", and then later
seeing more meaning in what I read than what I initially perceived. Some authors offer
perspectives on the FTC in mathematics education literature, and suggest that a particular
approach to the FTC will help students comprehend the theorem. I will endeavor to
avoid making such judgments while reporting my own perspectives here.
4.3.1. Personal Perspectives
From my own perspective, the FTC says that the graph of the accumulated area
between a graph of/and the x axis between x - a and x = b can be found by evaluating
the difference between the values of the antiderivative of/between x = a and x - b. For
me, I often first think of a graph of accumulated area, and then think of it as an
anti derivative. I will illustrate with a picture that I hope, as Davis suggests, has a "certain
vagueness" about it (R. B. Davis, 1984), as I do not want this figure to convey a meaning
that might limit the generality of the statement. Tall also suggests that one can use
120
"flawed" imagery to "stimulate the imagination" (Tall, 1993a). So while this graph
cannot communicate every possible example, it may be enough to communicate my
intended meaning.
Figure 6: A graph of the accumulated area of rectangles under a function/
In the figure, I created a function and drew rectangles between the graph of the
function and the x axis to approximate the area from x = 2 to x = 5. I also created a graph
of the accumulated area of these rectangles. 1 view the segments that form the strictly
increasing graph above as "plotting" the accumulated area of the rectangles shown. I use
this figure to remind me that the graph of the accumulated area is also the antiderivative
of my given function; the slope of each of the segments is the height of each of the
rectangles, since each segment rises by an amount equal to the area of each rectangles.
That is, if/(x)Axis an area on an interval with length Ax, then the segment rises by
f(x)Ax
f(x)Ax, and so has a slope ^—-— , or/(x). This makes the discrete accumulated area
Ax
graph an approximation of the antiderivative of j{x). While this discrete argument may
only hint at what goes on in the continuous case, I use these representations, and the
meanings I associate with them, as a basis for communicating about the meaning of the
theorem.
121
When I think about the FTC, I think about functions defined by integrals, and thus
see the calculation of g(b) - g(a) as the evaluation of two different values of my
accumulated area function. The figure above helps me think about why the action of
creating a graph of the accumulated area of the given function/creates the graph of the
antiderivative of/. When I make a graph of an antiderivative, I take the value of the
given function/at an x value and then make a segment with a slope equal to the value of
f(x). I then continue making the antiderivative in this fashion, "stitching together" a
graph made of segments, each with a slope equal to the value of the given function. To
make a graph of the accumulated area, I first calculate the area of a rectangle, and also
"stitch together" a series of segments. The picture above is a static one, but using
Sketchpad or one's minds eye, 1 imagine moving from left to right and vice versa, with
the rectangles filling in and the graph of the accumulated area being stitched together.
The graph increases more slowly if /(x) is decreasing, and decreases when f(x) is
negative. In explaining the FTC to others, I come back to this image of rectangles filling
in to explain other ideas about the FTC.
In this "discrete" version of an accumulated area graph, the rate of change of the
Jf(x)Ax
accumulated area graph is — , which for Ax not equal to zero, is always equal
Ax
t o / ( x ) . For the discrete area function A(x), A(x + Ax)- A(x) = /(x)Ax . I can then
appeal to the Mean Value Theorem to explain that it is possible to draw rectangles that
have an area equal to the exact area between the graph of /(x) and the x axis, thus making
a graph of accumulated area that is exact at the endpoints of each interval I chose, and
insuring that the area from a to b is exactly F(b) - F(a), where/is the antiderivative of/
When the width of the rectangles are made small, the discrete graph of the accumulated
122
area appears indistinguishable from a continuous graph. While this does not prove that
the area function is an antiderivative, the picture gives credence to the idea that such a
statement might be true.
It may not be possible to fully map what the FTC means to me or any person; in
addition to the ideas just described, all of the perspectives in the texts I described, as well
as the AP curricular goals, are ideas I might express about the FTC. When thinking
about a particular situation, one of the perspectives about the FTC may be more
prominent in my thoughts than another. Take, for example, the following train of thought
which I recently used in a lesson for high school calculus students.
The average of n numbers can be found by summing the n numbers and dividing
by n. Imagine extending the idea of average to a continuous graph. How might we
establish an "average value" for a. function on a interval from x = a to x = bl We could
divide the interval from x = a to x = b into n subdivisions, and find the average of the
function values at the right endpoint of each of the subdivisions, and take the limit of this
expression as n approaches infinity:
n-l
lim^ 2 .
»->°° n
This would seem like a difficult thing to do, given that you'd have to add up an infinite
number of values.
On the other hand, there is an average that is easy to figure out - the average rate
of change of a function. Consider a function g(x). The average rate of change of g on

the interval from x = a to x = b is — . But this quantity is also the average of the
b—a
slope of any set of secant lines drawn on equal sized subintervals of the interval from a to
123
b. Since the derivative of g is simply a plot of the values of these slopes, the average of
the slopes must be the same as the average of the sample values of the function g\x).
So, if you know the average rate of change of a function, you also know the average
value of its derivative. To find the average value of a function, find the average rate of
change of its antiderivative.
Now go back to the original question of finding the value of
(n-\ \
1
lim X/(*,)
U=o
Since (b — a) I n = Ax is the width of each of the intervals, n = (b- a)l Ax, and this limit
can be rewritten as
( n-\ \ j
\im^f(xk)Ax
b- a
The expression in the numerator is the sum of the area of a set of rectangles with heights
given by the value of the function and width equal to the length of the subintervals. This
is something we might be able to estimate. When the width of the rectangles is small, the
sum of the areas of the rectangles is close to the area between the graph and the axis. So
to find the average value of a function on an interval, find the area between the graph of
the function and the x axis, and divide this by b - a, the width of the entire interval.
4.3.2. The Geometer's Sketchpad
In 1998 I attended a one-hour workshop on the use of Sketchpad and was
exposed to how one might use it to construct geometric figures that would illustrate
calculus concepts through approximation. I had just that year finished teaching calculus
for the first time and recall feeling that I wanted to learn more about how teach in ways
that would help my students meet the goals detailed in the AP course description. I felt I
124
needed to rethink some ideas up from scratch, so to speak, and approximation seemed a
perfect way to do this. While learning to create constructions in Sketchpad, I began to
use an approach based upon approximations in my classroom. After trying out some of
my Sketchpad activities in the classroom with the students who would later volunteer for
this study, I created a full day workshop on the use of Sketchpad in the teaching of
calculus.
On the introductory pages of the handout for the workshop, I wrote the following:
Understanding calculus depends on an understanding of functions as dynamic
objects. For some students, the idea that the rate of change of a quantity can itself
be a changing quantity is a completely new notion. Students who are familiar with
the dynamic aspects of Sketchpad™, however, are accustomed to seeing
quantities change, both independently and in relation to other quantities. The
ideas of calculus are a natural extension to those who have come to see
quantitative relationships expressed numerically, verbally, graphically, and
symbolically. Passive symbolic manipulation is replaced by an active symbol
sense, where symbolic actions have meaning at every step along the way.
Symbol sense is built upon a foundation of experience, with the results of

symbolic actions viewed from numerical, graphical, and verbal perspectives. In
keeping with this theme, a new generation of calculus texts takes an approach that
involves students in investigations of limits, derivatives, antiderivatives, and
integrals from the first week of the course. This puts the fundamental ideas of
calculus in students' minds from the very beginning, encouraging them to look for
underlying connections and explanations rather than passively waiting for results
to be shown to them.
Symbol sense is essential to constructing hypotheses, creating symbolic

statements, and interpreting answers. Some students can perform the techniques
of calculus, but do not attach meaning of any depth to these actions. With
Sketchpad, the user directly experiences the mathematical actions on objects that
define derivatives and integrals, creating a powerful link between the visual,
numerical, and symbolic. These connections are the basis for a deep
understanding of the processes of change that the tools of calculus allow us to
describe.
Even if you are sure that your students already know or can do everything you see
here today, keep this in mind: there is very little, especially in mathematics, that
anyone can claim to fully know. If students learn the habit of reflecting upon and
deepening their understanding, we have taught them a valuable habit.
125
The next year, I began work on Exploring Calculus with the Geometer's
Sketchpad, a book of activities to introduce, visualize and allow students to experiment
with calculus concepts (Clements et al., 2001). In both the workshop and the book, I
used an approach that involves constructing approximations and making speculations
based upon the graphical evidence. For example, I created a sketch designed to
encourage learners to think about the derivative "at a point" and "as a function". In this
sketch, users would take a continuous function /, and create a graph of a step function
whose values are equal to the average rate of change o f / o n specified intervals. By
making these intervals smaller, the step graph appears to converge to a continuous
function.
AJL^.
./>' \ i r-
/ I
!
_L
1 "
N <-t^ ^
1 "-±-
I
"—-, -_—*
r
Figure 7: A graph of the average rate of change of a function/
Figure 8: The graph of the average rate of change on smaller intervals

126
Another approach to the derivative involved creating a secant line on the graph of
a function by clicking on the graph in two places. The user could then have the program
plot the slope of this line as a point (x, y), where the x value was the same as the x value
as one of the endpoints of the secant line, and the y value the slope of that secant line. As
that endpoint is moved along the graph of the function, the second endpoint would stay a
constant distance from the other, and the plotted point would move also.
Figure 9: Plotting the slope of a moving secant line
Using approximations, one can also create a graph of the integral | f(t)dt . A
Ja
value of x is chosen, and the area of the rectangle with height f(x) and width Ax is
calculated. A x value is chosen as a "starting point" and then the values of these areas
are successively added, creating new y values.
Figure 10: Plotting the accumulated area of rectangles under the graph of a function/
127
Figure 11: The accumulated area graph formed from rectangles of smaller width
Imagine then, having a rectangle constructed between the graph off and the x
axis, and a segment from (x, y) to ((x + h,y + f(x)-h). The slope of this line is
always/(x). By iterating this process, you get a piecewise graph that has slopes equal to
the sampled values of J{x). The derivative of this graph, of course, is the step graph, one
that approximates f(x). The smaller the value of h, the better the approximation.
Whenever you plot the area, you are always plotting a graph of segments with slopes
equal to the values of f(x). As h approaches zero, the derivative of this plot of the
accumulated area more closely matches the graph of J{x), which suggests that the graph
of the accumulated area is more closely approximating the antiderivative off.
4.3.3. Perspectives of Selected Mathematics Educators
As I did through constructing approximations in Sketchpad, Macula suggests an
approach that calls upon using piecewise graphs. In an investigation of the derivatives of
piecewise linear functions, Macula suggests that students can see that the derivative of a
piecewise linear function will be a step function (Macula, 1995). By considering the area
between the graph of the step function and the x axis, he shows that for any continuous
piece-wise linear function on an interval[a,b] , F(b)-F(a) = f(b-a) , where/ is the

128
average value of the step function on the interval. He then notes that this process can be
reversed. Given a step function, one can construct a piecewise linear function that is the
antiderivative of the step function, and know that the total change in the piecewise linear
function is given by the average value of the step function. He continues by suggesting
that one can extend this idea from step functions to arbitrary piecewise continuous
functions: "if/ is piecewise continuous, and F is a continuous antiderivative, then
F(b)-F(a) = J(b-a)= \" f(x)dx".
Macula suggests a pedagogical benefit from "tying the fundamental theorem of
calculus to ideas already familiar to students", and further suggests that this
representation will help students learn to "picture the derivative as an instantaneous rate
of change, a local average velocity, not just as the local slope of a graph". He states that
this approach to the FTC provides "an interpretation of integration as transforming a
varying local average into a global average of this interval", a point of view that "can be
helpful in understanding other applications of integrals". Bressoud also suggests looking
at a graph of a function and constructing a piecewise antiderivative. Agreeing with
Macula about tying new ideas to familiar ideas, he reports that students seemed to have
no problem with defining the antiderivative as a limiting graph of a series of segments
(Bressoud, 1992).
Tall relates approaches to the FTC in a number of articles. In a 1991 paper, Tall
asked his readers (perhaps tongue in cheek), to consider that learners had "simply been
looking at the wrong diagram for three hundred years" and thus not understood the
meaning of the notation dx in the symbol for the integral f(x)dx (Tall, 1991c). To
Ja
illustrate his point, Tall asked readers to consider the differentiable function I(x), and a
129
tangent line at any point with rise dy and run dx. With this definition^); = I'{x)dx. Tall
suggests that if the function/is the derivative of /, then the graph of I{x) is approximated
by a series of tangent segments with a slope equal to the value of f(x). The vertical
change in I(x) is then approximated by dy, and so the sum of the quantities dy on an
interval from x - a to x - b can be approximated by the sum 2Î'(x)dx, which also
approximates the quantity 1(b) - 1(d). The symbol | V(x)dx or f(x)dx then represents
the sum of a series of vertical segments (Tall, 1991c, 199Id) .
f
Figure 12: Tail's illustration for f(x)dx = 1(b) - 1(a) when I'{x) = f(x)
Ja
Tall also represents the FTC in another form. After plotting and examining an
accumulated area function using a computer, Tall suggests that a learner might see that
the derivative of the area function I(x) appears to be the original function f(x), so that
f(x) = f(x) (Tall, 1986). Then, for all values of x from a to b, the area between the
graph y = g(x) and the x-axis is 1(b) - 1(a). To think about why this might be the case,
Tall suggests examining the graph o f / o n a small interval of x. On a small enough
interval of x, the graph of /will appear to be a horizontal line if / i s continuous (Figure
13). Tall notes that "if one calculates the area under a flat graph like this, the area from x
to x + h is approximately hf(xyj. This area also represents the change in the function /
130
from x to x+h. So, I(x + h) - I(x) is approximately equal to h(f(x)) and (/(x + h) -
I(x))/h is approximately/^). Tall then shows that I'(x) = f(x) when/is continuous. He
uses the definition of a continuous function, noting that since fix) must lie between
f(x) + e and f(x) - e on a small enough interval of x, then
(f(x) + £)-h<I(x + h)- I(x) < (f(x) + e)-h,
and (I(x + h)-I(x))/h must lie between f(x) + e and f(x)-e (Tall, 1986, 1991d).
from x=.999 to 1.881
'•1
' • • • • I • i • » I ' ' ' • I ' • • • »

8.999S 1.8885
• -"»
Figure 13: Tail's illustration showing that/ is "flat" when/is continuous
In the calculus texts described earlier, the authors who prove the FTC by proving
that the derivative of the area function is the given function do not use a graphical
representation in this way. Here, Tall states a graphical idea about continuous functions,
uses symbols to describe that graphical idea, and then expresses what appears to be
happening with the accumulated function using a symbolic argument. Tall suggests that
the "exploratory stage of mathematical thinking benefits from building up an overall
picture of relationships and such a picture can benefit from a visualization. It is no
accident that when we think we understand something we say 'oh, I see!' " (Tall, 1991a).
In the texts previously described, the authors state the need to prove that the derivative of
131
the area function is the given function, use a symbolic argument, and then support it with
a graphical representation.
Thompson and Silverman suggest that learners may see a "mathematically
incorrect" reason why the derivative of the area function is the given function (Thompson
& Silverman, 2007). In discussing how learners might think about the rate of change of
the area under a graph, they warn that students may look at the graphical representation
of the width of the rectangle becoming thinner, and believe that Ax —> 0 implies
f(c)Ax—>f(c) (Figures 14 and 15). Students may then draw the conclusion that
d rx
— f(t)dt = f(x) without thinking about the actual multiplicative quantity whose rate
dxJa
is changing, or, for that matter any rate of change.
H—H-+-
Figure 14: Approximation of the area under a curve
1-
, -
0 8-
0.6-
/ I
..../. 1
/
0.4-
j
- /
/
02-
!
/1 \ 1 0|5
/-
Figure 15: Approximation of the area under a curve on a smaller interval

132
These authors believe that the "paint-filling" visualization (e.g. G. Thomas & Finney,
1988) may also lead students to hold meanings about the FTC that would be unproductive
in other problem solving situations. Additionally, they note that without other meanings
for the graph of/, students may not be thinking about the meaning of [ f(t)dt as a limit
of a Riemann sum.
Thompson chooses verbal representations to communicate what is happening with
the function | f{t)dt as x varies in his 1994 paper (Thompson, 1994a):
This says that if some quantity A has a measure t that ranges from a to b, and if
some quantity B has a measure f(t) that is conceived as being a function of the
measure of A, and if AB is a quantity made multiplicatively from quantities A and
B, then as quantity AB accumulates with variations of A (and hence B), the
accumulation of quantity AB changes at a rate that is identical with the measure of
quantity B at the upper end of AB's accumulation.
Here is one way to take these notions in combination so that the Fundamental
Theorem is intuitively clear: In a changing, multiplicative quantity, the total
accumulation changes at the rate of the accruals of the constitutive quantities
...the accumulating quantity is imagined to be made of infinitesimal accruals in the

quantities which, composed multiplicatively, make up the accruals in the
accumulating quantity. When one of those quantities is the rate at which the
quantity changes over an infinitesimal interval, then the total accumulation changes
over any infinitesimal interval at the quantity's rate of change over that
infinitesimal interval.
4.4. Summary
With respect to the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, representations matter; no
single approach defines what the FTC is, or what it means. In this chapter, I have
illustrated that the choices of representations and presentations highlight certain meanings
and leave others in the background. Whether "the" fundamental theorem has made an
appearance, I cannot say, but it may be clear that the meaning of the fundamental
theorem can depend upon one's representational choices. As the perspectives described
133
in this chapter illustrate, educators hold differing views. Cunningham wrote a short article
advocating a particular approach to the FTC in which he admits at the outset "This note is
purely polemical, rather than offering anything new" (Cunningham, 1965). He notes that
there are really two fundamental theorems, they are "independent of each other".
Cunningham believes that "making theorem 1 depend on theorem 2 obscures the fact that
the two theorems are saying different things, having different applications, and may give
the student impression that theorem 2 is the fundamental theorem".
How to think about the rate of change of | f(t)dt has been of particular
importance to me. I recall considering how to help my students use Figures 14 and 15 to
examine this rate of change. As I thought about the rectangles between the graph and the
x axis shrinking in width, and the rectangular approximation getting closer to the actual
area, I thought of gaps or "missing area" between the tops of each rectangle and the graph
that looked like "triangles", no matter how "zoomed in" my view (Figures 16 and 17).
-0-.5-+
•*«,j,^.,|».!:fii
I i I I i !
1 a
Figure 16: "Missing area" under the graph of a function

134
Figure 17: "Missing area" when zoomed in on both axes
While there was always a "missing area", that missing area was smaller, and the graph of
the accumulated area function would more closely approximate the "true graph" of the
accumulated area.
I found, however, that is was difficult to use figures 14 and 15 to explain why at
any particular instant, the rate of change of the accumulated area was the value of the
function /. On any discrete interval, that the rate of change of the area function was
f(x)h
equal to . Certainly, the value of f(x)h was always between the area of the
h
rectangle on the minimum of the interval and the maximum of the interval. As the width
of the interval approached zero, the instantaneous rate of change would "sandwich" the
value of f{x), as explained in the Thomas and Finney text. While I believed this
explanation, it did not find it fully explanatory. Tail's representation, however, where
only the x scale has been enlarged (Figure 18), communicated why the rate of change
must equal j\x) in a way that Figure 15 did not.

135
! f i
f !
0.06
Figure 18: "Missing area" when zoomed in on x scale only
This representation of the area under the graph provided me with a connection between
the discrete case where Jf(x)h

v
' is always equal to/(x) and the notion that in the
h
f(x)h
continuous case lim is equal tof(x). For me, Figure 18 communicates that on
small intervals of x, the area is changing at an "almost constant" rate: the value of j{x).
The "sandwich" idea, expressed as it was in the Thomas and Finney text, did not
communicate that same idea to me.
As I have learned about the FTC, I have found such realizations to be common
events. There are many meaningful roads, and many representational "shoes" with which
to walk on them. Such choices can lead one to move between representations, and make
connections that can form a chain of reasoning, as in the texts described here. To some,
these choices may be seen simply as different ways of expressing "the same thing".
Consider, however, that these representations may communicate very different things to
the novice. Where one text sees the integral as a way to calculate the net change of a
rate function, another sees the integral as a function. In writing this chapter, I was struck
again and again with the feeling that for every statement I wrote, I was leaving out
something important. Such may be the reality of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
In the next chapter, I will trace the discussion of students as they select certain
136
representations to communicate about the FTC. They too make choices about what
meanings to focus on and how to communicate them.
Looking back at the research on representations in calculus and representations in
general, I cannot escape the issues of meaning in my attempt to present the FTC in this
chapter. Whether I have communicated meanings to the reader in this chapter, or simply
used a string of mathematically accepted symbols chained together by words, is
dependent on the reader's own experiences with these symbols. If I have failed to
communicate meanings, it may be due to a failure to connect with the meanings held by
the reader, or perhaps the lack of an opportunity for the reader to ask questions of the
writer. Moreover, in communicating what the texts stated, I attempted to faithfully
reproduce their content, but did not create an identical copy of the content of the texts,
and so may not have communicated the meaning those authors intended. I am also not
certain that I have communicated the meanings I associate with the content of the texts.
The inclusion of discussion - where questions can be asked and meanings refined
through negotiation - adds, I believe, a dimension that the printed symbols lack. It is
through discussion that the representations of calculus were arrived at in the first place.
How students use the representations available to them, and how they may create their
own, is of interest because the representations passed down to us may not communicate
all the learner might wish to know. While students may or may not, just as this chapter
may or may not, communicate certain meanings about the FTC, the process of
communication, and the use of representations, remains. While the accumulated
research evidence may be taken as an indicator that students will continue to have
difficulty with representations, Alcock and Simpson suggest that attention to

137
communication about learners' experiences and preferences is necessary: no "perfect
presentation" of content may exist (Alcock & Simpson, 2005).
How might students explain the FTC if asked? It is to this question that I next
turn my attention, by tracing the discussion of a group of students. Before doing so, I
repeat that in any presentation of a mathematical idea, there is the potential for something
to be "left out". Is this due to a lack of some ability on the individual's part, or to the
inadequacy of the representations available to us to communicate mathematical ideas? I
do not have an answer to this question, but I note my belief that the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus is more than the representations people can use to describe it. The
meaning of the FTC also lies in the activity of communication of those people. The FTC
may or may not exist without humans to communicate about it. Given that we are here
to communicate about it, however, that communication is an important aspect of defining
what the FTC says, what it means, and why we believe it to be true.
138
5. Description and Analysis of Data
In this chapter, I first detail the responses of the students to the initial task of
explaining the FTC to a current student of calculus. In tracing the students' discussion, I
will describe which mathematical representations the students used to discuss the FTC,
highlighting the meanings the students explicitly assigned to the representations they
used. Secondly, I focus attention upon how the students used representations to "make
sense" of the FTC. Students "make sense" of an idea when they associate meanings with
mathematical representations, make connections between ideas and representations, and
base conclusions upon these meanings and connections. In detailing the students'
communications, I include commentary in order to make the content of students'
conversation clear to the reader. My commentary is chosen to clarify what the students
have said or what representations they are referring to s.
Lastly, I will characterize the students' use of representations, without making
judgments about what the students may "understand". In their discussions, the students
in this study chose and used representations to ask questions, communicate ideas, reason
about meanings, and draw conclusions. I will focus upon the students' methodologies for
communicating, reasoning, and drawing conclusions, rather than analyzing how the
students' conclusions about the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus may differ from those
of the mature learner. I will examine the viewpoints of these learners, focusing
specifically upon the representational choices the students made in their communications
with each other.
I will, for example, refer to a function as "the function/' while the student may have said "the function".
139
5.1. Session 1, Group 1, June 25,2003
In the session held June 25, 2003, Angela, Magda, and Romina engage in an
extended discussion of the statement f(x)dx - g{b)- g(a) , which they find on page
216 of the Foerster Calculus text (Foerster, 1998). They identify the function/as the
derivative of the function g upon reading the symbols and words that state this in the
textbook [lines 88 - 97J. In their discussion, they focus upon how to explain the
statement [ f(x)dx = g{b) - g{a) to the "current student of calculus" mentioned in the
task. In looking for ways to do this, the students looked to explain the Fundamental
Theorem to themselves, calling upon multiple representations to explain ideas about area,
accumulation, slope and rates of change to each other. The use of multiple
representations arose out of the students' requests for confirmation, or clarification, or
explanation of statements they would read in an available resource or state themselves.
In this session, the students often return to the idea of evaluating the area between
the graph of a function /and the x axis on an interval using another function, a function
that is a plot of the accumulated area under the graph of/. The students refer to this
accumulated area graph at various times as "the integral", but they also use the word
integral to refer to the area under the graph of a function, and to an antiderivative of a
function. Throughout the session, the students communicate meanings for this and other
words and symbols by using graphical representations. They also use graphical
representations to pose questions to each other about the meaning of symbols. Their
discussion leads them to investigate the question of why the function g is an
antiderivative of/, but their primary activity was to "make sense" of ideas about the area
between the graph of a function and the x axis.

140
5.1.1. Segment 1: Lines 1 - 341
Lines 1-100
Magda initially recalls that the FTC involves "the integral divided by b - a or
something" [line 39|. The first representation that all three students discuss together,
however, is a verbal and symbolic statement of the FTC from the students' calculus text
from high school. Romina asks if there is a definition of what the FTC is, and finds one.
She reads the text on page 216 (Foerster, 1998) [line 80|: "If/is an integrable function
and g(x) - I f(x)dx , then J f(x)dx = g(b)- g(a) ". Angela uses the word "integral" for
the symbol I , both with and without the limits of integration. She notes that the
paragraph at the beginning of the section begins with the words "Riemann sum" and asks
the other two students if that involves drawing "little boxes" and adding them. Magda
has already discarded one textbook in which she read a statement of the FTC (the
Ostebee and Zorn text, page 322) saying, "I don't like how this is written."
Magda asks, referring to the FTC, "Isn't it just taking the integral of the thing?"
and then adding the phrase "take the integral between the interval" [lines 80 - 93].
Romina responds immediately, saying, "Oh, that's the one" where "the integral of all of
this minus the integral of all of this equals the area from here to here", drawing Figure 19
as she speaks.
& •
/V>/
yf i \f
7*f
/•' PV
\i
A/A ]i
j v \A
' ' ^
CA b
Figure 19: Romina's sketch of the area under a graph on the interval from a to b
141
In drawing Figure 1, Romina shades in the area between the graph and an un-drawn
horizontal line from a point on the left of her page to a, and then from the same point on
the left side of the page to b. She does not give a specific location or value for the point
on the left of the page. She indicates that the area "between a and b" is the difference
between the two regions she shaded. Magda aggress that this is correct, adding the
question "the integral is like the area underneath the graph, right?", which neither of the
other students respond to. Angela says that she "got it" once Romina drew the figure.
Lines 101-252
The group notes the various words and symbols they find in the text, and in
written work from themselves and other members of their high school class. Romina
states some dissatisfaction with the "big long explanation" [line 157] in the Foerster text,
and Magda asks Angela and Romina if the meaning of the FTC is that "it shows the area
under a function". Magda suggests the terms "indefinite" and "definite" integrals but
Romina states that she does not remember the distinction. Magda says that a definite
integral is "between a and b". Angela suggests that the group should define what they
are talking about. Soon after, Magda writes the statement f{x)dx = F{b)-F{a) on
Ja
top of the graph Romina drew in figure 19, and says it is the fundamental theorem [line
210]. She says "you take the function and then you, you know...", [line 217] likely
referring to, as she does explicitly later, to the idea of using a symbolic expression for an
antiderivative to evaluate the area.
Romina then suggests turning to the words written in the text. Romina asks
Angela to read from the section on the FTC found in the Foerster text. Angela reads from
the text, adding her own comments:

142
"The top graph in figure 5-8 is a function g, an indefinite

integral of F. That is, g(x) = integral sign" how do I say
that? "Integral of f of x dx. by the definition of indefinite
integral, g prime of x = f of x. because g is differentiable,
the mean value theorem applies to it on a, b, in brackets, or
on any subinterval of a, b... [lines 227 - 232]
The students do not discuss this statement; Romina then states that she recalls a process
of finding the area between a graph and the x axis with rectangles that can be made
"smaller and smaller", and Magda notes that one can "take the integral" to find the area
|line 246]. Romina asks whether it is possible to find the area on a graph that extends
indefinitely to the left and right of the origin. She asks if two points are needed to "make
an indefinite definite". Magda states that one must "take the integral between a and b".
Angela suggests that they draw a picture, [line 252].
Lines 253 - 341
Romina draws a graph, and asks how to find the area under this graph between
two given points on the x axis. Magda responds,
if you take the integral between any set of points, you don't
even have to know how the graph looks to figure the area...
you could be taking sine of blah blah blah of like some
ridiculous equation, so of the equations, you wouldn't even
know what they look like... you wouldn't even have to
know what the graph looks like, you can take the integral of
it, you can just plug the numbers and get the answer" [lines
276 -283]
Romina notes, however, that she does not recall "how to take an integral". Magda
responds "it's like to a higher power". Magda then says the FTC "lets you know how to
find the area under the graph." She then begins to draw some "simple graphs", as she
calls them, but does not immediately say why she is doing this. A few moments later,
Romina reminds Magda of an earlier statement Magda made about dividing by the
143
quantity b - a. Magda notes that the expression (F(b) - F(a)) I (b-a) "gives you the
slope". Magda then explains:
this is a simple x squared graph, and this is an integral of

that, an x to the third graph and then basically when you
take the integral you want to find the area under the thing
so it's basically you find the value of the point here minus
the value of the point here and that gives you the area, and
when you connect them, it's like a line, which is...and the
slope...[lines 306-3121
She draws graphs as she speaks: graph of a parabola and a cubic graph, which
Magda later reveals is the graph of ^x 3 (Figure 20).
X
<t4
4 -'-
Figure 20: Magda's sketch of a function and its integral
Magda explains that the area she shaded in under the graph of x2 is equal to the
difference in y values on the cubic graph, and associates the symbols F(b)- F(a) with a
subtraction of the y values of the two points on her cubic graph. Magda notes that the
expression Romina referred to would find the slope between the two points - the slope of
the segment from x = 0 to x = 2 on the cubic graph. Romina asks what part of the figure
144
Magda has made represents the "integral". Here, Magda points to the cubic graph as "the
integral".
Romina asks [line 319] how her idea of subtracting areas [from lines 94 - 95]
relates to the graph that Magda has drawn of the "integral". Romina traces over the area
on the graph of x2 with her finger twice to illustrate. Magda explains that this area can
be found by subtracting the y values on the cubic graph. Romina says she does not
understand. Magda uses a numerical example, stating that if the y value on the cubic
graph was 2 at x = b, and the value was 1 at x = a, then the area shaded in would be 2 - 1.
Romina says again that she does not understand. Magda then writes the calculation of
I • 2 3 - -j • 03 to show that the area is 8/3. Angela and Romina do not question her use of
this particular function to calculate the area, but at this point Romina states "now I
understand".
5.1.2. Analysis of Segment 1
In lines 1 - 341, the students looked to confirm for themselves what the statement
f(x)dx = g{b)- g(a) "says" by creating alternative representations of the statement.

Ja
Romina initially recalled a graphical representation of a subtraction of two overlapping
areas. Magda recalled "taking the integral" using a symbolic process of subtracting
values of a function. (That g is the antiderivative off is not stated verbally.) While
saying that the area can be found without a graph, Magda follows Angela's suggestion to
draw a picture, linking a specific numerical example with the original graphical
representation. While Magda explains how two values of a new function are being
subtracted to find the area under a given function, it is not until Magda's use of the
specific symbolic example ofy = ^x~ that Romina reports that she understands.
145
The methodology the students use to communicate and reason in this initial part
of the session can be described as attempts to "coordinate" a statement in one
representation with the use of a different representation. I use the word "coordinate" to
refer to the methodology of using different representations to confirm, support, or explore
an idea. Here, the students do this by expressing the statement of the Fundamental
Theorem symbolically, recalling verbally what "the integral" means, and then expressing
this notion of area and subtraction graphically. The students "make sense" of the
statement f(x)dx = g(b)- g(a) by expressing it as the difference between two areas,
and as the difference between two values of a function. The students connect these two
rb
meanings of the statement f(x)dx = g(b)- g(a) by making the graph in Figure 20. By
coordinating the different representations with this figure, the students "make sense" of
the initial symbolic statement.
5.1.3. Segment 2: Lines 342 - 663
The students do not discuss Figure 20 further in this next segment, but begin to
discuss the idea of accumulation.
Lines 342 - 424
In line 348, Romina asks if that is "all" that the theorem means. She passes a
paper from her high school class that the students had received right after their instruction
in the FTC in 1999. (See Appendix E.) On this paper, I had provided the class with typed
notes about a classroom investigation of the properties of the function | f{t)dt .
Pointing to a particular figure on the paper (see Figure 21), Angela asks, and Magda
confirms as Romina and Angela observe, that the graph with the area shaded in is f(t),
and that the other graph is the graph of the "integral" [line 360]. Magda circles the
146
expression [ f{t)dt typed on the paper as she says this. This is the first mention of this
Ja
particular symbolic representation, and the students do not discuss it. While they have
previously referred to the area under the graph as the "integral" they now also associate
the symbolic expression \ f{t)dt with the word "integral". Shortly afterwards, they will
Ja
discuss this notation further.
Figure 21: A function/and its accumulated area function
Angela and Magda put this paper aside. Angela suggests that they ask for a
calculator, but both she and Magda express uncertainty what they would do with it.
Angela states she was only making a suggestion. Magda states that she learned "many
ways of taking integrals", apparently referring to techniques of antidifferentiation. After
continuing to read the notes from 1999 about f f(t)dt. Romina asks [lines 408 - 4111:
Ja
Would it have stuff to do with, tying in the whole idea like,
how a derivative and an integral is kind of like tied
together, and the limit, finding the specific slope, and using
the integral to find a specific slope of a point?
The following exchange then occurs [lines 412 - 424] :
Magda: Yeah, because if you take an integral

Romina: Isn't that what the question...
147
Magda: And you take it back to it that's kind of like

the integral
Romina: The derivative of the integral
Magda: The derivative of the integral is the actual
function
Romina: Take the integral to find the slope of certain
points
Magda: On the integral?
Romina: Say there's a line, and you like, you want to
find the slope at a certain
Magda: So you take the derivative
Romina: OK
Magda: Slope is derivative, area is the integral
In making these verbal statements about the relationship between derivatives and
integrals, the students associate words with other words without appealing to other
representations. Romina suggests a connection between derivatives and integrals - the
derivative of an integral function would be the function itself [line 416J - but the students
do not discuss it at this time. This idea was used earlier when Magda used the function
y = \x3 to find the area under the graph of the function y = x2, but not discussed at that
time either.
Lines 425 - 450
A few minutes later, the three students all examine a particular test from their
high school class (Figure 22).

148
Integrals and the

fundamental theorem " '
L*tg(x}=: lf[t}dt,wh®tm . , . , , . / A
the graph is rlxHs shown in the graph t o the right. ° ..'« .. •'" ' ' * ' %
1. At what point does the function g(x> attain its - - - / " •
maximum value? Justify youranswer.
2. At what point does the function g(x| have a point
of inflection? justify your answer. ' /' > - • • - - • - -
i / -
3. Find the value of J f\t\dt
«
4. What is the value of g'(45?
5. What is the average rate of change of gto over the interval -8 < x < 6 ?
6. What is the average value of fa} over the interval -8 < x < 6 ?
1. If the graph of fat was the graph of the speed of a toy car in feet per second, find the total displacement
of the car after over the i nterval 0 < x < 6.
8, If the graph of fa) was the graph of the speed of a toy car in feet per second, find the total distance
traveled by the car after over the interva 10 < x < 6,
9, If htx) - j f{t) dt, what is the value of g(x| - /fa} for any x on the interval -8 < x < 6?
(BJ What is the value of g H F
Figure 22: Part of test on integrals and the Fundamental Theorem from the students' high
school calculus class
The student's work (but not the answers to the questions) are on the test paper, and this
work includes a graph drawn on top of the function/. The students discuss which graph
on the paper is the function g, defined by the statementg(x) = I f{t)dt. In discussing
what they see on the test paper, the students talk about the behavior of the graph drawn
on the paper, and then agree that the graph off is printed on the test paper and the graph
of g is the graph drawn in [lines 448 - 4501:
Magda: Oh, this one's the integral, because you

added this area, then this area
Angela: And it keeps going up... and here it's
negative, so it goes down
149
Here, all three students see the symbol g(x)= | f{t)dt and associate this symbol with a
J a
graph of the accumulated area of the graph of /. No explicit discussion about the
expression g(x) = \ f(t)dt takes place here, but the students agree that g is a function
whose behavior is determined by the amount of, and change in the area between the
graph of / a n d the x axis, and that this graph should be called the "integral". When
drawing the "integral" in Figure 20 earlier, no discussion of accumulation occurred.
Lines 451-663
Romina and Magda, reading from other work written on the high school test, note
that the integral from a to b minus the integral from a to c is the integral from b to c.
Magda explains this verbally as a subtraction of areas while pointing to a graph she has
drawn, and adding, "Anyway, I like drawing stuff. At this point, approximately 35
minutes into the session, the students call me into the room to clarify the task, and I state
that they should focus on how they would explain the FTC to a hypothetical "student
asking for help". Angela, Romina and Magda state that the FTC means "area under the
graph." In response from a question from Romina, they also reaffirm that an integral
needs a "cut off point" - an interval from a to b.
Magda recalls that it is possible to take a limit to find an area if the interval does
not have such a cut off point. She writes a symbolic statement involving the limit of an
integral with infinity and negative infinity as the limits of integration, which the group
does not discuss. Angela then asks "can you do this without a graph?" [line 5731 Angela
repeats her question, asking "do we need a graph to do this?"[line 589], but this question
is not discussed. All three students then discuss whether the words speed, acceleration,
and distance can be matched to the words derivative and integral. Angela notes that
150
acceleration is the change in speed, and Romina refers to the motion of a cat. The group
members investigated the motion of a cat in a research setting in the summer of 1999 but
this investigation is not discussed here. Romina then notes that distance is the integral, or
"how much area you went" [line 636]. Magda agrees, saying, "I'm pretty sure that's
right. That makes sense. If you have speed you travel, you accumulate distance" [line
659].
In this segment, the students introduced the idea of the integral as an
accumulation function into their discussion. They do this without explicit examination of
the actual notation [ f(t)dt, instead referring to the graph of [ f{t)dt as "the integral".
During this segment of time, the students do not explicitly examine a connection between
this meaning of the integral and the notion of calculating the area under a graph using a
function, as they did earlier. However, Romina brings up the question of a connection
between derivatives and integrals at line 408, and in line numbers 592 - 647 the students
discuss how distance, velocity and acceleration can be related to derivatives and integrals,
verbally and graphically. In lines 612 - 614, Magda draws a graph of the speed of an
object, noting that the slope of such a graph would represent the acceleration of the
object.
In discussing the notions of distance, speed and time, the students coordinate a
familiar context with the graphical statements they have just made about the behavior of
accumulation functions. In line 661, Romina also notes that area could be used to find
the distance traveled, making a connection between the original discussion of area under
a graph the beginning of the session and the current context. As in lines 1 - 341, the
151
students have looked to support an idea expressed in one representation by calling upon
other representations. They have continued to maintain that the FTC involves the
calculation of area, and that changes in the values of a related function can be used to
calculate the area.
5.1.5. Segment 3: Lines 664 -985
This segment begins as Romina finds a new verbal statement in the Foerster
textbook.
Lines 664 - 809
Romina reads directly from page 215 of the text [lines 664 - 666): "This theorem
lets you evaluate definite integrals exactly by algebra using indefinite integrals" and adds
"that's what it does - 1 guess we missed that line before". Romina adds, perhaps referring
back to line 247 and the drawing of Figure 20: "That's what we were saying before. You
get a definite with an indefinite." At the same time, Romina points to the graphs Magda
had drawn earlier of the functions y = x2 and y = \xi. Magda adds, "An indefinite
integral just means you don't have bounds on it, isn't that what it means?" The students
do not pursue this question and state that they should "start with the basics". Romina says
that they have demonstrated the FTC through Magda's numerical example withx2 and
| x 3 i n Figure 20. The students then turn to consider pages 215 - 216 in the Foerster
textbook after Angela asks why the Fundamental Theorem is true [line 6831. The group
decides to create a specific example for the explanation of the FTC found on pages 215 —
216.
In section 5-8 Foerster shows a graph of a function/for which one wishes to find
the value of f(x)dx. He states t h a t / has an antiderivative, g, and because g is

152
differentiable, the Mean Value Theorem applies to it on the interval [a, b], and any sub-
interval of [a, b\. The following is quotation from page 216 of the text. "Divide the
interval [a, b\ into n sub-intervals of equal width Ax, Let ca,c2,c3,...,cnbe the points in
the first, second, third, ..., nth subinterval at which the conclusion of the MVT is true for
function g on that subinterval. Thus,
*«=;>=—£—•«(«.) = — £ — •
#$£&) g,( £<«z£W.

Ax Ax
Now, use the points ca,c2,c3,...,cn as the sample points for a Riemann sum of the original
definite integral, as shown in the bottom graph of Figure 5-8b. That is,
Rn = /(c 1 )Ax + /(c 2 )Ax + /(c3)AxH \-f(cn)Ax ." Foerster continues, "However,
f(x) = g'(x) for any value of x. Therefore, Rn = g'(cl)Ax +g'(c2)Ax +

g\c)Ax-\ \-g'(cJAx . Replacing the g\cx) with
Ax
and so forth, canceling the Ax's, and arranging in column form, gives
fl„=S(*i)-g(«)
+g(x2)-g(x,)
+g(X3)-g(X2)
+g(b)-g(xn_])
Rn = g(b)-g(a).
All the middle terms telescope, leaving only -g(a) from the first term and g(b) from the
last."
153
In discussing how to create a specific example for this explanation, the students
note that while the page in the text refers to the Mean Value Theorem, they have only a
limited recollection of it [line 715]. They decide to use y = x2 as the function / in
Foerster's explanation. Romina begins by asking what g represents, and Magda calls it
"the integral". Magda writes g(x)= J /(x)on the paper, and then, underneath this,
g'(c,). Romina states that "the derivative of the integral is the actual function", [line 733]
and suggests that Magda also write / ( c , ) , Magda writes the expression
g(x,)-g(a)
s'(q) = , and then draws two graphs [starting at line 762]. The graph in the
Ax
lower right of figure 23 is the students' graph of the function f(x).
m W»
Figure 23: Graphs drawn by Romina to illustrate Foerster's explanation of the FTC
Explaining the graphs, Magda states [lines 782 - 7911 :
Magda: so this is xl, so that would be g(x,) [pointing

to the x axis and the cubic graph] So that
would be like this is the xl here, so this,
minus g(a) which is the original point which
is here, over the change which is the
distance here.
Romina: OK, so that gets us the area? Does it?
Magda: Did I... gets us c,... [as she points to t\\tg'{cx)
she wrote on the paper. |
154
Angela: That gets us this.. .right? [points to the area

under the graph of y = x2 ]
Magda: Which is on the original curve is... yes, that
gets you the area.
Referring to the graph off, Romina asks [lines 792 - 8041:
Romina: Isn't the slope on our f the area on the g?

Magda: Isn't the slope on the f this is our f... no...
no.
Romina: Isn't that what the integral is., by finding the
area you find the actual slope...
Magda: So what are you saying?
Romina: The slope from., of a point is the area under
it.
Magda: The slope of a point is the area under it.
(Repeating Romina's words slowly.)
Angela: Slope between these two points is the area
here is what she's saying. Like from a to xl
is the area here.
Romina: Isn't that why we take the integral?
Magda answers "slope is the derivative", and adds a graph below the two other
graphs of g and /(Figure 24). At this point, Romina and Angela do not continue asking
questions about a relationship between slope and area.
€*^- **
Figure 24. Romina's addition of a derivative graph to Figure 23

155
Lines 810-985
For the next five minutes, Magda asks questions about the expression
p(x ) — s(ci)
g'Cq) = • . In particular, she asks about the meaning of "c,", pointing to the
Ax
graphs as she talks. Magda, looking at the textbook while talking, asks if the c values are
"any points in the subintervals". Romina asks if the symbols "are trying to say" [line 873J
that one can make the intervals smaller to find a more accurate value for the area under
the graph. Romina also suggests that the expression g'(c{)Ax + g'(c2)Ax + g'(c3)Ax-\—
might represent "height times width" [line 881 J.
Magda explains how the point cx is a point on the x axis and that the calculation
g'(cl )Ax represents the area under her graph of g prime and the vertical increase in the
graph of g. Romina then draws a graph and the x axis shown below (Figure 25). She fills
in the area in "slices" as shown in the figure, and states that she understands that the area
of the individual intervals sum up to be the entire area over the interval from a to b. After
drawing this graphical representation, Romina states "I've got the bottom half figured
out" [line 907], referring to the portion of page 216 in the Foerster text where it states that
the sum Rn = g(x{)-g(a) +g(x2)-g(x{) +g(x3)-g(x2)--- +g(b)-g(xn_^) is equal to
g(b)-g(a).
Figure 25: Romina's second graph to illustrate Foerster's explanation

156
Romina states that the graph she drew should be g prime, not g, and makes the
correction shown in the figure. She then asks why they are dividing by the change in x in
the expression g\cx) , since the graph she drew is the derivative of g. In
Ax
response, Magda asks Romina to draw an "integral" of the graph above. Romina draws
the graph in figure 26 as the "integral". Romina states that she drew the graph to look
like this because the graph in figure 25 looked to her like "negative x squared". The
students do not question if this graph is a correct approximation of the "integral" of
Romina's graph of g prime, but they use it as if it is, placing the symbols xx and a on the
graph. Romina then links the symbolic statements of the form g(xn)- g(xn_{) with the
graphical representation of the individual slices of area she drew in Figure 25 [line 902 -
9031, referring to each subtraction as a statement about the area under the graph of g
prime, and a statement about the change in y values on the graph of g flines 904 - 913].
i I
_ „,„,„ • ,L\
X
*,
Figure 26: Romina's sketch of the integral of the function from Figure 25
P(X ) — Q{CC)
!
Romina writes g'(c,) = on her own paper [line 934| and asks what it
Ax
represents. Magda draws the two points shown in Figure 26, (jc,,g(jc,)) and (a,g(a)).
Magda confirms for Romina that the expression "delta x" refers the length of the interval
from x = a to x = xu and that the expression g'{c{) = • refers to the slope of

Ax
157
the line between the points in the graph in Figure 26. Romina then says, "Yeah. Isn't that
what you just did? That's what I was saying - isn't the slope the area?" [line 967J.
Magda agrees, with the provision, "if you are dividing by the change." At this point,
Romina states that she has only concluded that "derivative is slope", and states that this is
not a step forward in their discussion.
Despite Romina's expression of a lack of progress, in lines 664 - 985, the
students continue to coordinate representations. In reading this sequence of statements in
the Foerster text, the students draw their own graphs, using quadratic and cubic functions
to coordinate the statements in the text with their own previous statements about the FTC.
They examine this particular sequence of verbal and symbolic statements that justify the
statement f{x)dx = g{b)-g(a) , seeing how the statements apply to the particular
Ja
example of y = x (Figure 23) to make sense of the meaning of the symbols. In line 786,
(and again in line 881) Romina suggests that part of what is written on page 216 refers to
area, as does Angela in line 788. Romina again refers to a connection between slope and
area [line 7921, and Magda assigns particular values to the points on the graphs [lines 886
- 889] to illustrate what the symbols might represent. Romina [lines 902-9031 and
Magda |lines 886 - 889| suggest that using differences on the graph of g to find the area
on the graph of g prime is something that is happening on individual subintervals, not just
the whole interval from a to b as illustrated earlier.
In this segment of their discussion, the students do not explicitly express that they
understand how the symbolic statements on page 216 explain why
f{x)dx = g(b)-g{a) . However, the students' movement between the symbols in the
Ja
158
text, their graphs they drew, and the meanings they associated with the graphs led them to
make connections to their own prior statements. In creating their own graphical
representation of the symbols on page 216, the students revisit the idea that a subtraction
of two values on the function g can be used to calculate the area under the graph of the
function g. By drawing a graph in response to Magda's suggestion [line 921] Romina
also suggests that the roles of/, g, and g prime in the book's explanation have become
more clear to her flines 961 - 963]. By drawing these graphs, Romina also has a new
source of evidence of a connection between slope and area flines 966 - 967 j. Romina
states "the slope from... of a point is the area under it" [line 798 and 800] which recalls
her observation about "using the integral to find a specific slope" in lines 408 -411.
5.1.7. Summary Analysis of Segments 1 - 3
Throughout lines 1 - 985, the students use one representation to examine
statements made in another throughout their discussion. The students have confirmed for
themselves the idea that the FTC involves finding the area under a graph through the use
of another related function. They have assigned a meaning of "area under the graph from
rb
a to b " to the notation f(x)dx as the area under a graph and viewed the expression
g(b) - g(a) as both a subtraction of area and a subtraction of two y values on the graph of
g, which they also call the integral. They have noted, separately, that the integral graph
is a graph of accumulated area, and then recognized that the area under the graph of g
prime, which consists of sums of the areas of rectangles, can be summed to find total
area, which can be calculated using the function g (whose derivative is/) as on page 216.
While the argument in the Foerster text does not explicitly involve accumulation, the
students looked to make sense of the symbols by linking the idea of accumulation to the
159
symbols they read. In the second half of the session, the students look at accumulation
again.
5.1.8. Segment 4: Lines 986 - 1312
In the next segment, the students decide to use rectangles to calculate the area
under a curve.
Lines 986-1110
Magda and Angela decide to "draw the area manually", which Magda had
suggested earlier [line 719]. Magda begins to write on a graph paper on which Angela has
already drawn the graphs ofy = x2 andy = x3, writing "delta x = .5". Romina has picked
up the Teacher's Guide to AP Calculus (Kennedy, 1997) and begun to read it. She then
reads aloud from page 22 of the Guide: "Use the FTC to evaluate definite integrals" and
then states "that's what we've been doing." She again quotes from the Guide: "Use the
FTC to represent a particular antiderivative, and the analytical and graphical analysis of
functions so defined". In line 1009, Romina adds "The antiderivative... isn't that the
integral... of the derivative?" This is the first time the word antiderivative has been used
in the session. Magda and Angela do not respond to Romina's question, but draw a graph
and a series of rectangles, (Figure 27) stating they are going to do the "midpoint thing".
Angela and Magda begin to calculate y values of the function y = x, which they then
begin to use to calculate the areas of rectangles.
Figure 27: Magda's sketch of a Riemann sum

160
Romina continues to look through the Teacher's Guide to AP Calculus, and then
the following exchange occurs [lines 1057 - 1078J:
Romina: You know what I think we should do? We

should first, explain, explain the calculus
and the area,
[laughter]
Romina: then we should explain definite integrals,
and then we're going to do calculus and area
by the Riemann sums,
Angela: Isn't that cheating, using the teacher's
manual?
Romina: It's not telling me how to do it, because
apparently the teacher's supposed to know,
because they've taken these math classes
over and over. And then we're going to go
into definite integrals and antiderivatives,
and then comes the FTC. We have this stuff,
just don't have integrals and antiderivatives,
that's the whole thing that I made you look
at that you apparently didn't...
Magda: Well, integrals and antiderivatives, aren't
they the same thing?
Romina: Well that's what I thought, but why did they
write it out like that?
Angela: Shouldn't we assume that the student knows
that?
Magda: Well, antiderivative, it's like one has like
how the graph moves up and down because
you can kind of start taking the integral at
any point. It's something...
Romina: I'll keep that open just in case we decide to
uh...
Magda: Isn't that the whole issue with plus C. that's
the difference between and antiderivative
and an integral.
Romina: That sounds really familiar, Magda, but I
don't know.
The mention of the word antiderivative brings new ideas into the students' discussion.
Magda notes explicitly for the first time that she believes antiderivatives and integrals
might be "the same thing". Romina suggests, however, that if this were the case, the
161
Teacher's Guide would not have mentioned integrals and antiderivatives separately.
Magda also recalls a constant term, C, being involved, which is an idea she has not
mentioned before with respect to integrals.
Lines 1110-1312
Romina turns her attention away from the Teacher's Guide and asks what the
other two students are creating. They explain that they are calculating the areas of
rectangles under the graph of x2 (Figure 28) and summing them up to create an
"estimate" of the integral (Figure 29). Magda and Angela work together to sum the
values, and Romina states that what they are doing is a "Riemann sum." Romina then
asks what they will do after they have estimated the area, and how this connects to "the
integral". Magda states that "this is our integral" [line 1150J and using "our... like
Theorem of Calculus", [lines 1152 - 1154] she explains that calculating the area estimate
using rectangles will approximate the result found when calculating the difference in y
values of the function y = |x 3 . Romina then asks why that works.
r Grid
Figure 28: Angela and Magda's sketch of rectangles under the graph of y = x2
162
Magda responds "because it does" [line 1155J and Romina suggests that the
question of "why" is part of their task in the session. Magda notes that the result using
the subtraction of the two y values of the function y = jx3 is 9, while the estimate using
a midpoint Riemann sum is 8.937. Magda states that she knows the calculation
F(3) — F(0) (F being the function y = | x 3 ) should give the area; Angela asks "but why?"
[line 1194). Magda creates Figure 30 by plotting the values Angela had been calculating
for the accumulated areas of the rectangles from figure 29. After Magda expresses some
uncertainty about whether she is plotting the correct values, she says, "And then using the
integral, is supposed to give you the area on that", [line 1275] referring to the area under
the graph of y = x2. (Here Magda uses the word integral to refer to the function y - \x3.)
She checks her calculations to see that the function y = \x3 is approximated at each x
value by the values of accumulated area in the table in figure 29.
m^
" (V) * h*
*-3
FC3V- * (#
F(5> H^y
Hi)~-"3 *r ?
-f.:
&>
Figure 29: Angela and Magda's calculations of accumulated area

163
/
/
/
•^f
yc^-*—-^
Figure 30: Magda's graph of accumulated area
In lines 986 - 1312, the students created rectangles, coordinating their earlier
verbal description of the accumulation function f(t)dt with a numerical representation
by summing the areas of rectangles under the graph of y = x2. While all three students
have previously accepted the idea thatj = \x3, could be used to find the area under the
graph of y = x2 , here they examine this belief by creating a numerical representation.
The students see that the result they get by adding areas of rectangles is consistent with
the notion that the function _y = }x 3 is the function that one should use to calculate the
area under the graph ofy = x2. They find in line 1295 that the meaning of integrals as
accumulation functions gives an numerical result consistent with the use of the function
y = \x3 to evaluate the integral. Up to this point, the students have, without discussion,
used y = \x , or a generic cubic function, to show graphically that the area under a
parabola could be found with another graph. Here, they show specifically that graph of
the accumulated area of rectangles under the graph of y - x2 approximates the graph of
y = }x 3 (Figure 30).
164
5.1.10. Segment 5: Lines 1313 - 1451
With a numerical representation of accumulated areas now created, new questions
about the students previous representations arise. The use of the function y = jx3 as "the
integral" is questioned for the first time, and the students draw together questions from
earlier in the session.
Lines 1313- 1390
Romina then asks which function in figure 28 (the parabola or the cubic function)
is their "g prime", referring back to the symbols in the text on page 216. She creates a
new graph of her own, labels it g (Figure 31), and shades in the area between the graph of
g and the x axis. She expresses uncertainty about whether the graph she is drawing the
area under should be the graph of g or g prime. After agreeing that she is drawing the
area between the graph of g prime and the x axis (although she has written \ g(x) on the
figure - see lines 1328 - 1331 and 1350 - 1352), Romina asks how the given graph
becomes the "other graph". Angela answers that this is what she and Magda are trying to
determine by creating Figures 28 through 30. Romina asks if "I want to figure out that
area under my g prime to get my g" [lines 1350 - 1352] and then begins to draw a new
graph (figure 32).
Figure 31: Romina's graph of a function g prime

165
Figure 32: Romina's graph of a function and its integral
Romina states that she does not understand how the area between the graph of g
prime (the parabola in figure 32) and the x axis turns into the area above the cubic
function. Angela and Magda correct her, stating that the graph of g (the cubic function in
figure 12) itself represents the area between the parabola and the x axis, and Romina
agrees. Romina then suggests that the area between the graph of the parabola and the
axis on the interval from a to b is 2. She asks if that assumption implies that the
difference between the y values of the points she draws on the cubic function at x = a and
x = b must also be 2. Angela and Magda confirm that this is the case, agreeing with
Magda's explanation near the beginning of the session [lines 321 - 3411.
Lines 1391 - 1414
Romina's question about Figure 12 is similar to her question about Figure 20
earlier in the session [lines 321 - 341]. Magda and Angela give Romina a similar answer
to the one they gave then, but this time Romina responds with a question. Romina states
"So each point on this..." pointing to the graph of the cubic function in Figure 32, "is
like a really skinny rectangle..." as she draws thin rectangles between the x axis and the
166
parabola in Figure 32 [lines 1392 - 1394J. Magda and Angela agree, and Magda states
that she was trying to express the same idea in creating figures 29 and 30. Magda says it
is like "stacking it up." Romina says "so you're just putting it on top of each other... so I
think we know what the integral is." Then she asks why that works.
Line 1415- 1451
Angela then states "and on to the fundamental theorem of calculus" [line 1451).
Romina responds by stating, "the a and the b, that's the fundamental theorem of
calculus". In lines 1424 - 1432, the following exchange occurs.
Romina: The fundamental theorem of calculus is just

an easier way...
Magda: No, look
Romina: ...to do the integral it's like the definite
integral, right?
Magda: Well no because...
Romina: It's a way to figure it out...
Magda: ...you've got to take the integral to figure
out the actual area
Romina: Yeah
Magda: It's not an easy way of taking the integral
because you have to take the integral
anyway you know what I'm saying
The group then wonders if they have actually talked about the FTC. Angela says they
have, pointing to the shaded area and the graph of the cubic function in Figure 32, stating
that "this area" is "this graph" [line 1449[. She adds, "that's what the fundamental
theorem of calculus is."
In lines 1313 - 1451, the students return to questions from the beginning of the
session. As seen in the last excerpt, the meaning of the word integral is still a matter for
discussion, but in contrast to earlier in the session, Angela and Romina explicitly equate
167
the accumulation of the area under the graph of the parabola in figure 32 with the graph
of the cubic function in figure 32. This conclusion comes after Romina has explicitly
asked the question of how the "area under g prime" becomes the graph of g. Earlier, the
area could be found by subtracting two values on the cubic graph, but now the group
recognizes that the cubic graph can been created by a plot of the accumulated area of
"skinny rectangles". They now use figure 32, which has the same essential elements as
Figure 20, to express how the graph of the cubic function is produced from the graph of
the parabola. The creation of accumulation functions was discussed before, for example
in the discussion of the test paper in lines 425 - 450. The coordination of the numerical
representation with the graphical representation, however, has led the students to justify
the use of a cubic function to find the area under a quadratic function, and to add new
meaning to the graphs from figure 20.
5.1.12. Segment 6: Lines 1452 - 1686
In this segment, a new question arises but remains unexplored.
Lines 1452- 1511
Romina wonders if the group has explained why the FTC, "the a and the b" [line
1418] "works" [line 1462]. Magda responds by drawing the graph in Figure 33, with
values from Angela's approximation of the area between the graph of x2and the x axis.
Magda writes the calculation (F(l)-F(.5))/(0.5) [lines 177 - 1480]. Romina asks if
this expression represents the "derivative of our integral" and their "g prime", returning
to the symbols found in the textbook [line I486]. Romina also states that the slope of the
integral would be the derivative of the integral [line 15011, which would be the function
they started with. Neither Magda nor Angela disagree with Romina's statement. Angela
168
adds that if the area between the g prime graph and the x axis is two, then the graph of g
increases by 2 on that interval [lines 1504- 1506].
--< y ft- /
~~f~—_——I
1
Figure 33: Magda's second graph of the accumulated area function
Lines 1512-1686
I have returned to the room at this time, and ask the students to summarize. The
students begin to talk to each other. Romina states, and Angela agrees, that an "integral"
is what happens when the intervals on a Riemann sum reach zero. Magda points to the
explanation of the FTC in the text and explains that it says that "this will cancel this, and
this will cancel that" [lines 1586 - 1587] leaving one with a simple subtraction at the end.
Having left and again returned, I then note that there are 15 minutes left on the
videotape. Romina asks what the phrase in the task "what it means" means. I respond by
stating that I believe it is possible for someone to "say a theorem like you can read a
sentence to me and not understand what it means" [lines 1612 - 1615]. Romina agrees
that this is how she interpreted the question.

I ask the students to talk to me as if I were a student that they were
rb
Angela says that they made the equation f(x)dx = g{b) - g(a) "with a graph"
Ja
the following exchange occurs: [lines 1638 - 1665]
Romina: The first thing we did was we took the

function
Angela: we used f of x, x squared as our function
Romina: and essentially we talked about what the
integral was, how we want to find the area
underneath our x squared from point we
designated points from like a ...
Magda: from like one to three, that's what it was
Romina: so we did that and do you know what the
Riemann sum is?
Pantozzi: Yes.
Romina: OK
Angela: We did that.
Romina: so we took a Riemann sum underneath that
area and then basically we... what the
integral is is stacking on the each area...
under., yeah I don't know where that went...
Angela: Points., there you go...
Romina: so do want to explain that? you wrote it
Magda: well basically what we did is that we figured
out that at .5 the area would be .03125 and
basically that is doing the change of x which
in our case was .5 times the height which
would be the
Angela: [inaudible]
Magda: y if you plug it into here [points to the
equation f(x) = x A 2| and that's our area, so
at .5 that would be that [she points to the
point on her graph in figure 33 at .5, .03125]
so at .5... and at one you would just add this
and this together and then you just keep
going
Angela: Keep adding
Magda: keep adding it up and then you get to the
integral
Pantozzi: you get a graph?
Magda: yes which is the integral of the f of x
170
She notes that the estimates of the area are close to the value found by using the
function y — \x3.
The students' coordination of the numerical, graphical, and symbolic and verbal
representations in this segment motivates the students to ask a new question: "why does
that work?" |line 1467]. That is, why is the area function the same as the antiderivative
function. Here, by examining the numerical and graphical representation of the
accumulation of the area under a graph, the students can then find the slope of this
accumulated area graph, which brings meaning to Romina*s earlier questions about the
derivative of an integral. The question of whether the slope of the accumulated area
graph is the original graph [line 1501] is not explored here, but it arose as a question
again only after the numerical representation of accumulation was created. Up to this
point, the students had used y = ^x as the "integral" ofy = x without question, without
noting explicitly that the latter was the derivative of the former.
5.1.14. Summary Analysis of Segments 4 - 6
In lines 986 - 1686 the students have connected their initial thoughts together, as
well as opened up new questions. By representing the accumulated area under the graph
of y = x2 with a table of values, the students have brought a new meaning to Figure 20,
which they express in Figure 32. The graphs in figures 23 through 31 have served as a
links between figures 20 and 32, so while figure 32 is almost identical in visual content to
Figure 20, the students assign new meaning to figure 32: the idea of "skinny rectangles"
and accumulation. The statement f{x)dx = g(b)- g(a), which began as a statement
171
about subtraction of area and subtraction of values on the graph of g, has gained meaning
as a statement about accumulation of the areas of rectangles.
The students did not come to this meaning instantly, nor does it appear that this
realization was the inevitable outcome of their discussion. They stated verbally and
symbolically that g was the "indefinite integral" of / a t the beginning of the session, but
eb
only after explaining f(x)dx = g(b)-g(a) graphically, and then creating
Ja
\ f{t)dt for a particular function, do the students themselves pose the question of why
Ja
the derivative of g is/. The statement about the relationship between g and/gained
meaning through the creation and coordination of the different representations.
5.1.15. Summary Analysis of Session
In the session as a whole, the students confirmed the meanings they recalled or
read about the FTC by constructing multiple representations and coordinating them with
each other. The students associated the statement f(x)dx = g{b)~ g{a) with a
Ja
subtraction of overlapping areas and then with the subtraction of values of an "integral"
function which plotted the accumulated area under the function /. The students
confirmed that the equation y = \x~ was a valid one for calculating the areas under the
function f(x) = x2 by plotting the accumulated area under the graph of/. The students
explained the meaning of f(x)dx = g(b)-g(a) as an equivalence between the area

Ja
under the graph and the subtraction of two values of a function by constructing and
interpreting graphs. The symbols in the textbook on page 216 were interpreted using a
graphical representation, giving those symbols meaning as statements about graphs and
then statements about the individual rectangles in a Riemann sum.

172
The meaning of the integral as an accumulation function gave new meaning to the
fb
original representation of f(x)dx = g(b)- g{a) in Figure 20. First the figure
represented the equivalence of the symbols on the two sides of the equal sign, then it
represented the connection between Riemann sums, accumulation functions, and a
relationship between the graphs of g and/. This relationship - the idea that the graph of g
is formed through the accumulation of "skinny rectangles" under the graph of / - is a
meaning that came forward after students' efforts to coordinate the other meanings they
had uncovered.
Without making claims to what these events imply about what these students
"understand" about the FTC, the students used representations to express meanings, and
to confirm meanings expressed in other representations. The students linked different
meanings by constructing and then explaining graphical representations, and created new
questions about meaning by linking representations. To reason about why the FTC is
true, the students coordinated the symbolic explanation in the text with the graphical and
numerical representations they created themselves. The students used representations
largely to explain other representations to themselves and to each other.
In the entire session, the students use representations as explanatory tools, and
explain representations when they deemed necessary. For example, the students talk
about f(t)dt without explicitly discussing the idea of what is varying in the notation
Ja
I f(t)dt, a difficulty noted in the literature. The students do not bring up this issue at all,
Ja
instead representing f f(t)dt as a plot of the sum of the areas of rectangles. So while the
Ja
students use multiple representations, they do not examine every possible representation;
the students move between representations as a means of explanation. The students, for
173
example, usey = | x 3 as the "integral" graph for y-x2 without explanation until their own
questions lead them to wonder why this particular function should be used. Then, the
students numerically examine whether f{t)dt is the correct "integral" by comparing
the values of t dt and TX .

Ja
174
5.2. Session 1, Group 2, June 25,2003
In their session, Brian, Robert, Mike, and Sherly discuss a variety of statements of
the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus that they find in a selection of textbooks. Later in
the session, the students focus on discussion of how to create the graph of the "integral"
of a given function, discussing how to create the integral as a graph whose slope is equal
to the values of a given graph, and as a graph that plots the accumulation of the area
between the given function and the x axis. In discussing the statements of the FTC they
find in the various textbooks, Brian, Mike, Robert and Sherly use verbal statements and
discuss the creation of graphical representations. For the latter half of the session, the
discussion focuses on creating graphs from verbal representations, and on describing the
behavior of graphs the students have created.
5.2.1. Segment 1: Lines 1 - 690
In the first segment, the students briefly discuss a number of different statements
of the Fundamental Theorem and related results.
Lines 1-168
Mike, Robert, Brian, and Sherly begin to examine a selection of textbooks. The
students begin by looking for statements of the FTC [lines 86 - 139]. Brian asks the
group, "what's a Riemann sum?", and Mike and Robert respond verbally, recalling a left
sum, a right sum, and a middle sum. Robert suggests that a formula exists relating the left
and right with middle [line 46J. Brian, reading from the Larson text, (page 280) states that
the FTC "lets you evaluate definite integrals exactly using algebra and indefinite
integrals" [lines 88 - 89]. Sherly, reading the Ostebee & Zorn text on page 322, states,
"for any well-behaved function/and any base point a, Af\% an antiderivative of/' [line
175
103 - 104J. Sherly asks what an antiderivative is, and Mike responds that the
antiderivative is the integral. Brian asks how one figures that out, and Mike gives a
symbolic example - since the derivative of x squared is 2x, then the "other way around"
would be the antiderivative. Immediately afterwards, Brian, referring to the FTC, states
that he is hoping to find something in his text that tells him "straight up what it is".
Sherly, reading the Hughes-Hallett text on pages 167 - 168, asks Mike to look at
what it says. Robert, reading from the Larson text, says "it tells the relationship between
differentiation and integration". Brian asks if a Riemann sum is needed, and Robert
answers that one would use it if the equation was "two hard to integrate" [line 131].
Robert adds, agreeing with Brian, that the Riemann sum will give an approximation of
the area under the graph. Robert then says [lines 136 - 139]:
I think it says something like... take the differences of the

antiderivative and you get the derivative- or something -
you take the this, this is the slope, which is derivative, and
these are antiderivatives shows that they're like related.
Sherly asks Robert to rephrase what he said: |lines 142 - 145]:
Take the slope, right, rise over the run, remember, area
under the graph, would be the same, take the integral, then
the derivative, these two points, divided by the interval, you
get the slope of the derivative it would be the same
showing the relation between antiderivative and derivative
Robert uses verbal representations only here, and then Brian points to the statement
[ f(x)dx = F{b)-F{a) in the Larson text. Robert states that F(b)-F{a) is the area
Ja
under the graph, and Brian adds, "between two points" [line 151 ]. Sherly asks what the
FTC is "for" and Robert responds "yeah, to show like to show the relation between
derivative and antiderivative I don't know - it gives you a number" [line 160] and adds
176
"a way to evaluate a definite integral without having to do the limit of a sum", reading
from page 218 of the Larson text. Sherly adds that her book says that as well.
Lines 169 - 320

pa pb
Sherly asks Mike to explain the statement f(x)dx = - f{x)dx , asking him to
Jb Ja
"draw it out" [line 174]. He does so by drawing an area, then motioning with his hands
in one direction and then the other to illustrate why the one expression is considered the
opposite of the other. Separately, Robert points to a picture to explain the symbolic
pb pc pc
statement f(x)dx + \ f(x)dx= f(x)dx [lines 1 8 9 - 190|. Sherly, again reading
from her text, notes that one can think of the definite integral "as a limit of the sum of the
areas of rectangles" [lines 196 - 197]. Robert, looking with Brian at page 281 of the
Larson text, notes that the process of finding area is similar to the process of finding
derivatives, and that one needs to make the "tops" and the "bottoms" really small, and
then take the limit [lines 234 -235].
Brian then asks if the FTC gives "an answer for something" [line 254] or if it
gives "a figure, and you say, that's what it is". Robert answers that it gives the area
under a graph. Brian responds by asking, "what does that area tell you?" to which Robert
answers "the total change between". Sherly adds that in her economics classes, when she
did "price and quantity" area "might represent revenue" [line 262]. She adds that, in
general, the integral "means something" [line 264J. Robert states "it gives a graph of total
change". Brian wonders if the statement [ f(x)dx = F(b)—F{a) can be "broken down",
[line 301] to show "how to get to" each of the symbolic in the equation, and Robert
responds that he is not sure. Mike and Sherly note that the Riemann sum will involve
177
some "error" when it is used to find the area under a graph. Mike and Robert suggest
that the FTC is about "finding area".
Lines 321 -440
Brian examines the Contemporary Calculus text on page 250, and states, "Where
its 3x to the square or something and you have to have x to the third" and Robert notes
that the example on the page shows how to evaluate the integral from 2 to 5. Robert then
mentions the possibility of a relationship between position, velocity, and acceleration
with respect to integrals and derivatives [lines 363 - 365]. Robert and Brian then
continue to examine the example in the text showing the symbolic calculation of this
integral of 3x2 from 2 to 5 on page 250 and 251 in the Contemporary Calculus text. The
next notes that x3 +C is the antiderivative of 3x2, and Brian notes that the "+C" represents
a "vertical shift".
While this conversation is going on, Mike and Sherly are talking to each other,
reading the Ostebee & Zorn text on page 322, which contains a verbal statement of the
FTC and observations about the FTC. Mike suggests to Sherly that sometimes the
integral can give a graph, and sometimes a number. He states, "See, that's on a closed
interval, that's when you get a number... if this wasn't closed, it would give you a
function" [lines 419 - 420|. Mike then shows the "Fundamental Theorem of Calculus,
informal version" on page 322 to Sherly and Robert. In the text, it states, "For any well
behaved function/and any base point a, Af is an antiderivative of/'. Mike points to this
and states "that's all it means" [line 425]. He does not explicitly discuss the meaning of
the notation Af.

178
Lines 441 - 690
After the two separate conversations end, Sherly says that the FTC "shows the
area of the graph" [line 461) and Robert says it is used "to find the integral without using
the limit" [line 467 ]. The group then discusses whether they are answering the questions
in the task [line 532]. After briefly turning to other pages in the textbook, Mike then asks
a question [lines 541- 5451:
Mike: what would you say is the derivative... I

mean the definition of the antiderivative of a
graph
Sherly: I don't know I've never looked at is
as...I've always looked at it as...
Brian: the antiderivative is a graph of the slope
Mike: of whatever graph it is an antiderivative of
The students communicate here verbally only, without any graphical representation.
Sherly then asks, "What is the mean value theorem?" [line 563] and Mike explains "It's
where you find a point in the center and multiply it by the change and get something".
Robert adds "So it says if a number somewhere in here, that you pick a number in here, it
will give you the value of the integral" [lines 583 - 584]. Sherly then asks Mike to draw a
picture [line 571], and Mike does (Figure 34). Mike states "Let's say you have a graph,
and let's say this spans 20 units, and this is your area, and your area is like 6 you can
make a rectangle that's 20, that will equal 6, that will if you put it up here, it will pass
through some points that's all it saying" [lines 602 - 607].
t@k7Z?f~ 2-o
Figure 34: Mike's sketch to explain the Mean Value Theorem

179
The students wonder about whether they are done with the task [lines 658 - 688].
In this first segment, the students search for a statement of the FTC and discuss
their recollections and findings verbally, sometimes referring to graphical representations
in the textbooks. On three particular occasions, the students explicitly use graphical
representations to explain symbolic or verbal statements. Two are properties of integrals
and the third, the Mean Value Theorem for integrals. The students discuss each of their
observations and recollections individually and briefly. The topics range across multiple
meanings of the FTC, reflecting the various textbooks that the students examine. The
meanings include the notion of using antiderivatives to calculate area, the existence of
antiderivatives, integrals measuring net change, and the area under a curve. In the case of
the Mean Value Theorem, Mike creates Figure 34 to explain the meaning of the symbolic
statement f(x)dx = f(c)(b-a). In the text (page 283), the statement of this theorem
lacks a numerical example, which Mike provides.
5.2.3. Segment 2: Lines 689 - 1130
Lines 689 - 906
I return to the room, and Brian asks if the statement f(x)dx = F(b)- F(a) is
"technically the bare bones" of the FTC. Sherly states that it is. Brian asks, "do other
things come from this or is this like a compilation of everything?" [lines 746|. I explain
that different books can approach the FTC in different ways, and that the FTC "is
supposed to pull everything, pull all the big ideas together" and that "there must be some
reason it's called the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus" [lines 757 - 794]. I ask the
group if they have found out anything about the FTC, and Sherly, reading from the
180
Hughes-Hallett text, states "the theorem allows us to reconstruct a function / from
knowledge about its derivatives" [line 805 - 806].
I suggest that the students examine the Teacher's Guide to AP Calculus [line
821 ]. I point out the goals and commentary written on pages 9 and 10, which mention the
different orders teachers might teach derivatives and integrals. The students look at these
verbal statements, and then Sherly comments [lines 858 - 861 J:
It's like you're... you're learning derivatives and then

antiderivatives is just the opposite of that and you're not
satisfied... if you learn what the integral is from the
beginning like you see more... its like you're getting more
explanation rather than just hey, this is it.
Mike adds [lines 875 - 884|:
Mike: [inaudible] Let's say that you've got a graph

and you make the integral,
Sherly: Right.
Mike: You then you know that that's the
derivative, so you're kind of learning twice,
two at the same time.
Sherly: Yes, but there's a whole section on you
know too.
Mike: [inaudible]
Brian: You have to be able to see that though.
Mike: Well you might pick that up, you might not.
Then when you learn derivatives are, you
can see...
Brian: I see when I did that was actually right in
front of my face.
Mike then asks: "It's like, you ask someone to create an integral from an existing graph,
or from some information ...from some points. What they're creating it from is its
derivative, correct? Right?" [lines 892 - 8951. Sherly agrees, and Brian says he does not
know. Mike then states [lines 898 - 900]:
So as they're making the integral, they don't know that

what they're making it off of is its derivative, they can pick
181
that up and then when they learn about the derivative and
see it's the opposite, and say wow.
Robert adds, "Like multiplication and division, are like inverse, you don't really know,
you learn one, and then learn the other" [line 905 - 906].
Lines 907 - 997
1 ask if the group can give me concrete example of what they are talking about.
Mike asks that the group imagine being given the graph of y = 2x, or any line, and being
asked to "make the integral". He states [lines 925 - 930]:
You have to pick a point like where zero would be, and
then you build up from that. You know what I'm saying...
and this is like -10, so I have to go down, -8, down, until I
hit there and then I start going back up. You know what
I'm saying so that's how you make your integral.
Mike draws small segments, the first with a slope of-10 (which he estimates on
the plain sheet of paper), the next with a slope of - 8 , and the next with a greater slope,
continuing in this fashion to include a short segment with a slope of zero, and then short
segments with positive slopes, each with a greater slope that the last as he moves from
left to right (Figure 35) Mike notes that one needs to "pick a point" to start at, and also
notes that to check his results, he is thinking of the graph he is drawing as "x squared
minus something" [lines 937 - 939J.
Figure 35: Mike's sketch of the integral of a linear function

182
Sherly asks for clarification, and Mike continues to explain that he is picking a
point to start and then reading the value of the graph y = 2x to determine the slope of
each of the segments he is going to draw. I ask Mike what he is doing and he states that
he is "making an integral... from a graph" [line 954 - 956). Mike then explains that the
slope of the parabola he has created can be read from the graph he began with [line 975 -
976J. He notes that if a student had already learned derivatives, they would be "used to
seeing it like that", referring to the parabola and a line being related in this way, except
for the idea of "picking a point to start at". Mike states: [lines 983 - 988 j:
Mike: and like you know, when they start doing

that they start realizing... what is the
derivative... a graph of the slopes... what
did I make that off of? the slopes...
Sherly: can you explain that? for me it's easier for
me to see the integral and then ask to get the
derivative because you can see like the slope
changing
Mike: but it's harder to do it like that it's easier to
just go backwards it's not...
I ask, "When you say 'making an integral' what does that mean to you?". Mike
responds, "well like using information or like points or the graph... making a graph well I
don't know... I wouldn't say like the area underneath it or something is that what it
means...no..." [lines 990 - 994|. Mike notes that the graph he has made has "the slope
of some other graph" [line 997].
Lines 998- 1130
I then ask the students to consider that they are talking to a fellow student who
wants help understanding the FTC, and that I will be the student. I ask first what they
think a derivative is. Sherly states, "the slope between two points on the integral" [line
1011). Mike interjects, "no, no a derivative of a graph is a graph of the slopes at

183
individual points you know like points" [line 1013 - 1014]. Sherly adds "and the closer
the points are, the more precise". I ask the group what an integral is, and Brian asks
about the difference between a definite and an indefinite integral [line 1023]. Robert
responds that "one is on a fixed boundary and one's on like...anywhere", adding, "but
it's like if you want to evaluate it from 2 to 5 that's when you use that fundamental
theorem of calculus thing".
At this point I ask Mike to go to the board to draw a graph [line 1034 - 1035]. He
draws a linear function with a positive slope and a y intercept of zero. Then students then
note that the derivative of this linear graph would be a constant. Mike then draws a
parabola, and Brian questions him as to why the derivative of the parabola would be a
linear, increasing graph that passes through the origin. Mike, Brian and Robert describe
the graph of the parabola in terms of its slope and how the linear graph is a plot of the
slopes of the parabola [lines 1103 - 1118]. Brian states that if the function were y = x ,
the derivative would be y = 2x. Brian then recalls the idea of "taking the exponent down"
when finding expressions for derivatives.
In this segment, the students focus their discussion upon drawing graphs of
integrals and derivatives and explaining connections between the two ideas. At the
beginning of the segment, Sherly notes verbally that the FTC allows one "to reconstruct
a function / from knowledge about its derivatives" and recalls that the relationship
between integrals and derivatives might be more than one simply being the opposite of
the other. Mike explains that a person creating the graph of an integral would likely
notice that the derivative of the graph they draw will be the graph they began with. When
184
I ask the students to elaborate on these ideas, Mike draws a graph of a linear function,
and notes that he does not need to specify a particular equation for it, other than to note it
is increasing and passes through the origin. He verbally relates the process by which he
would draw an integral of a function/: taking function values of/and drawing a series of
linked segments with slopes given by those function values (a process analogous to
Euler's method). Mike does this graphically, drawing on a paper without a grid. While
he uses numbers drawn from the equation y = 2x, he uses them as guides for his sketch in
Figure 35, without plotting exact values.
Mike states that he knows that the result of his process should be a parabola
[lines 937 - 939] but uses this as confirmation of his result, not as a part of his
explanation of the process. Mike suggests that a similar process of coordination of
known results might occur for the learner drawing a graph of an integral in the fashion he
has used. The student may realize that the derivative of the integral graph is the graph he
or she began with. He notes the difference between the process of drawing a derivative
and drawing an integral: in drawing an integral in the way he has described, there must be
a "point to start at". Mike acknowledges that integrals are associated with area but
suggests here that area need not be involved in the process he has described.
In describing the difference between a definite and indefinite integral in response
to Brian's question, Robert notes that definite integrals have boundaries while indefinite
integrals do not. He explains [lines 1031 - 1032] that the FTC is used when there is a
boundary. The discussion then returns to the process of drawing derivatives and
integrals, and the students verbally explain how to find a derivative by examining a graph
and describing how its slope changes [lines 1034 - 1118]. Brian suggests that the
185
process they have described is correct because he recalls that the derivative of y = x2 is y
= 2x, coordinating the results from two different representations.
5.2.5. Segment 3: Lines 1131 - 1439
Line 1131-1235
Sherly asks [at line 10651, "but see like when they tell you to do it backwards
that's what I don't understand", and Robert responded, "Add up all the things under the
graph". At line 1135,1 ask Mike to talk about how to do that, and Sherly states "I want
to know how to integrate this". Sherly asks Mike to draw a "squiggly graph" and he
does, drawing the graph shown Figure 36. Robert says, "you want the area from like
where you start to that point, I think" [line 1144|, and "the total area at that point" [line
1148].
Figure 36: A "squiggly" graph
Mike adds [line 1156-1168}:
Mike: that's why if you're accumulating areas you

have to pick a starting point you can't just
say from if you start from here this would be
zero if you start from here this would be
zero and go up
Brian: so that's like if the limits are from 2 to 5 or
something is that where that would come
into play
186
Mike: it's like from 2 to infinity or something....

Brian: all right
Mike: You know
Brian: you don't need an ending point
Mike: No
Brian: just a place to start and then from here on
Mike: just a place to start you pick another point
and the graph looks different like shifted
over, all right
Sherly then asks how to "make an integral". Mike says that to draw the integral,
one should "take that next unit and grab... try to estimate the area" [line 1174] and then
plot it. Brian notes that where the graph Mike has drawn (Figure 36) is negative, one
would have to subtract, since the part under the graph would be considered "negative
area" line 1181 J, thus causing the graph of the integral to decrease. Mike has drawn two
rectangles under the graph in figure 36 (see Figure 37) and notes that the area of the
second rectangle under his graph is larger than the previous. He starts to draw a plot of
the accumulated area, and notes that the slope of the graph he is drawing is determined by
the graph of the function (Figure 36). Mike states "I would just take a slope and draw a
line with that slope it's hard to draw it and interpret it either way" [line 1995 - 1197].
Figure 37: Mike draws rectangles under the graph in Figure 36

187
Brian asks Mike how he has begun to plot points to create the graph of the
integral, and Mike responds affirmatively to Brian's question "just find the area of that
(referring to the rectangles in Figure 37) and then what ever that is that then you just go
up?" referring to the value of the areas of those rectangles and the change in the graph of
the accumulated area [line 1201 - 1202]. Robert adds that the graph of the integral
"would just go up all to where it (referring to the graph in Figure 36) "crosses the x axis"
[line 1211 j. Mike continues draws the graph of the accumulated area, but observes that
he does not want to make it "straight", and indicates that he is unsure of how to draw the
graph so that it illustrates the accumulation of the areas of the rectangles he has drawn,
each of which is only slightly taller than the previous (Figure 38). I suggest to Mike that
he draw more rectangles between the graph and the x axis. Mike does this, but states that
each rectangle is "like the same" to him. Brian suggests that the graph of the integral will
"come down" after the graph in Figure 36 crosses the x axis.
J
-J
f
i
Figure 38: Additional rectangles
Lines 1236- 1439
Mike then states that his preference would be to draw the graph of the integral
using the strategy of taking the values of the given graph and creating a graph with slopes
188
equal to those values. He then erases the rectangles and states, "once you hit this here
you start to have negative slopes and so you'll start to go down that's how I would see it
like the slope changes instead of like adding on" [lines 1255 - 1257]. I ask Brian what he
sees on the board (Figure 39), and he replies: "it looks like a graph of area at that point a
total graph of area for each point I guess above the graph or on the graph" [lines 1274 -
1275]. I ask Sherly if Mike has "drawn an integral" and Sherly says yes. Mike says "I
think of it as slopes changing" [line 1281 and lines 1322 - 1326].
••X
Figure 39: The graph of the accumulated area under the graph in Figure 36
I ask the group if what Mike has drawn has anything to do with the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus. Mike refers to the Ostebee and Zorn text, where it says that one can
always find the graph of the antiderivative of any function, given the function is
continuous and given a "base point". Mike and Brian start to talk about the two graphs
in Figure 39 [lines 1322 - 1343]. In the excerpt below, I have added the text in the
brackets to make clear what the students are referring to. The given function in Figure 36
is called/and the integral added in figure 39 is called } / .

189
Mike: this \f\ is increasing here [on the right side

of the y axisj so when I draw graph I have to
make sure I'm kind of curving upwards and
then when it [/] starts to level off its [ J / J
kind of like a straight line and then it [/]
starts to decrease so it's \\f\ kind of
curving that way [concave down] cause the
slope it is changing you know as this \f\
changes I look at where this [ / / ] is at and
then I draw a line you know like according
to it
Brian: because once it [J/|crosses there (the y
axis) you're still adding on but you're adding
on less
Mike: Less.
Sherly: that's why it's going down?
Mike: Yeah like here [points to the maximum
value of f\ is like the highest point so that's
like the steepest slope [of J / ] .
Brian: would it [\f | go down though because
you're still adding on to it
Mike: When it goes down
Brian: but it [ If ]would never cross zero
Pantozzi: What are you talking about?
Mike: If this when like
Brian: Once it gets like., once you get into the
negatives [referring t o / | then it [ j f ) would
start going down right
Mike: Yeah, if this was going like...down here
[pointing to the minimum value of / ] the
slope of this thing \\f\ would be like 3
down you know... that's how like
Brian: I remember we had to match up points like
on the axis like where it \f\ was at 0 and you
had to draw line up and it should be like
that's where the curve [ { / ] it changes
direction
I ask the group if they could summarize what they had said thus far for the
fictional person in the task. Sherly then asks if the group can connect what they have
done with the statement of the FTC she read in the Hughes-Hallett text, which involved
the subtraction F{b) - F(a) [lines 1390 - 1409]:

190
Sherly: can you put these points up there like the f

of b and f of a and use that to explain you
know like use their terms in the thing where
it says the integral between a and b
whatever.
Mike: I guess so. What they're saying is...
Sherly: yes, just actually point it out. If
Mike: At here, the area of this [he points to the
graph of/1 is like right there, [Mike points to
a point on J / ] that's what that thing's
saying, the a and the b,
Sherly: and that's the
Mike: yeah, hold on... [looking at the book]
Sherly: Isn't it?
Robert: On the bottom graph, just the integral
from...
Mike: Oh, you have the integral... so what is this
saying ...so to find the area of this you take
this point and this point and you do that
minus that [Mike puts two dots on j f ]
Brian: To find the area?
Mike: The area of this is like...that's all weird
Brian: That minus that, if that point was like say
12, and that point's at 2
Mike: You've go to minus this from that
Brian: The area between those two points would be
ten?
Sherly: Right.
Mike adds brackets to show how the area under the function/can be found by
subtracting the y values of two points on the graph of J / , creating Figure 40. At this
point, Robert leaves the session for a prior engagement.

191
,0' --"'"
J*
Figure 40: Illustrating F(b) - F(a)
In this segment, the students discuss the process of drawing the integral as an
antiderivative of a given function and as a plot of accumulated area under the graph of a
given function. The discussion centers around the creation of the graphical displays in
Figures 37 through 40, to which the students do not assign any symbolic representations.
In contrast to his earlier explanations of how to draw an integral, Mike draws rectangles
under the graph from Figure 36, and explains how to plot the accumulated areas of these
rectangles. The students create the graph of the integral by attending to the graphical
behavior of the given function, noting, for example, that when the graph of the given
function in Figure 36 reaches zero, the graph of the integral should stop increasing. Mike
soon erases the rectangles he has drawn and states his preference for thinking about the
process of drawing the integral as one of plotting a graph as a sequence of slopes
determined by the given graph.

192
The students use graphical representations to link together ideas from the first
segment of the session. Near the end of this segment, Mike and Brian talk without
disagreement about the same graph using two different methods for how to construct it.
Soon after, Sherly asks if the statement of the FTC that represents a calculation of a
definite integral can be linked with the graphical display. Mike states this connection
immediately, showing that the difference between values on the integral graph represents
the subtraction j f(x)dx = F(b)-F(a) . Mike asserts that the FTC is a result that
expresses the idea that one can draw an antiderivative for any given graph. Mike does
not note the additional statement in the Ostebee & Zorn text that these antiderivatives are
area accumulation functions, but agrees that the antiderivative graph he has drawn can be
used to calculate area.
5.2.7. Segment 4: Lines 1440 - 2315
Lines 1440- 1590
I ask the students to discuss what they would say to a student who had asked for
help understanding the FTC. I leave the room. The students then review with each other
the creation of the "integral" graph. Mike creates a new graph on his paper, a parabola
with an axis of symmetry on the y axis and shifted down from the origin. Mike, Brian,
and Sherly discuss the process verbally as Mike draws the graph. He recreates the graph
twice after expressing dissatisfaction with his first attempt (the graph on the left in Figure
41). Mike, Brian and Sherly talk through the creation of the integral graph in lines 1480
- 1530, noting how the integral graph changes direction when the graph of the parabola
intersects the x axis. Mike notes that he drew the graph of the integral in the top right of
193
figure 41 to be a "constant line" decreasing when the parabola reached its minimum
value.
Figure 41: Mike's sketches of the integral of a parabolic function
Mike and Sherly then discuss what happens when one picks a different base point:
the graph of the integral shifts up or down [lines 1549 - 1574|. Mike creates the graph in
the bottom right of Figure 41, starting the graph of the integral at the point where the
parabola intersects the x axis, rather than a bit to the left of that point as he did in the
previous set of graphs in the top right of Figure 41. He draws part of the graph of the
integral, noting that it will simply be the same graph as the previous integral graph, but
shifted down vertically. Mike suggests that this "makes sense" [lines 1575 - 1587]:
Mike: Which makes sense like because like you

know when you have x squared something
when you do the anti derivative you come
up with
Sherly: 2x
Mike: 2x to the third... something x to the third plus
C
Sherly: Oh.
194
Mike: C is that up down thing you know what I'm

saying
Sherly: Oh.
Mike: you know what I'm saying, that was like
that...
Sherly: laughs
Mike: you always had that plus C because
remember when you went back, because
when you went back it doesn't matter
because when you do the derivative it
doesn't matter there's no base point you're
just doing the slopes off of it.
Lines 1591 - 1718
Mike asks Brian and Sherly how they would explain what they have done to
"someone who doesn't know". The students discuss how they might do this, talking
about how they might explain the creation of an integral graph. They decide to write the
process down on paper, using graphs to illustrate. Brian notes, "I don't think there's any
way to make this like concise... anywhere the graph's below the x axis" [lines 1636 -
1637]. Mike wonders if they should state that area is involved, and Sherly agrees, but
Mike is unsure about how to write this [line 1649]. Mike then draws a new parabola
(Figure 42) and notes that the area from point C is "something" then "less plus" then "not
adding any area" at point D. Mike begins to draw the graph on the bottom of Figure 42.
Mike points out that the graph of the integral (at the bottom of Figure 42) goes "that far
down" (in Sherly's words) because the graph of the function/at the top of Figure 42 was
negative "this whole time".

195
9»& * &* r",vvi c
o*
Figure 42: Description of how to draw the graph of an integral
Lines 1719-1840
The three students decide to write some additional sentences about the process.
Brian notes "any cross of the axis changes [the] direction" of the integral graph [line
1741 [. Mike states "the slope of the anti derivative is the value of the original graph at
that point" [lines 1742 - 1743J. The three students discuss alternative phrasings this last
statement for the next two minutes, pointing to the graph in Figure 42. Mike adds,
"Yeah, it's like each point has a different slope" [line 1804]. They examine the graphs in
the figure above and note, for example, that the value of the given graph is zero, and the
196
slope of the integral graph is zero (at the point labeled D in figure 42). They continue to
point to and make reference to the graph as they speak. Brian notes: "Putting things down
on paper is always tough" [line 18361. to which Mike responds "You miss so much
stuff...you can't put it all down. Sherly adds "It's easier like when you have like the
transparencies" [line 1839]. As Sherly says this, Brian and Sherly make a "flipping"
motion with their hands, possibly referring to the idea of making a series of pictures to
animate the process of making the graph of the integral.
Lines 1841-2041
The three students ask themselves if they have answered all the questions in the
task. Mike expresses that the FTC says that it is "possible" to make an antiderivative for
any continuous function [line 1896]. Sherly states, "so the theorem is for, in English, to
show that you can draw an integral of any graph" [lines 1913 - 1914]. They express that
they do not believe that what they have done can, or needs to be, proven [lines 1942 -
1944]. Mike states that there is "there's no mention of area" when looking at the
statement "Af is an antiderivative of/' on page 322 of the Ostebee-Zorn text. (Note that
the phrase Mike refers to does not use the word area, but in the paragraph above, Af is
referred to by the authors as an "area function".) Sherly states, however, "can you just
write that down, when you break it down into rectangles and add the areas up, it's the
same thing" [lines 1978 - 1979]. Sherly states that she believes that area is important to
why the FTC is true [line 2029 - 2032] pointing to the bottom of page 170 in the Hughes-
Hallett textbook.
197
Lines 2042-2315
I return to the room at the students' request. Mike explains that he did not think
about creating the graph in terms of areas [lines 2088 - 2089] and states that the FTC
says that "there is an antiderivative" and that it is "possible" to create an antiderivative
[lines 2126 - 2127]. I ask the students if they have any questions, given that they
believe they have responded to the task. Brian wonders how the graph in Figure 42 could
be seen as a "representation of total area" without someone knowing in advance that it
was [line 2184]. Mike gives an area argument for the creation of the graph on the bottom
of Figure 42 [lines 2190 - 2194]:
Mike: well, if you look at it, you're starting from

here, [the point labeled C on the graph on
the top of Figure 42] you do have a positive
area, which I could say would be that much,
[he points to the amount indicated by the
graph on the bottom of Figure 42 [
Brian: OK
Mike: and once you start decreasing from it, you
know...
Brian: This will eventually come up...Because you
started with point C... You keep adding on
Brian refers to the point labeled C in the figure, noting that he did not see the graph as
representing total area because he had not used point C as the starting point for the
accumulation [line 22031.
Mike then repeats his thought about the FTC: "but it's so simple the way they put
it out in one line", referring to the statement of the FTC in Ostebee & Zorn text . [line
22301. Brian asks how Riemann sums come into play with this, stating that he does not
see a connection [lines 2239 - 2240]. Sherly notes that Riemann sums are a way to
"represent the area" and Mike suggests that area is a way to show the graph of the
198
antiderivative [line 2255]. Mike adds that the Riemann sum is a way to find an "actual
number" where the graph of the integral stops somewhere, "you know, the f of a to b type
thing, it would give you a number" [lines 2260 - 2263].
The students suggest that the best way for someone to understand the FTC is by
"seeing it done" [line 2293], adding "Like you could bring in a video for the student of us
doing math" [line 2297]. Sherly suggests graph paper as a means to make their
demonstration more precise [lines 2301 - 2312]:
Sherly: Something more precise, where we had the

graph paper and we drew out a correct,
Brian: Transparencies
Sherly: Yeah, transparencies so that, cause he was
also saying because you start at the same
point...you know...easier that way
Brian: Put that graph on top of it, and say, this
point and then have it done with graph paper
Pantozzi: OK. I think we can come up with something
like that for you
Mike: Take like 10 transparencies, put them on top
of each other, where each one is the next
step and that make a little video like a flip
book
Brian: Flip book
Mike: Basically what it is the only way to learn
this stuff is to see it done
In this segment, the students recap their statements from the previous segment,
adding the additional result that a change in the "starting point", as Mike terms it, will
create a integral graph that is vertically shifted from another integral graph; that is,
J f{t)dt=\ f(t)dt + C for some constants a, b and C. Mike makes this claim first
graphically, and then coordinates the result with a verbal and symbolic statement that
recollection that antiderivatives can be shifted vertically. He supports this symbolic

199
statement with a graphical explanation about the meaning of the derivative as the graph
of the slopes of a function [lines 1575 - 1587J. Mike again acknowledges that the FTC
can be used to find the area under a graph, but continues to stress the existence of an
antiderivative as a primary meaning of the FTC.
The students look back at the session and reflect upon what might provide the best
presentation of the ideas they discussed. They agree that it might be best for the learner
to see a dynamic graphical representation accompanied by a verbal explanation, and that
the verbal explanations would not be sufficient. In their discussion in lines 1719 - 1840,
the students bring this point up a number of times, as they report their own dissatisfaction
with their verbal representations of the process of plotting integral graphs. Throughout
this segment and in the previous two, the students relied on verbal and graphical
representations, and did not use the symbolic notation for antiderivatives or accumulation
functions. In particular, Mike refers a number of times to refers to the "informal
version" of the FTC on the top of page 322 of the Ostebee & Zorn text, [e.g. line 2225]
but not the "formal version" a few lines down on that same page. Instead, he
communicates the idea that the derivative f{t)dt \sj\x) by explaining that the drawing
of a graph with particular slopes or the plotting of accumulated area produces the same
graph.
In this session as a whole, the students made sense of statements and meanings of
the FTC through discussing the creation of the graphs of "integrals". Without discussing
a definition of the word "integral", the students created graphs of "integrals" through two
different graphical processes which had the same result. The students used the fact that
200
the processes of plotting J f(t)dt and \ f(x)dx produced the same graph to draw a
connection between integrals and derivatives. They also use this graphical observation to
rb
give meaning to the statement f{x)dx = F(b)-F(a). This statement represented a
subtraction of values on the "integral" graph, and the area under the graph of / . The
students do not call F the antiderivative of/, but do note that/is the derivative of F.
In focusing the majority of the session on the creation of graphs, the students
assigned meaning to verbal and symbolic representations largely from talk about those
graphs. Both derivatives and integrals where discussed as graphical ideas, with symbolic
representations used to support of describe the results. In particular, the statement

rb
f(x)dx = F(b) — F{a) was given a meaning using a graph. The meaning of this
Ja
statement did not drive the students' inquiry in this session, but was an outgrowth of the
students' discussions of graphs. The students did not explain that the derivative of the
function y = x2 was the function y = 2x, instead using this known result to support their
inquiry into the creation of graphs through verbally defined processes.

201
5.3. Session 2, Group 1, July 24,2003
In this section, I detail the communications of Angela, Magda, and Romina during
their second research session. In the previous session, the students had considered the
statement | f(x)dx = g(b)-g(a) as a statement of the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus, associating the expression f(x)dx with the area under the graph of a
function between two x values a and b. The students talked about the graph of the
function g as a plot of the accumulated area of a series of rectangles. The question of
why g was an antiderivative off arose as a question at the end of the first session. For the
second session, 1 asked these students to consider the meaning of g as the antiderivative
off, a meaning which was used by the students in the first session but not extensively
discussed. At the beginning of the session held July 24, 2003, I ask Angela, Magda, and
Romina why the function g is the antiderivative of/in the symbolic statement of the
Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
5.3.1. Segment 1: Lines 50 - 475
In this first segment, the students draw graphs to investigate the question of why
antiderivatives can be used to calculate the area under the graph of a function. Romina is
late for the beginning of the session and is not present at this time.
Lines 50 - 225
rb
After I present the equation f(x)dx = g(b)- g(a) to Angela and Magda, I state
Ja
that a statement of the FTC using this equation would include the idea that the function/
is the derivative of the function g. Referring to the previous session, I ask Angela and
Magda how they know that they needed to use the antiderivative of/ to find the area
between the graph of/and the x axis on a particular interval. Magda asks [line 95] if I
202
am asking "how do know that you are supposed to go up a power". I respond that I am
asking why, in general, antiderivatives can be used to find the area under a graph. I note
that the particular example of power functions might be useful, and then leave the room.
Magda suggests first that the function for the integral of a given function must be
a "higher power" [line 146] because of the accumulation of the areas between the graph
of the given function and the x axis. She draws a graph of y = x2 on her paper, and talks
about how to create the graph of the integral of this function |lines 146 - 150|:
Well my thinking of why it has to go to the higher power is

because if you're adding up the area underneath and you are
going here and are going here and going here you are
adding up what is under here and you are stacking like this
little thing, like, more on top of that, so like at this point
here, you have this area and this area
Figure 43: Magda's graph of y = .r and its integral
Magda draws Figure 43 as she talks, dividing the area under the graph of y = x2 into
sections, and pointing to the graph of the integral she has drawn. Angela asks [line 154 -
155] whether the integral function need only be "more than" the given function rather
than necessarily a "higher power" exponent. Magda then writes the formula for the
antiderivative of y = x" on her paper, illustrating symbolically the notion of a "higher

203
power" with the expression (1 / n)x . Magda then draws a small segment on the graph
of her integral and notes that the slope of the integral graph is equal to the value of the
given function at any particular point. Magda asks, "'How does that tie in?" [line 177 j.
She then suggests a specific numerical example. For the given function y = x2, the slope
of the graph of the integral would be 16 at x - 4, . Magda asks, "but why?" [line 184).
Angela agrees that their task should be to "figure out why that works" [line 197 j.
Magda then says that she recalls, from her high school calculus class, the area
between a graph and the .v axis being "filled in" as a graph of the accumulated area was
also displayed, using the Geometer's Sketchpad computer software [lines 198 - 202].
Angela states that she recalls this as well. Angela adds that "it makes sense" for the slope
of the integral ofy =x 2 to be 16 at x = 4 [lines 211 -225):
Angela: Like because like if this (referring to the

integral graph) is this (filling in the area
under the graph of x squared) it makes sense
for this to be the slope of that because that is
the rate that that is changing
Magda: Say that again
Angela: Like if this graph is the area under here it
makes sense for like you know for 16 to be
the slope at 4 because that is the rate at this
is changing like that's rate that the area is
increasing you know what I'm saying?
Magda: mmm humm
Angela: X squared. I don't know if that is just like
pointing out obvious stuff
Magda: No because that's good because as you go
higher
Angela: The slope gets steeper
Magda: but the area,
Angela: Gets larger
Magda: you're adding more area
Angela: it's changing at a steeper pace
204
Lines 225 - 475
Magda picks up the Foerster Calculus text and looks through the pages. Angela
asks what "pluc C" represents, and Magda explains that it is the "initial condition" that
tells you where to start your graph. Magda then gives a numerical example, using y = x2
(•4 1 1 I3
as the given function. She writes J l x = - ( 4 ) —(1) , explaining that—(4) is the value
3 3 3
of the area under the graph of y = x2 from 0 to 4. and that — (l)3 is the area from 0 to 1.
Magda draws Figure 44 as she talks.
t.
Figure 44: Magda's graph illustrating the area under the graph from x = a to x = b
Subtracting these two areas, Magda explains, will give the area from 1 to 4.
Magda also points out that she is subtracting the y-values of the two points on the graph
of y = }x 3 . Both students ask themselves why this is the case [lines 364 - 372]:
Angela: Why does it work out that the integral is...

where is that other thing... this point here
minus this point here is this area here I
understand like you are adding it but why is
it the integral I'm playing teacher... like do
you get what I'm saying I know how it
works but why?
Magda: Because this function happens to be
Angela: Why does it happen to be there's got to be a
reason right
Magda: Well
Angela: a mathematical reason... think... why is this
true maybe...do you know what I'm saying?
205
Magda explains what she would do if she was not aware that she needed to find
the difference in values of the function y = }x 3 , referring back to what the group did at
the end of the previous session [lines 375 - 389]:
Magda: ...and I was asked to, you know, draw a

graph of the area I would just plot points
Angela: Right but you wouldn't have something
really accurate because you have to go with
super super tiny
Magda: Yeah, so if I didn't know that, if 1 didn't
know that this was one third, if I didn't
know that...
Angela: Right
Magda: Then basically were going back to the thing
of Riemann sums
Angela: Right but what I'm saying is we do know
this. All right we do know this, even if we
didn't, why is... forget that we don't we
know this... why does this just happen to be
the graph of the area underneath it's
antiderivative... is that the right word? I hate
math terms
Magda: Why...
Angela: Why is this graph the area under here
besides adding up like that why is it the
integral because actually now I'm curious
(laughs) we should find out.
Magda draws a new graph while speaking about her idea that "adding on more
area" should result in a graph that is "steeper" than the original graph. In creating this
new graph (Figure 45) Magda notes that if the original graph started to decrease, the
graph of the integral would continue to increase, but at a slower rate | lines 429 - 4511:
Magda: But then also because we have a growing

graph, but say we had something like this
(she draws a graph that is increasing and
decreasing)
Angela: Then it would change to like it would go
down and then it would go back up right
Magda: (Starts to draw a new graph.)
Magda: Cause then it be adding more area,
206
Angela: No it would keep going up because you're

still adding on area It would only go down if
it went below the x
Magda: But it's like slows down here., goes up...
Angela: The rate is different
Magda: It goes up... it's like
Angela: You're starting at 0
Magda: you can start wherever because that's the
whole point of C, what C is
Angela: But if your area is starting at 0 you have to
start at 0 don't you?
Magda: Yes, OK.
Angela: OK, sorry.
Magda: So it's like growing growing growing higher
then still growing but at a slower pace here.
It never like goes down, it's just going at a
slower pace, and then it starts picking up
again..
Angela: Yeah.
Magda: So it's one of those, then its concave up,
concave down...
Angela: Yeah.
Magda: ... concave up
Figure 45: Magda's graph of the integral of a cubic polynomial function
Magda adds that the graph of the accumulated area of the constant function x = 1
would be a linear function that increased at a constant rate of 1, and draws Figure 46
while she says this. Angela concurs, noting that the integral graph of a constant function
would be a graph of a line. Magda adds that she does not know why the equation for the
207
integral "goes up" by exactly one power in the exponent, and Angela states that she is
curious about why this is the case [line 389].
Figure 46: Magda's graph of the integral of a constant function
In lines 50 - 475, Magda interprets the integral as an accumulation function, and
uses this interpretation to create a graph a pair of graphs to represent a function and its
integral. She supports the appearance of her integral graph by appealing to her
knowledge of a symbolic formula for the antiderivative of a power function. Magda
also recalls a dynamic graphical representation of area "filling in" under the graph of a
function. Magda and Angela explain graphically that the graph of the integral increases
at a greater rate because of the accumulation of greater and greater areas under the graph
of y = x2 on each successive interval. Angela then makes the verbal statement that the
graph of the accumulated area of the function/ should change at a rate equal to the value
of/. Magda uses symbols to show that the area under the graph of y = x2 can be
calculated, but uses graphs to show how this calculation of the area represents a
subtraction of two accumulated areas.
After asking why what they have stated might be true, Angela and Magda turn to
graphical representations, without a given symbolic equation. They use a graph to explain
208
that when a given graph is positive and increasing, the slope of the integral graph is
positive and increasing. When the given graph is positive and decreasing, the slope of
the integral is positive but decreasing (Figure 45). The students then use the graph of a
constant function, without assigning an equation to it, to illustrate that the integral of a
constant function is an increasing linear function. They create the graph of the integral
by referring to accumulation of the area, and connect the graphical result with the idea
that the integral of a power function has an exponent that is exactly one "power" higher
than the given function.
In this segment, the students approach the question of why antiderivatives are
used to calculate area without making any one representation primary. Magda and Angela
begin with the graph of y = x2 and the idea that the integral graph is created by the
accumulation of area, and coordinate the graphical result of plotting accumulated area of
an increasing function (a "faster growing graph" [line 455]) with the symbolic result that
integrals involve a "higher power" exponent. The students also numerically illustrate that
the slope of the integral of y = x2 at a particular point is equal to the value of the y = x2 at
that same x value [lines 183 - 184[. In asking why the slope of the graph of the
accumulated area would be equal to the value of the given graph, Angela and Magda
rephrase the question posed in the task in a new verbal form.
Referring to the graph of y = x2 and its integral (as yet unassigned an equation)
Angela makes the verbal statement (lines 211 - 217) that the graph of the accumulated
area must change at a rate equal to the given graph. She accompanies her verbal
statement by pointing to the graph of y = x2, noting that its height determines the
steepness of the graph of the integral. The statement that the rate of change of the
209
accumulated area function is determined by the value of the given function can be
considered another way of saying that the accumulated area graph is an antiderivative.
The students, however, do not make state this relationship in that particular form. Magda
[lines 300 - 308] assigns a particular symbolic expression to the accumulated area graph,
namely y — ^x , and explains how the area under the graph of y = x2 would be found by
a process of subtraction. These examples prompt Angela to ask why this particular
expression is the correct one to use, and why antiderivatives are involved in the general
case.
Throughout this segment, the students use symbolic representations to suggest
graphical representations, and make graphical representations to support their use of
symbolic examples. When Magda and Angela then construct and explain Figure 45,
[lines 423 - 4471, they talk about the rate of change of the accumulated area graph as it is
determined by the given graph. The students do not calculate areas of rectangles and sum
them, (as in the first session) but verbally describe how to construct the graph of the
integral from the given function. In so doing, they use Angela's idea about the rate of
change of the accumulated area being determined by the given function. Angela again
asks why the graph they are making is "the integral" [line 458], and the students create
Figure 46, graphically testing Magda's verbal statement that accumulation leads to a
"higher power" function. They find graphically that the integral of a constant function is
a linear function, which supports the use of y — \x3 as the accumulated area function for
y=x\
In this segment, Angela and Magda approached the task of answering the question
"why is an antiderivative used to calculate area" by coordinating their knowledge of a

210
particular symbolic antiderivative with their thoughts about how to construct any
accumulated area graph. The students end this segment without addressing the "why" but
find that their use of verbal, symbolic, and graphical representations mutually reinforce
the idea that the use of antiderivatives is a reasonable one, consistent across
representational approaches. Using a particular symbolic antiderivative creates a graph
that appears to plot accumulated area, and creating an accumulated area graph appears to
result in a graph that has a '"higher power" exponent.
5.3.3. Segment 2: Lines 476 - 810
In this segment, Romina arrives, and Angela and Magda recap their discussion
thus far. Then the three students examine and discuss a graph of the accumulated area
created with the Geometer's Sketchpad.
Lines 476 - 691
Romina arrives, and I return to the room to ask Angela and Magda to summarize
what they have said thus far. I ask the three students "why the antiderivative is used to
fb
calculate area", again referring to the equation f(x)dx = g{b)-g{a) where /"is the
derivative of g. I note the particular example of how to use the antiderivative of y = x2 to
find the area under the graph on a particular interval. There is then some discussion about
the use of the word integral:

Magda: yeah like why are we taking the integral
Romina: why are we taking the integral or why is g
the integral of/
Angela: why does it work out that in this equation
that that's the integral like why...
Romina: because if you take the integral of a function
it's the functions integral (laughing)
211
Magda again mentions her recollection of how the area under a graph was "filled
in" on the computer in her high school lessons, and restates her idea that an integral is a
"higher power". Romina then states her idea about the question [line 595 - 600|:
Romina: can you say something about taking the area,

since we take the area, it goes to the next
power because it's like the cumulative
function, you're talking the area at every
single point and that's why it has to be
bigger
Angela: Yeah, that's what Magda said...
Magda: yeah but with sine and cosine that you're not
exactly taking it to the next power
At this point, I suggest that I can present the students with a demonstration which
dynamically illustrates the area between the graph and the x axis being "filled in" while a
graph of the accumulated area is simultaneously created. Magda's asks me to do this and
I create a display with the Geometer's Sketchpad [Figure 47]. As point B is moved, the
area is filled in and the "red graph" of accumulated area is plotted.
Figure 47: Graph of a function/and its accumulated area function from x = 2
1 explain that the "red graph" tells you "how much area you've got" [line 6431
and that the area is measured using trapezoids drawn between the graph and the x axis.
The students state that they recall a similar, but less "advanced", demonstration in their
high school class, and then talk about the graphs [lines 652 - 658]:
212
Romina: Doesn't the integral, does the integral

measure the slope?
Angela: Umm.
Magda: No the original graph is the slope of the
integral
Angela: Yeah
Romina: So then see how it goes, the integral
increases and then decreases
Magda: because you have negative area. That's
why...
Angela: Down it takes away.
There is a brief continuation of the discussion about the meaning of the word "integral"
[lines 683 - 6911: Angela asks why the graph of the accumulated area is the integral, and
Romina responds that "someone named it" that.
Lines 692-810
I state: "I as the student know that the integral is the area. I just don't understand
where antiderivatives come in like why you're doing this whole formula thing". Romina
replies: "We're saying that antiderivatives and integrals are the same thing right?" [line
7041. She adds: "I use them interchangeably but I keep noticing that they keep saying
antiderivative and I keep saying integral so I'm beginning to wonder" [line 709 - 710|.
Magda then brings up another idea [lines 711 - 722):
Magda: How I understand it is the anti derivative can

start anywhere like you know you can like
start drawing it anywhere and you have that
like + C thing
Angela: I remember that
Magda: But an integral is just a function OK maybe
I'm not understanding this... integral may
Romina: So I could move this whole red line up
Magda: Yes.
Romina: But I can't do it with an integral?
Magda: What is
Angela: The red line is what
Romina: It's the anti derivative
213
I then state that in the Sketchpad sketch, it is the area under the graph that is being
plotted, and then show the area accumulated to the left of x = 2 [figure 48 j.
Figure 48: Graph of the accumulated area of/to the left of x = 2
Magda then refers to this display [lines 730 - 738]:
Magda: See there even though you have a positive

area between zero and two
Angela: Collectively right
Romina: This is... (gets up to point at the screen)
Magda: No, over, zero and two
Romina: This
Magda: but the line is below but it's still growing it's
still going up because the area is positive but
the reason it's in the negative because the
whole thing is like minus 6 that...that's your
initial, your initial condition, which is the C.
Romina states that she is not following Magda's train of thought, and Magda asks for an
adjustment to the computer image [Figure 49] [lines 747 - 757]:
Magda: So, OK, can you start drawing the anti

derivative from zero
Romina: So OK.
Magda: See stop... Can you stop it at 2 see it's six..
and
Romina: OK.
Angela: OK.
214
Magda: .. .and its kind of like he moved that OK and

can you see that when he started at 2 that
whole line got moved down to, got moved
down to, like down six. six
Romina: That's not the same graph I saw 2 seconds
ago
Magda: Yeah it is
Angela: Yes it is. It's just higher up
Figure 49: Graph of the function/from Figure 47 and its accumulated area function from
JC = 0
Magda gets up to point directly at the computer image on the dry erase board. She
notes that when the area accumulation began at x = 2 (Figure 501 the graph of the integral
"got moved down" approximately 6 units, and that this new graph is simply "higher up".
Figure 50: Graph of a function/and its accumulated area function from x = 0, extended
further to the right
215
Romina then states, "OK the integral is the anti derivative but the anti derivative doesn't
always have to be its integral but can the integral be the same as anti derivative can we
write the integral as a function with a plus C?" [lines 763 - 765j. The students look
through the textbook to address Romina's question. Angela looks in the glossary [lines
785-810]:
Angela: (Angela reads from the textbook.) g(x) is an

anti derivative of f(x) if and only if g'(x) =
f(x) an anti derivative is the same as an
indefinite integral an indefinite integral...
Magda: Is that...an indefinite integral is where you
are not defining a and b
Angela: Yeah
Romina: so it is the same
Magda: What
Romina: So it is the same. Did we not just read that it
is the same it is
Angela: Yeah
Magda: It's the same as an indefinite but its not the
same as a definite
Angela: OK.
Romina: Last time we were doing indefinite
Magda: No, indefinite just means it's not just defined
on that like..
Romina: Yeah
Magda: Specific...
Angela: Atob.
Magda: ...interval. Definite is a to b
Angela: (Angela reading from the text.) Indefinite
integral: g(x) is the integral of f(x)dx if and
only if g'(x) = f(x)
Romina: So if we have a...
Angela: So an integral is the same as an anti
derivative
Romina: If we're finding...
Angela: so we can use the integral as a loose term
here (laughs)
Romina: So if we're doing... take the integral from a
to b then there has to have a set integral
because you start at that point a
Angela: yeah, you're going between A and B
216
In lines 476 - 8 1 0 , the students discuss ideas about antiderivatives and area,
using the word "integral" to refer to both the area under the graph itself and the graph of
the accumulated area. The students discuss their use of the word "integral", using
graphical and verbal representations. Independently of the other students, Romina
suggests that an integral might be a "higher power" because of accumulation, but Magda
also notes here that the idea of an integral being a "higher power" exponent cannot be
applied to all functions, appealing to the symbolic examples of sine and cosine. In
looking at a dynamic graphical representation of a polynomial function f{x), the three
students describe the graph of f{t)dt as the two did before Romina's arrival, noting the
Ja
increase in the graph of | f{t)dt when/(x) is positive, and the cumulative nature of
*" Ja
[f{t)dt.
Ja
While examining the dynamic graphical representation, the students coordinate
their knowledge of a symbolic representation of a property of antiderivatives and the
behavior of f(t)dt for two different values of a. Magda first suggests an association
Ja
with the idea that antiderivatives have "initial conditions", represented symbolically by
"plus C", when she observes that J f{t)dt has a value of 0 for x = 2 and a value of -6 for
x - 0. She suggests that the addition of a constant term relates to the "starting point" of
the accumulated area under the graph of /. She refers to the dynamic graphical
representation to illustrate a vertical translation of the graph of f f(t)dt for different

Ja
values of a, noting that antiderivatives are vertical translations of each other. The
students coordinate these representations with the verbal and symbolic statements about
217
antiderivatives and integrals they look up in the textbook, finding the definition in the
glossary to be consistent with the representations they have used.
In this segment, the three students continue to respond to the initial task of the
session by using and discussing different representations and meanings associated with
integrals and antiderivatives. When the question of whether antiderivatives and integrals
are the "same thing" is posed (line 704| by Romina, Magda recalls that antiderivatives
can be translated vertically, and connects this with the behavior of the accumulated area
function shown in Sketchpad. Seeing that the accumulated area function f{t)dt
behaves like the students expect antiderivatives to behave gives the students further
evidence related to the question in the initial task. The students continue to talk about the
graph of I f(t)dt as a function, focusing on its rate of change, and again note that the
•la *""
derivative of | f{t)dt is/[line 654).

Ja
5.3.5. Segment 3: Lines 811 - 1215
The students discuss some thoughts about antiderivatives and continue to discuss
connections they have noted between antiderivatives and area. I ask them to directly
address why antiderivatives are used to calculate the area under a graph.
Lines 8 1 1 - 1070
The students decide to investigate the sine function and its integral. Romina and
Magda recall that there is a formula for this integral, but are unsure what the formula is.
They begin to draw the sine function on paper, and then start to draw its integral, using
the behavior of the sine graph as a guide [lines 883 - 893 J:
Magda: It's growing slowly

Magda: (Magda is drawing) OK it's actually
growing slowly
218
Angela: And here is where it starts decreasing, and

here, increasing
Magda: And this is growing more on this interval
Angela: Right there.
Romina: Decline
Angela: That's where it starts going down.
Magda: It's still going up
Angela: Yes, but this is where it goes down...here is
where it stops increasing so much
Romina: It's negative cosine isn't it
Magda: So this is where it crosses the zero so this is
Pi
Based upon their sketch, the group agrees that the integral is "negative cosine".
I ask again how antiderivatives are involved in finding area, pointing to the
rb
symbolic statement f(x)dx = g(b) — g(a). Romina then asks a question about the role
of "plus C in this equation, and for a few minutes, [lines 938 - 1035], the students
discuss how the antiderivatives of two graphs that differ by a constant would differ. They
explain the difference by explaining how the area between the vertically shifted graph
differs from the original given graph. They also discuss how the addition of a constant to
the given graph will cause an addition of a linear term, Cx, to the equation for the
antiderivative. Romina also notes that when you take the derivative of an integral graph,
you should get the graph you started with [lines 1036 - 1037].
Lines 1071 - 1215
Magda notes |lines 1071 - 1073] that no matter where the integral graph is
positioned vertically, the derivative of the integral graph will be the same because "the
slope is going to be always the same". I return to the room [line 1083], and the students
state that they are not "getting the question." I state:

Me as that student that you're helping feels that
antiderivative... doesn't know where, it just seems the anti
derivative just seems to be plucked out of thin air we were
219
talking about area, we were talking about figuring out area,

and then we said oh, to find the area, do the antiderivative,
and then you'll have the area, and I missed the part about
where., why is that... why is that what you have do... why
not take the derivative... why doesn't that give you the
area?
Romina notes that someone must have "correlated" the graph of the accumulated
area to the original function and seen that it was an antiderivative [lines 1116 - 1119|. I
agree that this may have happened. Romina then notes that the antiderivative is the
"opposite of taking the derivative" and that if you have a derivative, you can graph the
area of the derivative and get its integral. I ask [line 1132] what antiderivatives have to do
with area, and Romina says that she now understands the question being asked in the
session.
Magda points to the graph of accumulated area on the screen, and says that its
derivative is the given graph J{x) [line 1158|. Romina points out that this makes the area
graph the antiderivative [line 11611. I then ask why the original graph is the derivative of
the area graph. The students note that the red graph is a graph of accumulated area, and
Magda states, "you take the derivative of the red graph you're going to get the purple
graph" [lines 1178 - 1180]. I state that I do not know why this is true. Romina responds
first [lines 1182- 1193|:
Romina: because when you plot the slope of the red

graph like we the way that
Angela: that's the rate that it's changing
Romina: when we did okay because when we were
graphing the red one we were taking amount
of... amount of area underneath
Pantozzi: that w as me ...I'm sorry
Romina: because when we did that... the area...
because the slope is changing at a rate
Magda: Yes
220
Romina: when we take the derivative of the red one

we're actually graphing the initial slope that
we had to figure out the area, you see there
(pointing to the projected graph - Figure 50]
it's going faster and then it peaks and then
it's slowing down and your graph is going
like the slope hits zero and then the slope
goes up again
I ask Romina to repeat what she has just said [lines 1201 - 1211 ]:
Romina: the way the area is formed like you have a

lot of area and then the area gets smaller is
because of the rate, the way the purple slope
is changing which is the way in the purple
line is changing which is the slope the area
is caused by the changes in the slope like
more area less area so the inflection points
on your red one is caused by when your
slope goes down because you're gaining area
at less speed and when your going from
negatives you're gaining more negative
faster and then you're losing negatives...
yeah., and then when you take some so then
we take the slope of the red graph we're
essentially getting the purple graph again
because that's the slope... do you want to
add? I know that sounds really confusing
but
Angela: It's like the rate that you're accumulating
area or losing area as you go along the x axis
that's what slope is
Magda notes that she and Angela had this idea at the beginning of the session.
In lines 811 - 1215, the students respond to the question of the relationship
between antiderivatives and area by continuing to coordinate pieces of information drawn
from different representations. At the beginning of the segment, students use the
graphical representation of accumulation of area to recall the antiderivative of the sine
function. Not knowing an expression for the antiderivative, they recreate a graph and
221
then recognize it as "negative cosine". The students then continue to use verbal
representations of the idea of accumulation to discuss antiderivatives: Magda graphically
explains the difference in the integral of two vertically shifted functions, and then the
students note the corresponding symbolism for this [lines 959 - 962], Romina notes that
the derivative of an integral of a given function / would be the function/[lines 1031 -
1032|, but suggests that she is not sure of the correct symbolism for expressing this idea.
Throughout this segment the students use verbal and graphical representations of
I f(t)dt, calling it the "red graph". The students describe the graphical behavior of
Ja
[ f(t)dt to explain why the derivative of [ f(t)dt is/. In the previous segment, Magda
Ja *a
noted that the graph of | f(t)dt could have different vertical locations based upon the
Ja
value of a. Here, Magda supports Romina's statement in lines 1031 - 1032 by noting that
the derivative of [ f{t)dt will have the same derivative no matter where it is located
Ja
vertically, because the slope of the accumulated area graph "is going to be always the
same" |lines 1072-10731.
At end of the segment, Romina explains why she believes the derivative of
f{t)dt is the function /'by coordinating representations of antiderivatives and slope.

Ja
Referring to the graphical representation in Figure 50, she explains that the slope of
[ f(t)dt, is determined by the given function/by explaining how the slope of i f(t)dt
Ja Ja
is "correlated" to the values of the function/. Romina relates how the slope of/allows
more or less area under the graph o f / a s x varies, which causes changes in the rate of
change of [ f(t)dt, and notes how the slope of/is correlated with the inflection points of
Ja
f{t)dt. Angela notes again that the rate at which the area under/is accumulating is the
Ja "~
slope of the graph of [ f(t)dt.

Ja
222
5.3.7. Segment 4: Lines 1216 - 1788
The students continue to explain why the derivative of f(t)dt is the function f.
Lines 1214-1403
Romina asks [line 1237 - 1238 J if it is possible to display a particular area under
the graph "at some point" on the graph. At this time I have placed, on my own accord, a
graph of y = xon the screen. Romina comments nines 1250 - 1253]
your area under from point... I could count... your point at

2 is... is less than your point at... OK your point at 4 has
more area underneath than your point at 2 because your
slope is increasing you are allowing more area
Magda notes that the slope of the graph of y = x is not increasing. She notes, "the
whole thing is you're adding on more area as you go" [lines 1261 & 1263J. I then change
the equation to y = (1 / 2)x, and Romina then requests to see the graphs of y - (1 / 2)xand
y = x side by side on screen. Magda notes that the slope of | (\t)dt at x - 6 would be 3
Ja
[line 1298], and that the slope of \ (\t)dt would continue to increase because you
Ja
accumulate more area. Angela adds that the slope is "getting bigger there because there
is more area per interval" [line 13031.
The students then describe the graph of | ({t)dt , debating the use of the term
Ja """
"rate of the rate", which Romina introduces into the discussion as she describes the
behavior of J {\t)dt. Romina states that for the graph of J (\t)dt "the rate at which the
curve is growing is a constant" [line 1341 ]. Magda disagrees, stating that its "slope is 0.5
times at whatever point you are". Romina revises her statement, stating, "The rate at
which the rates... the rates at which the slope of the red line is growing increasing in this
case is 0.5 which is the derivative that's what I mean" [lines 1361 - 1364]. Magda then
agrees, and asks Romina whether her idea could be applied to a graph such as that of
223
cos(x). Romina notes that she thinks of that graph as a series of "little parabolas" |line
1370]. In lines 1371 - 1398], Romina demonstrates this, drawing a series of parabolic
graphs and describing how the slope of these '"little parabolas" change.
Lines 1404- 1562
I ask how they know that the purple graph (3; = 0.5x) is the derivative of the red
graph ( I {Q.5t)dt ) [line 1404] and not some other purple graph [line 1425). Magda
Ja *"
points to the graph projected on the board (Figure 51) and estimates that the average rate
of change of the red graph | (0.5t)dt from x = 6 to x = 7 is 3. She points out that the
"" Ja
value of y when x = 6 for_y = 0.5x is 3 line 1454]. Romina states that this is the same as
her reasoning 11ine 1455] and explains that the behavior of the graph
of>' = 0.5x demonstrates how the slope of the graph of (0.5t)dt changes |lines 1457 -
Ja
1460]. Magda agrees that the graph of (0.5t)dt has a slope that is growing at a rate of
Ja
0.5: "The slope is increasing at .5 because if you look at that every time OK... between
five and six you added up like 2.75 of area and between six and seven you added 3.25 of
area which is 0.5 more so your slope is increasing by 0.5" [lines 1475 - 14771.
Figure 51: Graph of fix) = (0.5)JC and its accumulated area function from x = 2
224
I ask the group if the slope of the graph off (0.5t)dt is equal to the area under the
Ja
graph of y = 0.5x [line 1502]. The three students agree with this statement, and I then ask
them if they could relate what they have said to the statement f(x)dx = g(b)- g{a).
Ja
tb
Romina states that f{x)dx means "the integral of the purple line", and Angela adds
Ja
"the integral of the purple line is the red line" [line 1539]. Romina notes that the interval
from a to b is an area under the graph of/and a signal for "sectioning off that particular
area on the red line". Magda adds that if a is 6 and b is 7, then you could find the slope
of (0.5t)dt: "Like if you take g of b right, say b is in our case seven whatever we say
Ja
in our example b is 7, and the a would be the six, right, so if you think about it that gives
you the change" [lines 1551 - 1556]. She suggests, however, that if the interval on which
one is calculating the change is not one, then you would have to "divide it by interval"
[line 1561].
Lines 1562- 1788
Magda then asks for a "harder" graph. With direction from the students, I create
the displays in Figure 52 and Figure 53. The students note that the area in the slices
shown is equal to the average rate of change of the graph of (0.5t)dt.

J a
2€>-
Figure 52: Graph of the function/(x) = x2 and its accumulated area function from x = 2
225
1 1
Figure 53: Graph of the function/(x) = x2 and its accumulated area function from x = 5
Romina then suggests "Maybe we should take it over a bigger span so we do over all the
areas, because the slope could be changing from b to a" and Magda adds "then you'd
have to divide it by the interval that you're taking the thing over" [lines 1593 - 1597]. I
then create Figure 54 with Sketchpad, and Romina asks that the graph of / b e "moved
down" and so I create Figure 55. Romina notes how the "slope changes" and that "it
doesn't have one slope" and Angela adds that "the rate changes" [lines 1613 - 1617].
Romina also says " the slope of the red one is changing at a rate of the purple one" (lines
1623 - 1624J.
39-
€0- *s
18- ---
>
Figure 54: Graph of the function J{x) = x2 and its accumulated area function from x = - 4
226
Figure 55: Graph of J{x) = x2 - 1 and its accumulated area function from x = -4
I then ask the students if they would consider a "simpler" graph for the benefit of
the student in the task. I change the given function to y = 3, and ask the students to
describe what is happening as the area accumulates [line 1630 - 1652]:
Romina: Our purple graph at each unit that it moves

requires three units of area and our red graph
is growing at no it's not growing it has a rate
of 3 because that's how much our purple one
is growing by like the accumulated area
Angela: The area under the purple
Pantozzi: The area under the purple is doing what?
Romina: It's increasing at a rate of three
Angela: Constant
Romina: Per point per unit
Pantozzi: So how about if I only went like halfway
there like this
Romina: You increase half of 3
Magda: Which is one half which gives you the s...
Romina: That's the slope of the red line is 1.5
Pantozzi: The slope of the red line is...
Angela: No... that's where the red line goes up to
Romina: Oh hold on the slope of the red line
Magda: The slope is still three... the slope is still
three.
Romina: Oh, right, sorry
Magda: Because you took only half of the block
before you were increasing by threes but
now you only increase by before you're
taking going over on the x's by ones but
now you are going on the x's by no you
227
went over by 0.5 only 0.5 so you got to

multiply so you've got to one times three it
was growing by three so now it's 0.5 times
three is 1.5
Pantozzi: So this area right here right now in purple is
1.5
I then change the graph so that it increases and decreases at a constant rate in a
periodic fashion, creating figure 56.
Figure 56: Graph of a function/and its accumulated area function from x - 4
I ask the students if they have any comments about these two graphs. Looking at the
interval from x = 4 to x = 5, Romina comments, "at any one point the slope equals the
area whether it is positive or negative area that's the way I always think about... under its
negative area... over positive area so like from 4 to 5 the slope is negative 1.15" [lines
1702 - 1705J. Angela notes, however, that "you can't look at the whole thing...at that
little pokey spot it changes" |line 1708]. Romina adds that "it's still negative just less
negative or it's still positive just less positive so your slope decreases because it is less
positive you're still accumulating positive area just accumulating less amounts of it"
[lines 1709-1711].
I suggest to the students that the area under the purple graph is 2 [line 1716], and
that this occurs on an interval with a length of 3. Angela notes that the red graph will
228
increase by 2 on that interval, and Magda notes that the average slope on that interval will
be 2/3. Romina adds: "the way I think about it as if you're driving a car from point A to
Point B. You could drive really fast and then really slow and then really fast or really fast
and then really slow to get three miles" [lines 1738 - 1740]. Romina also says, about that
same interval, "you're changing your slope on the red line... yeah well almost
constantly". Angela responds [lines 1752- 17631:
Angela: It is isn't it like you could keep going

smaller and smaller and smaller with your
intervals
Romina: you're changing your slope constantly but
from point A to Point B you're covering x
amount of area
Angela: Two
Pantozzi: Two.
Romina: So the average rate at which your red line is
the slopes of your red line you know what
I'm
Magda: Increasing or decreasing...
Romina: Are an average of your slopes... the average
is the slope of., no...
Angela: If it is just that chunk then it is two thirds
Magda: That's what I'm saying it's the average...
The students conclude by noting that g(b) — g(a) will equal 2 for the interval in question.
In this segment, the students use graphical displays to explain why the rate of
change of [ f{t)dt is given by the function/. The students use numerical values at
certain junctures, while primarily describing the behavior of the graphs without specific
numerical values. Adding to their previous explanations, they talk about sections and
intervals of the graphs to describe rate of change. The students use the meaning of the
derivative as a measure of slope or rate of change. Their verbal arguments about the
graphs of [ (0.5t)dt and (t)dt are focused on describing how the rate of change of
229
these graphs (or the rate of change of the slope of these graphs) is caused by the way that
the area under the graph off accumulates as x varies. The students do not talk explicitly
about instantaneous rate of change, but talk about average rate of change and how this
average rate of change can be calculated on any particular interval [lines 1662 - 1663,
1752 - 1753 J. Romina notes that the "slope equals the area" [line 1702] on any particular
interval, and Angela talks about how "more area per interval" creates a greater slope in
the graph of V f{t)dt.
In this segment, the students respond to my repeated requests to explain why the
derivative off f(t)dt i s / , by focusing on the graphical construction of [ f(t)dt. The

Ja Ja
students continue to interpret the integral as an graph of accumulated area, and make the
case that the slope of f(t)dt is determined by the graph of /in a particular way. The
Ja *~
students explain that the construction of f(t)dt is accomplished through accumulation
Ja *""
of increments of area, so the value of the area determines the slope of [ f(t)dt [lines
Ja
1436 - 1454, 1474 - 14881. The students explain how the rate of change of the area under
a constant function is independent of the size of the interval [lines 1630 - 1652| and note
that the area is accumulated in "chunks" that determine the changes in the value of the
graph of f{t)dt and thus its average rate of change. Magda adds a reminder that to
"~ Ja
calculate slope, one must "divide it by the interval": while the graph of [ f(t)dt will
Ja
increase by an amount equal to the area under the/on the interval from a to b. the rate of
change must be found by dividing by the interval.

230
5.3.9. Summary Analysis of the Session
In this session as a whole, the students addressed the question of why
antiderivatives are involved in finding the area under the graph of a function through
examining the function | f(t)dt in graphical, numerical, and verbal representations.

Ja
The students do not use the notation [ f{t)dt in the session, but construct graphs of
Ja
[ f{t)dt for various functions, and coordinate the graphical results with other ideas about
Ja *"
integrals and derivatives. The students used the Geometer's Sketchpad constructions to
quickly access graphical representations and test ideas, while continuing to create their
own graphical representations (specifically, the graph of j sin(0^ ). The students recall
that antiderivatives have particular symbolic expressions, and use these at times to
support graphical conclusions about the behavior of the function [ f(t)dt. As they did in
Ja
the first session, the students make associations between different facts they recall about
derivatives and antiderivatives. In this session, however, the students used the graphical
behavior of f f(t)dt to make a connection between area and antiderivatives.

Ja
Throughout the session, the verbal statement that the "derivative of the integral"
[line 1031 ] was the function itself was a notion that the students recalled and coordinated
with other results that they found. For example, Magda used y = -jx3 as the "integral" of
y = x2 without explanation. She and Angela tested this example graphically, noting that
the interpretation of the integral as accumulated area gave a "faster growing graph"
which was consistent withy = | x 3 being the expression for the integral. When the three
students did not know an expression for the antiderivative of the sine function, they
constructed an accumulated area graph, and deduced a symbolic expression for the result.
The students did not explicitly state that the derivative of "negative cosine" was the given
231
sine function, but in both this and the previous example, the students associate
antiderivative functions with accumulated area functions. The students find additional
confirmation when they observe that the graph of f(t)dt for a given function / a t
Ja
different values of a creates a family of vertically shifted functions, and that the graph of
f{t)dt changes in ways consistent with/being its derivative.

Ja
As in the first session, the students used representations with the purpose of
communicating, proposing, or testing ideas. Throughout the session, the students created
graphical evidence, supported by symbolic examples, that antiderivatives could be used
to calculate area. They choose when to assign numerical values to graphs and when to
talk about the graphs qualitatively in terms of increasing or decreasing behavior and rate
of change. The students answered the question of "why" antiderivatives could be used to
calculate area by using specific graphical examples to make a general argument.
Symbolic expressions were available for each of the functions shown in Sketchpad, and
the students used them to generate numerical values and make a generic argument: if one
constructs the graph of [ f(t)dt, its slope will be equal to the value of/'because of the
Ja
construction process. The graph of | f{t)dt will rise by an amount equal to the value of
Ja
area under the graph of /over the interval on which the area is calculated, and thus the
average rate of change of [ f(t)dt will be the value off.

Ja
The students addressed the question of why antiderivatives could be used to
calculate area without finding an instantaneous rate of change of | f(t)dt at a particular

Ja
point. Instead, they verbally noted how the area was accumulated in discrete increments
which could be made small, and viewed the derivative as a function that plotted the slope
or rate of change of a function, rather than as a limiting process involving symbolic

232
expressions or slope of secant lines. The students' argument that the derivative of
[ f{t)dt is/rests upon a dynamic view of how [ f(t)dt changes based upon changes in
Ja Ja
f, and is supported by their calculation of the average rate of change of [ f(t)dt on any
*" Ja
interval. No matter where the average rate of change of [ f{t)dt is calculated, the slope
Ja
must be steep when the value of/is far from zero, and less inclined when the value of/is
close to zero, because of the way | f(t)dt is constructed.

Ja
Although the task in this session was more directive than the task used in the first
session, Angela, Magda and Romina pose their own questions or rephrase the task in a
form that connects with the meanings that they bring to the task. In response to my
repeated question about why antiderivatives are used to calculate area, the students
discuss their thinking about the relationship between derivatives and integrals. The
notion of rate of change, in numerical and verbal forms, is prominent through their
discussion. As in the previous session, Angela makes the verbal statement that the value
of a function is equal to the rate of change of the area under the graph of the function.
Romina sees the integral as a process of "stacking" areas at different rates. In this
session, the students coordinate these ideas with each other as a means of responding to
the task. They check their ideas with each other, to confirm their own ideas and to see
how the ideas might be used by the others to advance the group conversation. As Romina
notes in line 1336 when she says, "Push me there, Magda", the students make statements
to explain ideas to themselves and to generate group discussion.

233
5.4. Session 2, Group 2, July 24, 2003
In their second research session, I pose two questions for the students to discuss. I
ask Brian, Robert, and Sherly (Mike arrives late to the session) to create a graph of
g(x)= I f(t)dt for the graph of the function /'in figure 57 (see next page) and then a
graph of g'(x). After they complete that task to their satisfaction, I present the students
with a new graph of a function /, shown in figure 64. For this graph, I ask the students to
sketch f'(x), and then | f\t)dt. After the students complete this second task, 1 ask
Jo
them to discuss how they might use either or both of these tasks to help the "fictional
student" from the task in the June 25 session understand the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus. The students discuss this question, and at the end of that discussion I ask the
students to explain why they have used the word antiderivative in reference to the graphs
ofg(.v)and | f'{t)dt that they have made. The students talk with me about this question
•Jo
until the end of the session, and I use Geometer's Sketchpad constructions of
accumulation functions as I talk with the students.
5.4.1. Segment 1: Lines 1 - 541
In this first segment, Brian, Robert, and Sherly each create a graph of
g(x)~ f{t)dt and g'(x) for the given function/defined by the graph in Figure 57.
Jo
They discuss and compare their graphs as they make them. Mike then arrives and
discusses what the three have done using a sketch of Brian's graph displayed on the dry
erase board at the front of the room.
Lines 1 - 339
I ask the students to create a graph of g(x) = j f{t)dt for the graph shown in
Figure 57, using that particular notation for the definition of the function g.
234
Figure 57: A function/, defined graphically
Brian, Robert, and Sherly talk about how to create the graph. Sherly asks if the graph of g
"goes up more" when the graph of/is "flat" on the interval from -1 to 0 (line 105 - 106].
Robert suggests that the graph of g should only start at zero [line 107]. Robert notes that
"starting at two, then it's definitely down" (lines 123 - 126]. Brian asks, "it's the area
under the graph, right?" and states, "where it crosses zero what does that do... it changes
the direction?" [line 132]. Robert agrees. Brian notes that "from zero you have zero,
right, because at zero you have no area" [line 166] and Robert agrees with this as well.
The students continue to create the graph of g(x) by finding the areas between the graph
of/and the x-axis on intervals with a width of 1 unit, starting from x = 0, and plotting
these values as points on the coordinate grid. Figure 58 shows Brian's sketch before he
connects the individual points; Figure 59 shows the points connected.
Figure 58: Brian's plot of the integral of the function/from Figure 57

235
Figure 59: Brian's completed graph of the integral of the function/from Figure 57
Robert says that he has used also used "key points")line 201) to locate specific point on
his graph. For instance, he notes the maximum of the graph of g(x) should occur when the
graph of/changes from positive to zero to negative.
I return to the room, and tell the students that when they are done, their next task
is going to be to draw the derivative of g (line 215 — 216] . (I do not question the students
about their graph of g.) Brian asks, "is the derivative a graph of the slopes?" [line 219|
and Robert says yes. I state that the students should draw the derivative of g, Sherly asks,
"isn't that the same thing as that"|line 241 - 2421, pointing to the graph of/on the board.
Robert states that it might be, but notes that their graph of g begins at x = 0. Sherly asks
Robert about his graph of g, and he explains its behavior by referring to the areas of the
regions between the graph and the jc-axis between zero and two, and between two and six.
There is some discussion about where the graph of g should cross the x-axis; the students
determine the location by noting that the area under the graph of/from 0 to 2 is equal to
the area under the graph from 2 to 5, so that the graph of g has a value of 0 at x = 5 [lines
243 - 283]. The students' graph of g increases from (0, 0) to (2, 3.5) and then decreases
to a minimum at the point (6, -0.5).
The discussion then turns to the derivative of the graph of g. The students look at
the graph of g and talk about its slope. Brian plots points at each integer value of x
236
starting at x = 1; the first value he plots is at y = 2.5. Brian states: "at 0 there's 0 right and
at 1 there's 2 1/2 slope at 2 there's no slope and at three there's negative 1/2 slope... at 4
there is negative one half of a slope at 5 there is negative one half of a slope... six there's
zero seven there's positive 1/2 slope" (lines 319 - 322). Brian connects his plotted points
with a curve, starting at the point (0,0). Brian's graph of g'(x) appears in figure 60.
1
A
\
\
\
' /
Figure 60: Brian's graph of g'(x)
Sherly has drawn a graph that differs from Brian's; Sherly's graph, unlike Brian's
decreases on the interval from x = 0 to x = 2. She asks Robert if the graph should "go up
first" and he says it should not. He explains that since the graph of/crosses the x axis
three times, the derivative should look like "x squared" [lines 302 - 303].
Lines 340-541
I return to the room and ask the students to summarize what they have said so far.
Brian notes that "We graphed the area underneath the graph" [lines 343 - 344] for the
first part of the task, and then that "we took the derivative of that and graphed the slopes
at each point" for the second part of the task [line 3491. Brian goes to the board and
recaps how he created the graph of the function g as he draws the graph with a green
marker. Brian plots points at (1, 2.5), (2,3.5), (3, 3) (4, 1.5) (5,-0.5) (6,0) (7,1) and (8,2),
and then connects them with a curve. Brian notes, "we just kept adding on the areas, it
237
got negative at one point, and this is going to continue back up, if that's a solid x line
stays with slope of one" [lines 389 - 390]. Robert adds, "we didn't know whatx was so
we didn't know where to stop" [line 3921.
Mike arrives, and I ask that the group explain their work thus far to him. Brian
then asks, "what was that the antiderivative we just drew?" [line 402] and Sherly says
yes. Brian then sketches the graph of g'(x) at the board (Figure 61) with a red marker,
and Robert explains that "this is a graph of the change", [line 426]. Mike states, "you just
drew the anti derivative of the purple one and now you're drawing the derivative of the
green one, which is the purple one" [lines 447 - 450] emphasizing the word "is" as he
speaks. Sherly adds, "that's what I thought." [lines 451]. Robert notes, however, that
their graph of g only begins at x = 0. and comments on the shape of the graph of g'(x),
stating, "I don't think that it goes down that far because there's never a change of
negative 3. you know what I mean? I think it starts going back up at 5 it starts going back
up like it's negative but it's less negative... you know I mean?" [line 463 -466]. Sherly
agrees, stating, "I don't think it goes all way down to negative three because you are like
adding the derivatives there is never a change o f - 3 anywhere... the highest change is
negative one-and-a-half [lines 469 - 471].
Figure 61: Graphs off. g(x) and Figure 61: Graphs of g, g{x) and g'{x)
238
Robert suggests that the graph of g'{x) should equal -1.5 twice, based upon this
statement about g, and Brian edits the graph on the board (Figure 62).
"" %
--• I
Figure 62: Adjustment made to g'(x)
Mike suggests that the graph g'(x) should look like the graph of/, because "that's
what the antiderivative is" [lines 495 - 496], adding, "you know what I'm saying if you
drew it off of that, you drew the antiderivative and then the derivative would be the same
thing" [lines 512 - 513J. The group agree that their drawing of g'(x) will not look
exactly like the graph of/because, as Robert states, "our derivative is a rough sketch of a
rough sketch" [line 5291. Robert also suggests editing the portion of the graph near x = 0,
stating, "it should start up there too because like it crosses the x axis three times...so does
the antiderivative... cross the same amount of times..." [line 535 - 536|. Mike adds that
the slope of g is positive near x = 0 so that the graph of g prime should have a positive
value at that point, rather than a value of zero as in Brian's sketch [lines 539 - 541 J.
In this segment, Brian, Robert, and Sherly use the meaning of the integral as a
plot of accumulated area to sketch g(x) = f(t)dt. When I ask the students to sketch
the derivative of g. Sherly states verbally, without any other justification, that the
derivative of g should b e / . The students, however, proceed to draw the graph of the
239
derivative of g by calculating the average rate of change of the graph of g. Brian starts
his derivative graph at (0,0), which Sherly questions. Robert recalls a rule about
derivatives: the derivative of a cubic function will be a parabola [line 302| presumably
identifying the graph of / in Figure 57 as a cubic function. He uses a verbal
representation of this rule to conclude that the graph Brian has drawn is not correct.
Brian suggests at line 402 that they have just drawn an antiderivative, but this
does not become a topic of discussion. When Mike arrives, he independently states that
the derivative of g should be f also calling g the antiderivative off. Robert then uses the
meaning of derivative as a rate of change to make a correction in the graph of/that Brian
has drawn, noting that since the graph of g does not every change by 3, its derivative
graph could not have a value of -3 as Brian's graph of g'(x) indicates. Mike again notes
that the graph of g is the antiderivative off, a statement he uses to justify the idea that the
derivative of g should be/.
In this segment, the students work with graphical representations of functions, and
graphical definitions of derivative and integral. The students associate the idea of
accumulation of area and the idea of antiderivative with the notation g(x) = J f(t)dt.
Robert coordinates representations when he makes a recommendation to correct the
graph of g'{x) that Brian has drawn. He justifies the correction to the graph by with a
verbal representation of a rule for derivatives a verbal rule: the derivative of a cubic is a
parabola. Mike also uses a verbal representation to justify the shape of the graph of g\x).
While the students have created the graph of g'{x) by plotting slopes, he uses the verbal
rule that the "derivative of the antiderivative o f / i s / " to support the shape of the graph
the other three students have made one step at a time.

240
5.4.3. Segment 2: Lines 542 - 945
In this segment, I give the students a new graph for the function/(Figure 63) and
ask them to draw f\x), and then J f'{t)dt. The students draw these graphs and note that
the vertical location of the graph of the "integral" depends on the x value at which one
starts to calculate accumulated area.
Lines 5 4 2 - 7 1 4
I create the graph of a function/on screen (Figure 63) and ask the students to
graph the derivative of/ and the integral of f'{x) [lines 603 - 605J. I do not use the
notation [ f\t)dt in presenting the students with this task.
Figure 63: Graph of/for the second task
In response to a question from Sherly |line 633] Mike notes that you can "start"
the graph of the derivative at any x value, because it is "just a graph of the slopes" |line
637]. All four students quickly create a plot of the slopes of the individual segments that
make up the graph of/. Mike plots points at locations like (-2.5, -3) and (-1.5, -1) and
connects them to create his graph. He plots the slope of each of the segments of the
graph o f / a s a point, with the x value of each point at a value halfway between each
integer. Robert creates a graph in a similar fashion, but plots the slopes of the segments
241
that make the graph of/as apoints at the left side of each interval of one unit. Both Mike
and Robert connect their points with a curve. Mike helps Sherly create her graph, noting
that the graph of/'(x) should include an interval where it remains constant at a value of
one for three units of A [line 705].
Lines 715-945
The students then discuss drawing the integral of the graph of f'(x). Mike
suggests that the integral of/'(x) will be "shifted", but retain the same shape as the graph
of/ [lines 726 - 734]. Robert decides he would like to start the graph of the integral at
negative 5, while Sherly starts from 0 and draws to the right only. The students draw their
graphs, commenting after finish and compare [lines 762 - 769|:
Robert: I think were you start though affects the

answer, doesn't it?
Mike: It won't change shape, just shift it
Robert: Yeah, but I mean like... yeah.
Mike: Like I started it at zero. So I moved... up.
Robert: ...start...
Brian: Something like that?
Robert: It's the original graph.
Sherly: It's shifted
Mike notes that "they usually tell you" what „v value at which to begin drawing the graph.
Until I return to the room a few minutes later, the students talk about some mathematics
classes they took in their previous years of college.
When I return to the room Sherly has begun drawing/'^) on the dry erase board
art the front of the room (Figure 64). I ask the students how they approached the previous
task. Mike explains how this graph connects points that represent the slope of each
segment of the graph of/in the middle of each interval. He notes that plotting the slope
value in the middle of each interval is not a requirement, but a choice he made. He
242
suggests that they could have represented the derivative with a series of disconnected
horizontal line segments instead of the connected graph, but that the connected graph
"looks better" |line 8661.
Figure 64: Graph of /'(x) in the second task
Mike then comes to the board and explains how to draw the graph of the integral
of f\x). He first plots a point at (0,0), and Sherly suggests that he "start with a half
referring to the area under the graph of f'(x). Mike states that the area between the graph
of f\x) and the x-axis is one-half [line 887 - 8881 but then notes, "if you think of it like
slope" it would be "basically the same thing" [lines 896 - 8971. Mike then plots more
points on the board. Although the area under the graph off'(x) from x = -1/2 to x = 1/2
is 1/2, Mike plots this area at the point (1, 1/2) and continues to create the graph in this
fashion, plotting the accumulated area half a unit to the left from where the areas are
located. Brian notes verbally that "You've got to think about it as shifted over" (line
890]. In discussing the location of one of the points, Robert says, "the slope... the point
is at negative two there so the slopes going to be negative two...because it's losing two
area", Mike adds, "well you could also say., that's true... you could also say the area of
that box underneath is negative 2 either way" [lines 920 - 924|. Mike plots points at (1,
243
0.5), (2, 1.5), (3, 2.5), (4, 3.5), (5, 3.5), (6, 2.5), with a maximum of the graph occurring
at x = 4.5. Figure 65 shows some of these points.
\
- • ~t-,
1 -. ' J
Figure 65: Some plotted points for the integral of f'(x)
I ask if the graph of the integral has any values to the left of zero, and Mike says
"if you start at zero, no" |line 9281. I then ask what would happen to the graph of the
integral off'{x) if they had begun plotting the area at x = -5 instead of x = 0. Robert
states that the graph would be "shifted down". His graph is shown in Figure 66.
» *
Figure 66: Robert's graph of the integral of f'(x)
In this segment, the students use the same graphical meanings of derivative and
integral as in the first segment. Just as with the first task, the students do not make the
specific details of way they draw the graphs a topic of discussion. The students draw their
244
derivative graphs as smooth curves (when a series of steps would be more technically
correct). Mike does note that a step function graph could be drawn, but states a
preference for the smooth curve. In the same vein, the students do not discuss that their
graph of the accumulated area is shifted to the right from where it might be more
technically correct to locate it. Instead, they talk about the behavior of the graphs
globally, and make note of characteristics of the graphs that they consider important.
They note in particular how the point at which one starts to calculate the accumulation of
area will determine the vertical shift of the graph of the integral.
In this segment, although the students mostly talk about the graph of the integral
as a plot of the accumulated area, Mike suggests that one can think of it "like slope" and
get the same result. This idea is not discussed at this time. In contrast to the previous
segment, the students do not discuss a justification for the similarity in shape between the
graph of/and the graph of f f\t)dt ; they focus on the fact that it is the same graph a s /
but shifted vertically,
5.4.5. Segment 3 Lines 946 - 1756
In this segment I ask the students about their use of the words antiderivative and
integral, and how the previous two tasks in this session might be useful in teaching a
student about the Fundamental Theorem.
Lines 9 4 6 - 1479
I ask the group if they have any comment on these tasks with respect to the FTC,
and whether they would use either of these two tasks with a student who has questions
abut the meaning of the FTC. Robert suggests that drawing the derivative first, and then
the integral of the derivative, will more readily allow the student to see how the integral
245
can be "shifted" vertically [line 997]. Mike adds, "by drawing the derivative first you
realize that it doesn't really matter where you start and then when you start drawing the
integral, you start noticing, oh, it'll shift" (lines 1002 - 1004]. The students talk for a few
moments about which task is "easier" and then Brian suggests, "we should do them both
to show that they can be switched like that and still get the same thing" [lines 1029 -
1030]. Robert adds that if one were to draw the integral, and then the derivative of the
integral, one might not discover the shift.
Brian then asks, "How we relate this to the fundamental theorem?" [line 1054|.
Sherly says "f of b minus f of a", and Mike recalls that in the session the previous month,
he read about a "real simple" version of the Fundamental Theorem. Mike says the
theorem states that for "any graph there is an integral for it" [line 1074]. Robert adds
"you can go both ways" to show the "connection between derivatives and integrals" [line
1081 J. I return to ask the students about what they have discussed. Sherly says they
would use the task where the student would draw the derivative of a function, and then
the integral of the derivative. Mike elaborates [lines 1123 - 1138|.
Mike: because first you draw start with the graph

and then you'll draw the derivative graph
which is fairly a lot easier to do than the anti
derivative cause you're looking at slopes,
you know., it just flows much more... and
when you're doing the um the
Sherly: Anti...
Mike: anti derivative of that graph you start to
realize that it is the same graph so you really
don't... you don't have to pay attention too
much about counting boxes and stuff, you
know...
Robert: Trace...
Mike: And then you start realizing that it would
start somewhere else if you pick it at this
246
point and then but kind of you lose some of

the...
Sherly: because the first one we did we started from
0 and we just did the integral and then we
did the derivative and the second one we did
the integral and then started from a different
point so we saw how it shifted if we with the
other way around where we started at two
different points, you'd probably see it
probably see a shift of but you won't realize
At line 1152 I ask the group why Mike used the word antiderivative in his previous
comments, when it was not a word mentioned in the tasks for the session. Mike responds:
It depends on how you make your antiderivative...

integral... you know if you make it as an anti derivative
which you just can like ... I did it with like slopes and stuff
so it's like anti derivative... you do backwards what you
did with the derivative... you do it with counting boxes it
sounds like you're doing an integral ...it's the same thing.
I state that the student in the task from the first session knows that an
antiderivative "is a graph whose derivative is the graph you gave me" [lines 1180 —
11811. Mike states (lines 1187- 11921:
that's what I was trying to say before...like you said you

think of it as an opposite when you make the anti derivative
you would just graph a graph that resemble the slopes
that... the derivative tells you to you know... and if you
say integral it sounds more like something you do with
counting area and stuff like that.
Mike wonders if I am saying that the antiderivative is different from the integral, i
decline to address this topic, and state that I am going to leave and allow the students to
talk about the relationship between integrals and antiderivatives. Sherly states "aren't
they the same thing?" |line 12151, and a few moments later, she uses the graphs that are
still on the screen as an example. She notes that for the graph on the screen, "the slope
there is one and the area is one". (Figures 67 and 68). Mike responds [lines 1262- 1267]:
247
Mike: Yeah, but hold on, Let me think about this.

Say it?
Sherly: Like over there where it's like flat and how
you were saying slope is one consistently for
the three boxes
Mike: Put your shadow ... right where.. .so I can't
Sherly: Right here, right the slope is one for these
three boxes and that's the same as the area
Figure 67: Mike pointing to the graph of f'(x)
Figure 68: Mike pointing to the graph the integral of f'(x)
Mike asks, "Why does it like come out to be the same graph?" [line 1282] and a
few moments later, Brian asks "What are we trying to figure out?"[line 1304]. Sherly
responds, "why taking the anti derivatives... when you're looking at the slopes of the
derivative to draw the integral, and taking the integral of counting boxes ...result in the
same graph..."[lines 1307 - 1310]. Mike also uses the graphs displayed on the board
(Figures 67 and 68) to explain further [lines 1336 - 1342]:

248
Mike: you're adding a half plus zero you'll come up

with a line that's a slope of 1/2 because this
is the boxes are one unit
Sherly: From where you're starting to to where
you're changing to
Mike: you know what I'm saying The box is just
by one so it would be a half by one, and that
would be like the slope, the next one is one,
so you're, say add one to that so you end up
with, you're actually at one and a half
here...
At line 1380, Mike states "one of over one because each unit, each one of these
boxes is one, whatever you add is going to be the slope", and adds, "that's kind of like
why". He says again at line 1387, "whatever you add becomes the slope so that's why it's
the same thing". I then return to the room and Mike explains again. He uses the graphs
shown on the dry erase board (Figures 67 and 68) again [lines 1455 - 1459]:
so either way you do it it's the same, so this, now let's say
I'm thinking about an anti derivative - this is one, so I want
to do a slope of 1, same thing if I said, add one because
since you're doing units of one I really don't think it matters
if you look at a graph, you're going in units of one,
whatever you go up is going to be your slope also
Sherly explains for Brian as well, although she reverses the words rise and run [lines
1470 - 14711. Mike adds, "so it's like the integral is the same as the antiderivative" [line
1479].
Lines 1480-1756
I have returned to the room. Robert asks a question, "Do you think the integral is
like one specific graph and like... and the integral is like a family?" [lines 1480 - 1482].
In response to this question I create the graph of v = 3 on the screen using Sketchpad, and
ask the students what the antiderivative of the graph would be. The group agrees that
there are various translations of the graph of y = 3x that could be antiderivatives. Mike
249
then notes that y = 3x+ 3 would be "the integral starting at negative one" while y = 3x
would be another integral. The students note that the derivative of either of these
functions is y = 3. I state that either graph would be considered an antiderivative of y = 3
[lines 1581 - 1582). I then use Sketchpad to plot the accumulated area under y = 3, and
create the graph of y = 3x - 6; 1 note that the integral of a graph can be created both to
the right and to the left of the point where one "starts" the accumulation.
I then use Sketchpad to create a graph of the accumulated area of a polynomial
function (line 1653 J. I start this accumulation at two different points (Figures 69 and 70)
and show the area "filling in" and the graph of the accumulated area created in each case.
i at -0.00/
•- f
s
• I
,.w.
/ • .
2>*
Figure 69: Graph of accumulated area of a polynomial function created with Sketchpad
P\ "\
Figure 70: Graph of accumulated area of the same polynomial function but with a
different initial value
250
I ask the students to comment upon the graphs. Robert states that he sees and
antiderivative |line 1692| and Sherly agrees. Mike states that he sees an integral, as he
interprets the sketch as showing area under the graph being accumulated [lines 1695 -
1697J. At the students' request [line 1706], I create two different graphs of accumulated
area on the screen at the same time (Figure 71).
Figure 71: Graph of two accumulated area functions for the same function/
I ask the students what thoughts they have. Robert responds, "I think the bigger one is the
anti derivative at 0 and the other one is the anti derivative at 2 and they're both part of the
integral, they take in the integral which is all the graphs at every point the graph exists".
Mike states, ' i think it's the other way around", and "the integral is a piece of the
antiderivative that would go through that point" [lines 1727 - 1740|.
Lines 1757- 1915
I ask the group what they would say the integral from 2 to 3 of y - 2x would be,
providing the students with the graph of the function and the symbolism [ f(x). Mike
251
answers, "it would be a piece of a x squared that started right there" [line 1769] (from the
point (2,0)) and "yeah it would be that from two to three it would be that that little piece
of like the x squared graph" [lines 1788 - 1789|. Mike says, " 1 guess... 1 .. that's what
the integral is". Sherly adds that "you don't have the draw the whole thing out" [line
1813].
In the final few minutes of the session, I claim that the symbolic statement
-^ I f(t)dt = f(x) is one way to state the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. I state that
the student they are helping in the functional task knows that the notation J f(t)dt means
integral. Mike asks if the statement is true, because he notes that f f(t)dt only makes
Jo
"half o f [line 1837] the graph. 1 tell the students that x can take both negative and
positive values, so that J f{t)dt creates a graph both to the left and right of x = 0. I then
ask why the derivative of J f(t)dt is the function/. The following exchange occurs
[lines 1888-1905]:
Robert: it's kind of saying like multiplication and

division, you multiplied by something in and
divide by something it's kind of the same
thing
Mike: it's not quite like inverse functions, one's
accumulation and you know... they're two
totally different things
Robert: maybe they are inverses
Sherly: they're not totally different things they're the
same thing but shifted so the slopes are still
same
Mike: one way you're adding things and the other
way you're just finding slopes and how
would those two things that you know
someone you know, they come out to be the
same thing
Sherly: right
Mike: someone who probably never seen it before
would say oh that's got to be something
different has to be, you know, that doesn't
252
make sense, but when they see it all you

know likely
Robert: the change of area being inversely related
like multiplication and division
Mike: like what I said with the boxes whatever you
go up is going to be the slope
Sherly: Right...
Mike: so there's your relation - slope and area, you
know, so you mean...
I decide at that point to ask no further questions.
In this segment the students focus on the graphical representation of the result that
I f{t)dt = I f{t)dt + C for some constants a, b, and C. In thinking about the two tasks
Ja Jb
together, for example, Robert notes (without using this symbolism) that this "shift" would
not be apparent if one graphed \ f{t)dt and then ^ J f(t)dt. The students justify their
belief in this shift from the graphical evidence found in the creation of the graphs and do
not reference the symbolic representation of antiderivatives involving the addition of a
constant here (as they did in the session one month prior). When I question the students
on their use of the word antiderivative, the students explain their use of the word with
graphical evidence: a graph created by a plot of the accumulated area must have a slope
equal to the value of the height of the graph of/ The students verbally explain their
graphical method for constructing integrals: if fix) = c, and one is plotting the integral
with A' intervals of one, then the graph of [ f(t)dt will rise by c. If one plots the
Ja
antiderivative of/, and / ( A ) = c, one would draw a segment (positioned somewhere
vertically) with a slope of c. These two processes, as Mike put it [lines 1216 - 1217) are
graphically equivalent.
253
Near the end of the session, the students express multiple ideas about the
connection between antiderivatives and integrals when presented with graphs of f(t)dt
for various functions in Sketchpad. In looking at a graph of the accumulated area under
the graph of f(x) = 3, the students are willing to identify it as an antiderivative or an
integral. The students leave open the question of whether the integral or the
antiderivative is "a whole bunch of graphs that could be plus C" [lines 1508 - 1509J. The
examples I present to them in Sketchpad near the end of the session do not suggest a
definitive answer to the students. They identify the graph created by accumulation of
area, or a graph whose derivative is a function, as possibly being one or the other [lines
1543 - 1546, 1584, and 1727 - 1732J. Their interpretation of f f(x) as a "piece of a
graph" rather than an area, however, is consistent with their use of the word integral as a
word to describe a graph (no matter which process was used to create it.)
At the very end of the session, I present the students with the symbolism
•£ I f(t)dt = f(x) and ask the students to "break this apart for me", stating that 1 believe
it says "the derivative of this ([ f(t)dt) is the function you started with" [lines 1878 -
•J a
1879]. Given this introduction, Robert interprets the symbolism -^ \ f(t)dt = f(x) as a
way to express his statement from the previous months' session, that integration and
differentiation are inverse processes. Sherly notes that "the slopes are still the same",
perhaps referring to the fact that whatever the placement of f(t)dt, the slopes (f(x)) do
not change. Mike makes reference to his previous statements that the process of adding
areas and creating slopes resulting in equivalent graphs.

254
Throughout the entire session, the students used graphical meanings of
derivatives, integrals, and antiderivatives. They also justified their statements about these
terms using graphical arguments. With respect to the graphs that they used, the students
viewed the information from graphs globally, taking note of specific features of graphs
when they found an element of a graph that did not agree with their global view of what
the graph should look like. They looked at the derivative, the integral (as an
accumulation of area), and the antiderivative as functions without extensive reference to
symbolic representations of these terms. The students did not realize that the graph of
[ f{t)dt existed for value of x less than a, but the students did not report this as a
difficulty in making general conclusions about the properties of the graphs of integrals.
For the students in this session, graphical representations served as their primary
method for giving meaning to words and other verbal statements about derivative and
integrals. In the session, the students stated verbally that 4- f{t)dt is equivalent tojix),
and that [ f'(t)dt'\s equivalent to f{x) + C, and illustrated these ideas graphically. When
Ja
questioned on these issues, the students justify their verbal statements by relating how the
creation of the graph of an antiderivative results in the same shape graph as the creation
of an accumulation function. In focusing on graphs in this session, the students described
[ f(x) as a piece of an antiderivative graph from x = 2 to x = 3. While the standard
interpretation of this symbol is the area under the graph of/, the identification of this
symbol as a graph is consistent with the notion that one uses a graph to evaluate the
numerical value of the symbol.

255
5.5. Summary Analysis of the Four Sessions
In this section, I link together the research results from the four sessions to
summarize my findings with respect to the research questions of the study. I asked what
representations the students might use, what meanings the students might assign to
representations, how the students might link representations, and how the students might
reflect upon their use of representations. In the following I will discuss the research
results, addressing representations, meanings, links, and reflections to interpret how these
students "made sense" of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
5.5.1. Coordination of Representations
The students, having first taken calculus three and half years prior to the research
sessions, responded to the task of explaining the FTC to a current student of calculus by
explaining the theorem to themselves. In the textbooks the students consulted first, the
students found verbal and symbolic representations, typically accompanied by graphs. In
the selected texts, the reasoning behind the FTC was presented symbolically, with
different meanings expressed in the different texts. The students created their own
graphical representations to make sense of the symbols and words they found. They also
made graphical representations to express their own ideas and communicate the meaning
of symbolic and verbal representations.
In explaining the FTC to themselves, the students often "coordinated" a
statement in one representation by creating or referring to a different representation. I
have used the word "coordination" in the previous sections to describe the students'
activity of linking or comparing different representations to confirm, support, or explore
an idea expressed in a particular representation. The phrase "coordination of

256
representations" is used by Dennis and Confrey (Dennis & Confrey, 1996), and appears
in the work of some other authors (e.g. Duval, 1999; Stylianou & Silver, 2004). I use the
phrase to describe the work of the students because of the way in which the students
proceeded with their discussions. Particularly in the first session for both groups, the
students' discussion is marked by the linking of ideas as they occurred to the students,
rather than by progression from the "simple" to the "complex". When an idea was
suggested, using a particular representation, the idea was often revisited in a different
representation in order to support a statement or derive a meaning.
As the students recalled or found meanings related the Fundamental Theorem,
they organized their ideas to convince themselves of the reasonableness of their
statements. Both groups might use idea A to support idea B, then at another point use
idea B to support idea A, by coordinating these ideas across representations. In their first
session, for example, Angela, Magda and Romina recalled that one could find the area
under a curve by evaluating an antiderivative could be used to find the area under a
curve. They used the idea that the antiderivative of y = x2 is y = }x 3 to support the idea
that accumulation functions are a part of the meaning of the FTC, but also drew an
accumulation function to confirm the reasonableness of the idea that the antiderivative of
y = x2 was y - \x3. Graphs were used as a means to explain symbols; Angela, Magda
and Romina drew graphs to connect the symbolic statements in the Foerster text with the
meaning the integral as a subtraction of areas.
In all the sessions, graphical representations were at the center of students'
discussions about the FTC, but these representations were coordinated with others. To
these students, the words "integral" and "derivative" were given meaning through graphs
257
or as graphical processes and the students discussed the behavior of graphs without
assigning the graphs particular symbolic expressions. The students coordinated other
representations with their graphs, however, noting that a graph should look a certain way
because of a known symbolic result. In their first session, Brian, Mike, Robert and Sherly
mentioned a variety of symbolic and verbal statements of the PTC, and link these to their
discussion about the drawing of graphs of antiderivatives and area accumulation
functions. They note that vertically shifting a graph does not change its derivative,
supporting the symbolic result that antiderivatives have a constant term, and use the fact
that antiderivatives have a constant term to support the observation that antiderivatives
with different initial conditions are vertically shifted graphs.
Brian, Mike, Robert, and Sherly did not look to explain any particular symbolic
statement of the FTC in their sessions. However, they coordinated symbolic examples
with graphical results to support the reasonableness of graphs that they drew, and used
graphs to address Sherly's question about whether the statement
f{x)dx = f'{b) — f'{a) could be explained in the context of the accumulation functions
the students had drawn. Mike shows how the symbols are a quick result that can be
derived from the graph. Taking a different route, Angela, Magda and Romina spend a
significant part of their first session looking to explain the statement

rb
f{x)dx = g{b)-g{a) , making graphs for the purpose of doing so. These examples
illustrate how for both groups, no one representation was sufficient in and of itself; each
use of a representation to express an idea was accompanied by an effort to check the
validity of that idea in another representation.

258
5.5.2. Meanings of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus
In representing integrals and derivatives as graphs, the students communicated
certain meanings of the FTC more prominently than others. For each group, the meaning
of integrals as accumulation functions (of the area under a graph) was the primary
meaning they used to reason about the FTC. In their first session, Angela, Magda and
Romina used this meaning to explain the symbolic statement f(x)dx = g(b) - g(a), and
Ja
their graphical constructions led them to pose the question of why, in this formulation, g
is the derivative of/(despite already stating, at least implicitly, through the examples
they used, that g should be an antiderivative.) In their first session, Brian, Mike, Robert,
and Sherly used integrals as accumulation functions and noted that the graphical process
of drawing an antiderivative (a graph with particular slopes) is equivalent to the graphical
process of drawing an plot of the accumulated area.
In their first session, Sherly and Robert verbally associate the symbolic statement
fb
f{x)dx = F{b) - F(a) with finding the total change from the rate of change, while Brian
Ja
and Robert talked about an example in the text showing this statement used to evaluate
the area under a curve. However, Brian, Mike, Robert, and Sherly spent little time
examining the statement, and instead focused on the drawing of graphs. In so doing, the
students became focused on the connection between antiderivatives and integrals that is
expressed by the symbolic statement J f(t)dt = I f(t)dt + C. They noted that two area
accumulation functions are vertical shifts of each other, and that antiderivatives have this
same property. Brian, Mike, Robert, and Sherly did not justify the use of an
antiderivative as a means of calculating the area under a graph, as their discussion of the
processes of drawing "integrals" in two ways makes their equivalence clear.

259
Angela, Magda and Romina took a different path in their first session. To this
group, the use of antiderivatives to evaluate the area under the graphs was a result that
required explanation. These three students first graphically explained the statement
rb
f(x)dx = g(b)-g(a) , and also made sense of a detailed symbolic proof of this
Ja
rb
statement by drawing graphs. The students first interpreted f(x)dx = g(b)- g(a) as a
Ja
statement about regions of area being subtracted and then as the subtraction of two values
of the function g. After discussing the meaning of the integral as an accumulation
function, and the construction of the quantity g{b) — g(a) as a sum of the areas of a series
of rectangles, the students plotted a graph of an accumulated area function. The students
then asked why g is the antiderivative off. Given the meanings these students assigned to
integrals up to this point, this was an open question for them, and they then inquired why
the slope of the accumulation function of/would be/.
In their second session, Angela, Magda, and Romina again focused on graphical
representations to explain why g is the antiderivative of / in the statement

rb
f(x)dx = g(b) — g(a) . In investigating this question, the students coordinated their
Ja
knowledge of the symbolic rule for antiderivatives of power functions with the graphical
results of plotting f(t)dt. They used the graphical result to support the symbolic rule of
"going up a power" and used the symbolic rule as confirmation of their graphical
processes. Angela noticed, and stated verbally, that the rate of change of f(t)dt is
given by the value of the function/, and the students spend the majority of the time in the
session working with graphical and numerical representations to confirm this statement
and find support for the use of antiderivatives to calculate area.

260
5.53. Graphical Representations
As the students coordinated representations to make sense of each other's
statements, such as Romina's question, "does the integral measure the slope?", graphical
representations were at the center of their discussions. Romina, Magda, and Angela
made sense of this statement by drawing graphs and talking about the behavior of these
graphs using descriptive terms and numerical values. Magda's recollection that
antiderivatives have the addition of a constant term followed her observation that the
graph of [ f{t)dt has an "initial condition" and she then suggested changing the value
Ja
of a in f{t)dt to observe the graphical result. The result - a vertical translation -
provided students with graphical evidence that [ f(t)dt is an antiderivative of/.
The students did not view this evidence as completely sufficient, however, as
they continued to look for a graphical explanation of why the rate of change of | f{t)dt
Ja
is given by / . This group of students pointed to graphical evidence (increasing and
decreasing behavior of | f(t)dt a n d / ) that the derivative of [ f(t)dt was/. I asked the
Ja Ja
students to explain further why they are sure that/, and not some other graph, was the
derivative. Angela suggested, verbally, that the rate of change of the accumulation of area
must be the actual value of the graph/ The students looked to coordinate this statement
with numerical evidence drawn from particular graphs in Sketchpad in the latter part of
the session. Using a graphical and numerical representation of average rate of change,
they explained that the average rate of change of [ f{t)dt is equal to the area under the
Ja
graph of the/on any particular interval.
Romina added that "the slope equals the area", referring to this average rate of
change. This explanation is very similar to the conclusion Brian, Mike, Robert and Sherly
261
came to in their second session, after I asked them why they used the words
antiderivative and integral interchangeably. Throughout their second session, Brian,
Mike, Robert and Sherly described how they would use graphical representations to
explain the FTC to a learner, following up their suggestion from the first session. In
particular, they explained how the graphical process of drawing an accumulation function
results in the same graph as the graphical process of drawing an antiderivative. They
explained that they would use the same methodology they themselves used to explain the
theorem to themselves - create graphs and make observations about those graphs. Brian,
Mike, Robert and Sherly suggested that the learner would come to the same conclusion
because the learner would notice connections between graphical and symbolic
representations.
In these sessions, the students used graphical representations in particular as
problem-solving and explanatory tools. For example, both groups of students talked
about f{t)dt graphically, discussing how f(t)dt=\ f(t)dt + C for some constants
Ja Ja Jb
a, b, and C without particular emphasis on symbolism to communicate their meaning.
The students developed their own lines of inquiry as they made observations about the
graphs they created. The verbal and symbolic rules that they found or recalled from their
prior study of calculus of were translated into graphical form, giving the students
evidence for the truth of those statements. Angela, Magda, and Romina explain the
statement f{x)dx = g{b) - g(a) first with a graph, using a particular symbolic example
Ja
to explain the graph, rather than the other way around, as might be more typical. While
the students coordinate graphical, symbolic, numerical and verbal representations
throughout the sessions, graphical representations were the form that they turned to
262
throughout to make statements about the meaning of FTC the reasons for the validity of
those statements.
5.5.4. Multiple Representations
The use of multiple representations in the learning of mathematics is a frequent
suggestion in the literature, and in recommendations for teachers and students of calculus.
The data described here provide a case study of how students might work with multiple
representations other than produce them upon request. In the session, the two groups of
students each created and discussed multiple representations as a means of recalling ideas
and assigning meaning to words, symbols, and graphs. The students moved between
representations to reason about mathematical statements, and created lines of inquiry
which in turn promoted the need for further movement between representations, or the
need for analysis of a particular representation.
The data described here provide examples of the multiple ways in which students
might link representations to reason about a single mathematical result. With respect to
the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus in particular, the data provide a case study of how
students can emphasize different meanings of the FTC when they focus on different
representations, and how inquiry into the meaning of representations can promote
reasoning. Variously, these students suggested that drawing a function representing
accumulated area and drawing an antiderivative are the same "process", that the rate of
change of the accumulated area under the graph o f / i s equal to the value of/, that area
accumulation functions must be vertical translations of each other, and that area under a
graph can be found by a process of successive subtractions as well as a single subtraction.

263
The students came to each of these meanings through examination of multiple
representations.
In the sessions, the order in which students employed different representations
appeared to be determined by the needs of the moment and the individual. The choice of
representation followed the students' efforts to make their statements clear to each other,
and to answer questions posed by group members. One group discussed how to explain
the symbolic statement f(x)dx = g(b) - g(a) in graphical form from the very beginning
of their session, while for the other group this question came near the end. The students'
discussions of the properties of g(x)= f{t)dt motivated questions about derivatives
and integrals that the students pursued through the creation of different representations.
As they coordinated these different representations and results, the students chose the
representations that they decided would be useful or meaningful.
The approach of coordinating multiple representations and results runs contrary to
the belief that mathematics is a fixed chain of statements and conclusions that leads from
basic statements to more complex ones. In the sessions, each student suggested
meanings that were open for interpretation, and each questioned the ideas of others. The
students in this study were accustomed to solving mathematics problems collaboratively,
and in the students' conversations, each of the students draw conclusions that are drawn
from their own comments and the comments of others. These conclusions were often
important generalizations about the FTC, deduced from multi-representational evidence,
rather than from a sequence of ordered statements. Angela's statements about the rate of
change of area, for example, put an important idea about the FTC a nutshell, and her
group looked to other representations and other results to support and confirm that the
264
rate of change of the area under the graph of a function was equal to the value of that
function.
5.5.5. Students' Reflections
On a number of occasions during the sessions, the students commented about
their experiences with representations in mathematics. The students' reflections upon
their use of representations are consistent with their use of representations in the sessions.
The students appear to recognize that the choice of representation may make a difference
in a learner's understanding, and express a preference for active demonstrations with
graphs. In the first session, for example, Magda puts aside a textbook after noting that
she does not "like how this is written" [line 74, Appendix A], and chooses another text.
Referring to her experiences in calculus at the university level, Magda notes [lines 279 -
283, Appendix AJ:
to figure the area underneath it cause you could be taking

like sine of blah blah blah of like some ridiculous
equations, and some of the equations, you wouldn't even
know what they look like... you wouldn't even have to
know what the graph looks like, you can take the integral of
it, you can just plug the numbers and get the answer
Magda makes a point of indicating that she did work with finding expressions for
antiderivatives of functions and used this to calculate areas under curves of functions,
perhaps without graphing either function. She notes a few minutes later that she learned
"so many different ways of taking integrals" (line 386, Appendix A] but is just now
refreshing her memory as she helps her sister take calculus. In contrast, in the second
session, Magda reports that she "totally" remembers the dynamic graphical representation
of an accumulation function as shown with the Sketchpad during her high school class
[lines 539 - 540, Appendix B[.

265
In the second session, Robert recalls an experience from his college mathematics
classes, "You just do this this this this this there wasn't like no thinking involved" [line
823 - 824]. Near the end of the session, he says that most teachers "just ask us to give
you the formula but you're trying to actually like understand it", referring to my role in
asking questions in the second session [lines 2025 - 2026, Appendix D[. During the first
session, Angela notes that the group should not copy words from an available textbook as
part of their response to the task, because that would be "plagiarism" [line 549, Appendix
A], adding " I'm not just going to steal something out of the book we're not going to
learn anything it if we do it like that". Much later in the session [lines 1540 - 1541,
Appendix A| Angela brings up this issue again, and Romina responds by stating
"obviously if we don't understand I can't plagiarize it".
Mike, thinking about how to help a student learn calculus, notes, "you really
shouldn't give them a formal version cause they wouldn't understand it" [lines 434-437,
Appendix B|. Later in that session, he notes that when one records an idea with words,
"You miss so much stuff...you can't put it all down "[line 1837 , Appendix B| echoing
Brian's comments that it would be better to explain it to the student in person [line 1833,
Appendix B]. Mike adds, a few minutes later, "I think the best way to learn something
like this is not by reading it... by seeing it done in front of you, something like that, you
know?", pointing to the graphs he had drawn during the session [lines 2292 - 2293,
Appendix B|. Brian and Sherly concur, describing how they might demonstrate the
creation of a graph with an animation of the process.
Angela states that "I'm just a person who likes words" [line 1907, Appendix Al
but Romina expresses a different opinion, noting, "I don't like learning math with
266
language" [lines 1953 - 1954, Appendix A]. Angela responds, " I don't think I could do it
any other way. It's the way I think" adding "I can't read math language... I mean graphs
help me more than other things but like just articulating it in regular words is the best
way for me". Romina suggests that she would "do words... but words are kind of just the
filler, because you're explaining the graph" (line 1970, Appendix A). Romina also states,
"If someone didn't understand it, I'd draw a graph" (line 1881, Appendix A) and notes
that she recalls having graphs used when she first learned the Fundamental Theorem.
At the end of that session, Romina relates a discussion she had with me in 1999,
in the spring before her high school calculus class began. In attempting to give her a
sense of what calculus was about, I showed her a graph of velocity as a function of time
for a moving car. I asked her to determine what the area under the graph represented, and
she realized that it represented the distance traveled by the car. After telling this story to
Magda and Angela, Romina suggested that if her teacher could explain calculus with
graphs to her, "I think that's fine that I explain it to someone like that" |lines 1896 -
1897, Appendix A |.
267
6. Implications
In the AP Calculus Teacher's Guide, Howell explains that the AP Calculus test
development committee's has "a commitment to multiple representations" (Howell,
2007). In his commentary on a particular AP Calculus exam question, Howell notes "the
way you think about the answers depends on the representation of the function". In the
Teacher's Guide - AP Calculus (Kennedy, 1997), Kennedy suggests that the study of
integrals and derivatives, and how they are linked by the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus, should involve the use of multiple meanings of these words and of the theorem.
In his study of students' thinking about the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus,
Thompson (1994a) suggests that it is important that students use representations to
describe "what is going on" with the FTC. The question of how students might use
representations to build and communicate meanings about the FTC is the fundamental
question of this study. In this section, I will highlight implications of the results of this
study related to the issues raised by the preceding comments, with particular attention to
contemporary and longstanding issues in the teaching of calculus. I conclude with
suggestions for how students might "make sense" of the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus within the broader context of their study of calculus.
6.1. Coordinating Multiple Representations
As indicated in the Teacher's Guide (Howell, 2007), multiple representations are
both a goal and an instructional strategy in AP Calculus. Students should learn to solve
problems expressed in a variety of representations, and use multiple representations to
make sense of the meaning of a particular word or symbol. A student who knows that the
meaning of the definite integral is more than "something you do to the derivative rules in
268
reverse, then plug in two numbers" (Kennedy, 1997) may be able to solve a variety of
problems because of an ability to interpret the meaning of a question and perhaps solve it
in multiple ways. Students who remain in one representation appear to operate less
successfully; a student's progress is slowed when he or she sees only one aspect of a
concept. As Harel and Sowder note, "most students' repertoires of reasoning do not
include the way of thinking that 'A concept can be understood in different ways' and that
'It is often advantageous to change ways of understanding of a concept when attempting
to solve a problem' " (Harel & Sowder, 2005).
To develop the capabilities Harel and Sowder describe, a student might, as
Thompson suggests, use representations as opportunities to "consider if what she said
was what she intended to say and if what she intended to say is what she said"
(Thompson, 1996). Thompson suggests, however, that "negotiations with oneself about
meaning" are largely outside the experience of most school students. Agreeing with
Davis (R. B. Davis, 1992), Thompson sees students' notational actions oriented towards
"putting the right stuff on paper". In this study, however, the students' back-and-forth,
give-and-take conversation was very much not about putting "right stuff on paper.
Instead, the students' work was oriented towards making the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus "intelligible", as Thompson suggests (Thompson, 1994a), and much of the
students' use of representations served as opportunities for reflection about meaning.
Duval notes that "mathematical comprehension begins" when students coordinate
representations (Duval, 2006).
The students' activity involved the use of representations to communicate ideas,
and the coordination of different representations to construct meanings. The students

269
talked to each other to decide what the FTC meant to them, why it was true, and how it
could be explained to a novice student. Researchers who have looked at students'
learning of the FTC have noted the difficulties students have with the many "parts" of the
theorem (Carlson et al., 2003; Smith, 2008; K. S. C. Thomas, 1995; Thompson, 1994a;
Thompson & Silverman, 2007) The students in this study, however, took an approach
that Tall attributes to successful mathematics learners. Tall suggests that mathematicians
"selectively focus on the most useful representation" - graphic, numeric, or symbolic -
and display "versatile movement between representations". Tall recommends that
students be encouraged to move between representations in a "cognitively natural" way,
rather than be required to examine all representations at the same time (Tall, 1993b). The
students in this study used representations selectively, as Zack and Reid describe. "Trying
to optimize" - i.e. explain every detail - "can be counterproductive" (Zack & Reid, 2003,
2004).
The students questioned a result when they felt that it needed questioning, and
accepted a result when it seemed reasonable. Duval notes, "Too often, investigations
focus on what the right representations are or what the most accessible register would be
in order to make students truly understand and use some particular mathematical
knowledge" (Duval, 2006). The students' work provides an example of the productive
mathematical activity that can result when students are given the opportunity to make
their own decisions about how to represent ideas. As Thompson suggests "it may be
wrongheaded to focus on graphs, expressions, or tables as representations of function.
We should instead focus on them as representations of something that, from the students'
perspective, is representable, such as aspects of a specific situation" (Thompson, 1994b).

270
For these students, graphs, easily created by hand, served as a basis for giving meaning to
other representations of the theorem.
While the students used graphs as a launching point, the students coordinated
different pieces of information that they knew about derivatives and integrals across
representations. Given the task of explaining the theorem to a fictional novice student, the
students focused on aspects of the FTC that they could communicate meaningfully to
each other. As Mike states, "We don't need the formal version, they're not asking for the
formal version they're asking us to explain it to some student, you know, you really
shouldn't give them a formal version cause they wouldn't understand it" [lines 434 - 437,
Transcript 2]. The students coordinated representation to get a sense of the "big picture"
(Tall, 1985) of the FTC while working with some of the details. Tall suggests the student
"would be in a better position to organise his thinking" with respect to calculus and the
FTC using such a strategy, and the students successfully use just this strategy here.
6.2. Organization of Ideas
In 1999, I wrote in a handout for a calculus workshop for teachers using the
Geometer's Sketchpad software. In the handout, I commented that getting the
fundamental ideas of calculus "in students' minds from the very beginning" would be a
means of "encouraging them to look for underlying connections and explanations rather
than passively waiting for results to be shown to them". The students' communications
in this study support the idea that students who take this approach may engage in such
active mathematical behaviors. As these students looked to communicate the meaning of
the FTC, they established connections and explanations that did not follow the particular
logical order of limits, then derivatives, then integrals, and then the FTC. Calculus
271
educators have begun to reconsider the approach to the subject that places the concepts of
calculus in this particular order, and these students' communications suggest that such
approaches may productively build upon students' own ways of organizing the ideas of
calculus.
Additional support for this implication comes from Newton himself. When he
established a connection between the area under a graph and the rate of change of that
area, he had the some sense of a "big picture". When he found expressions for the
derivatives of functions of the form A", he already knew that Fermat and others had
established that the area under the curve x" was given by xn+ll{n + 1) by means unrelated
to the study of rates (Maor, 1994, pgs. 70 - 79). Newton's discovery that the rate of
change of x" was given by (n - l)xn~' may have led him to examine the rate of change of
the area under a graph, and propose the Fundamental Theorem. While mathematics is not
popularly characterized as an activity that proceeds such a "non-linear" fashion (Dennis
& Confrey, 1996), it is perhaps more common than not for learners to first see
conclusions give meaning to "prerequisites" in addition to prerequisites giving meaning
to conclusions.
Asking students to study each topic in the logical order determined by the
mathematical community can hide the thinking that went into the mathematical result
(Dennis & Confrey, 1996; Kline, 1970). The method of presenting students with results,
without the chance to investigate, wonder, and deal with uncertainty, Kline suggests,
"robs the student of insight". Students may not learn to make mathematical observations
for themselves if educators point out what it is that should be observed. Asking students
to build a foundation of ideas about limits before they can learn about derivatives,
272
integrals, and the FTC, for example, leaves the students without the advantage of the
questions that led to the development of limits in the first place. Newton's and Leibniz's
formulations of a connection between rates and area motivated the development of the
idea of limits (Boyer, 1949; Kline, 1970). Without such questions, students do not have
the opportunity to organize the information in conceptual frameworks that enhance
learning and retention (Donovan & Bransford, 2005). It is possible, for example, that
involving students in investigation about the important questions of the calculus will lead
students to ask educators for the study of limits, rather than traditional situation where
educators ask students to study limits.
6.3. Student Activity
Questions that involve students in the active use of representations may help
students develop habits of mathematical activity that contribute to success in more
advanced mathematical work. Making the practice of mathematics one of asking
questions and coordinating representations, rather than one of repetition of
decontextualized methods, puts students in a very different position with respect to their
learning. Students have been known to ask "what do they want in this problem" rather
than asking, as Angela does, "actually now I'm curious... we should find out" [lines 388
- 389, Appendix C|. Involving students in the use of representations can build students'
capacity to communicate with others in the classroom rather than checking an authority
for the correct answer. Students who create representations for a purpose may be more
likely to care about the results of their work and whether it makes any sense to others
(and to themselves). Such orientations to mathematical activity are important ingredients
to grasping complex mathematical concepts (Alcock & Simpson, 2004, 2005; Weber &
273
Alcock, 2004). If students are dissatisfied when their representations don't mean
anything, they may be less likely to set derivatives equal to zero whenever they see the
word "minimum" in a calculus question (Borgen & Manu, 2002).
That these students would have a conversation about the FTC in the form that
they did may be attributable to the students' particular history of doing mathematics
together. These students have used different representations of mathematical ideas,
discovered connections, and revisited ideas in new contexts that raised new questions
about previously settled conclusions (Benko, 2006; Francisco, 2004; Giordano, 2008;
R.D. Kiczek, 2000; Martino, 1992; Mayansky, 2007; Muter, 1999; Powell, 2003;
Sweetman, 2005; Tarlow, 2004; Uptegrove, 2005; Walter, 2004). In this study, the
students coordinated results and multiple representations to make sense of the FTC,
forming connections in ways that acknowledge calculus as a cohesive body of knowledge
(Kennedy, 1997; NCTM, 1989, 2000). The students' work in the sessions suggests that a
long term commitment to creating connected experiences for students can encourage
students to engage in these kinds of active mathematical behaviors. If students of
calculus are to leave the subject with the ability to take "concepts apart, understand where
they come from, see how their elements are inter-related, and ultimately see how they
might be used in a new context to build insights" (Roberts, 1996), engaging students in
long-term conversations about mathematical ideas may be essential.
The students' conversations, and the connections they made, also point to the
importance of collaborative work in mathematics. The students spent their time
discussing meanings of the FTC, questioning results, and drawing conclusions based
upon multiple sources of evidence. Romina's comment to Magda, "push me there", [line
274
1336, Appendix C| typifies the collaborative nature of the students' work. The students
viewed each others' statements as contributions to their own understanding and to the
goals of the group. As Dennis and Confrey suggest, "it is the mathematical action rather
than the result which most deeply conveys meaning" (Dennis & Confrey, 1996). The
discussions of the students provide a vivid example of what collaboration might look like
in the learning of calculus and how it serves to advance students' search for mathematical
meaning. This kind of activity is consistent with group members' prior experiences in
sense-making and open discussion of their own ideas during their participation in the
long term longitudinal study.
Of course, when a person notes that they "understand" what another has said,
this statement does not guarantee that the ideas each person holds are an identical match
(Thompson, 1999). But as Boyer notes, "Calculus was the result of a long train of
mathematical thought, developed slowly and with great difficulty by very many thinkers
(Boyer, 1949, page 29). Boyer adds, "There is a strong temptation on the part of
professional mathematicians and scientists to seek always to ascribe great discoveries and
inventions to individuals. Rarely, if perhaps never, is the single mathematician or
scientist entitled to receive credit" (Boyer, 1949. page 299). The students' work in these
sessions is an example of how a mathematical conversation moves forward through the
contributions of individuals, leaving some questions answered, but perhaps more
importantly, leaving some questions open.
6.4. Teaching Calculus
While the particular experiences of these students may or may not be replicable,
their experiences can serve as a model. Contexts and questions that students believe are
275
worth having conversations about do exist. Educators need not insist on making sure
students learn every detail before examining important questions. Students can have
connected experiences that motivate them to ask their own questions. These conditions
may play important roles in achieving the goals the mathematical community has
expressed for the learning of calculus, and are not outside of the reach of high schools
and colleges. Educators can be provided time to analyze the many facets of a result like
the FTC so that they can design tasks for students that respond to students' needs rather
than the dictates of the textbook, and help the students raise their own questions about
meaning and representation.
Small learning communities for both teachers and students can also provide an
environment for educators to examine students' emerging ideas, and apply strategies such
as lesson study (Stigler & Hiebert, 1999). Such environments and strategies provide
educators with the opportunity to plan instructional activities that engage students in
connected discussions over time. When teachers from multiple grade levels engage in
discussions about ideas that are learned across grade levels, they can create experiences
for students that recognize that learning may not proceed linearly. This group of students
differ from most in that they have had a group of researchers communicating with them
over the course of 13 years prior to their participation in this study. However, it is not
impossible to create similar strands of communication between teachers and students
across years in schools.
Motivating students to talk about meanings may also require that educators
recognize the possibility (or likelihood) that students will come to their classrooms with
gaps in their learning and preconceptions about certain mathematical ideas. Rather than
276
believe "We can give them the correct approaches and they will understand", an approach
Kline states and dismisses (Kline, 1970), educators might think about how to use
students' prior experiences to motivate classroom discussion, rather than aiming to "fill
in the gaps". While there may be no single recipe for engaging students in discussion,
examining student conversations such as the ones in this study may help educators see
how students' ideas can differ from the logically organized results in textbooks or their
own conceptions of those results. In appreciating these differences, educators may be
better equipped to engage students in conversations that promote student questioning and
independent decision-making.
As Zack and Reid note, mathematics is viewed as sequential, and "Complete
understanding of underlying concepts is assumed to be necessary before new concepts are
learned" (Zack & Reid, 2003, 2004). As students learn mathematics, however, they may
advance by forming deeper connections between certain ideas while others remain less
developed (Harel & Sowder, 2005; Rasmussen et al., 2005). Zack and Reid suggest that
in practice, students may settle on an idea that is "good enough" (Zack & Reid, 2003,
2004) to allow conversation to continue. Determining when students are forming
connections and when they have settled on incomplete ideas as actual ideas (Vinner,
1997a, 1997b) is again a matter of finding out what students are thinking and how they
have arrived at their current understandings, and selecting tasks or experiences that may
cause the learner to question their assumptions.
Engaging student interest in mathematics as a worthwhile endeavor is perhaps the
most important goal of a mathematics program; students are unlikely to learn
mathematics if they have stopped thinking about it. The students' conversations about
277
the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus provide an example of how students can talk about
meanings, rather than focus on producing representations. Angela, the English major,
says "I really want to know now" [lines 690 - 691, Appendix C], indicating her curiosity
had been piqued by the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. The model of mathematical
practice that involves two-way communication between teachers and students remains at
odds with the typical schedule for learning and organization of students into groups that
presumably move along at the same pace. Focusing students upon discussions about
meanings, permitting loose ends to be explored at a later time, and choosing tasks that fit
the needs of students who may be approaching a concept in different ways, requires an
investment of time and learning on the part of school communities.
Developing students' thinking about the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus may
require revisiting ideas (as suggested by Howell (Howell, 2007)) at times determined by
the needs of the students. Educators may be accustomed to asking a class to prove a
mathematical result that students have yet to wonder about, or using a particular method
of solving a problem because the class has reached a particular section of a book. Such
habits, however, may do more harm than good for students' development. Students may
not learn what to do when the teacher is not present to direct their thinking, or know why
the question is being asked. To talk with students and ask them what an idea means to
them, rather than showing students what it should mean to them, is an approach that takes
into account the idea that students will not all develop ideas at the same rate. Vinner
suggests that students be encouraged to take the ideas that they do develop - which may
be initially simple associations between words - and refine them over time (Vinner,
1997a, 1997b). Kline notes that Leibniz himself "objected to 'overprecise critics' and
278
argued that we should not be led by excessive scrupulousness to reject the fruits of
invention" (Kline, 1970). To make such an approach feasible, however, again requires
that the professional role of teachers involve more analysis of student learning than is
currently provided for.
6.5. The Use of Graphical Representations
The students' coordination of graphical representations with other representations
stands out as a strategy that may have implications for the teaching and learning of
calculus. In drawing a graph without a given symbolic representation, the symbolic
representation may take on a different meaning for the learner: a way to describe
something that one has noticed. A symbolic representation becomes a way of talking
about a graph's behavior, rather than the rule that creates the graph. Students can draw
graphs of the average rate of change of a function given only by a graph, and make
graphical observations about the behavior of the new graph with respect to the given
graph. They may notice, for example, that the rate of change graph has a value of zero
when the given graph has a maximum or minimum, before learning a rule about setting
derivative equations equal to zero to find maximums and minimums. As the students in
this study observed, one can draw a graph of the accumulated area under a given graph
and notice (if one knows about derivatives) that this rate of change graph is "correlated"
(as Romina and Brian note) to the given graph - specifically, that the derivative of the
accumulated area is the given graph. Students who discover this relationship are in the
same position as Newton (although he may have arrived at his position symbolically, as
described above).
279
Making this kind of observation about derivatives and integrals and then looking
to attach symbols to the observation is a different way of approaching the ideas involved.
Tall suggested a graphical approach over 20 years ago, but the graphical approach
remains largely untested. Students are reported to find difficulties in the learning the
FTC as they grapple with symbolic notation presented during their investigations into the
FTC (Smith, 2008; K. S. C. Thomas, 1995). While the students in this study have already
learned calculus, the graphical representations were clearly foremost in their mind as they
looked back to recall the FTC. The students drew graphs of derivatives and integrals
with ease, allowing them to focus on discussing meanings and giving them results from
which to support their statements in other representations. Further study of how students
might use graphical representations to support their reasoning in other forms may be of
benefit to calculus educators (Pinto & Tall, 2002; Tall, 1992). While graphical
representations may not be the "solution" for all students, they may provide teachers and
students with a useful alternative means of approaching calculus and the FTC.
In particular, the students used graphical representations not as ends unto
themselves, but as a way to develop meanings and connections between representations.
In looking to explain the FTC to themselves, the students used graphical representations
as a means to negotiate the meanings of other representations, using any new ideas
developed to give greater meaning to the graphical representation. This back and forth
movement using graphical representations allowed the students to move their discussion
towards shared conclusions about meaning. While symbolic representations may have a
distinguished track record with respect to precision when used to summarize results,
these learners found that graphical representations permitted ongoing negotiation of

280
meaning. If students are to develop their own lines of mathematical inquiry, there may
be untapped potential for graphical representations to support students' reasoning.
6.6. Conclusion
The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus is considered by some to be one of the
most extraordinary results in the annals of mathematics (Diefenderfer, 2005). Referring
to two forms of the FTC, Kennedy notes that students may be "less than impressed with
the profundity of these results" if they consider only the idea that "integration is the
opposite of differentiation" (Kennedy, 1997). In their use of collaborative communication
and active inquiry into this well-established mathematical result, the students in this study
brought the theorem to life once more. This is certainly a goal of mathematics instruction:
that students reinvent the "mathematical experience" (P. J. Davis & Hersh, 1981) for
themselves. These students organized their thinking about the FTC through coordinating
different representations. While it may be possible to point out some knowledge or
viewpoint that the students did not discuss, the absence of an external requirement to
express the theorem in a particular way may have contributed to the liveliness of the
students' discussions.
The search for the "right way" to teach any topic will continue, and researchers
will continue to examine students difficulties with particular aspects of the FTC.
However, the students' discussions in this study can serve as a reminder that learners can
use representational tools in ways that are meaningful from their own emerging
perspectives, and in ways that lead to new and productive learning. Seeing that learners
might come to conclusions as these learners did can also serve as a reminder for
educators to listen to the learners' ideas as developing perspectives rather than errors to
281
be fixed. As Davis reminds us, "students usually do deal with meanings" just not the
way educators may expect; students "create their own meanings" (R. B. Davis, 1988).
This process of "making sense" of mathematics is one that may sometimes be lost in an
effort to insure that all the right topics are taught the right way. If mathematics
education, and the learning of calculus in particular, leave students with the interest in
and habits of learning that encourage them to continue and/or use their studies, then
mathematics education may be considered a success.

Appendix A: Transcript of Session 1 with Group 1, June 25,2003.
1 Pantozzi: Here is the question.

2 Angela: Thank you. [Angela whispers to MagdaJ.
3 Romina: That is way to too much college right there.
4 Pantozzi: Now 1 want you to know before you begin, this is not a test of what you
5 remember...
6 Angela: Good I...
7 Pantozzi: You're not going to be rated upon what you say, whether it's right or
8 wrong, and to help you, as it says there, I have about six or seven
9 different calculus textbooks over there, and some other materials, I have
10 papers you did back in 1999,1 have some tests you did in 1999,
11 Romina: They look like that piece of paper you just had...
12 Pantozzi: The calculus textbooks over there, I put a bookmark, a fluorescent yellow
13 bookmark on the page where is says what the Fundamental Theorem of
14 Calculus is, so it's not a matter of saying here.
15 Angela: Search through this.
16 Pantozzi: So it you want to start talking about it without looking through the books,
17 that's fine, if you want to go straight to the books, [students laughs] et
18 cetera, I'm not really going to be participating, I might come in
19 afterwards, after a half and hour,
20 Romina: Are you going to ask us questions? No direction?
21 Angela: We have a little thing here to do, didn't you read the directions?
22 Romina: We, but I thought we'd get some direction or something, some like
23 whys... all right.
24 Angela: OK.
25 Romina: OK.
26 Pantozzi: OK.
27 Angela: We should go get a book, because I don't remember what it is.
28 Pantozzi: If you want to draw any pictures, say anything, demonstrate,
29 Romina: Should we make a plan.
30 Pantozzi: And again you can ask...
31 Angela: You be the leader...
32 Romina: I'll be the leader because I'm bossy?
33 Angela: I say I think I actually did well in calculus in high school, but I don't
34 remember anything.
35 Romina: Angela, so did I
36 Angela: We should get some of our test papers...
37 Romina: No...[laughs] OK, yeah, we'll get that, and we'll...I don't even know
38 what it is, so I have to read the actual definition.
39 Magda: It's the integral divided by b - a or something.
40 Angela: Oh my god... You remember that?
41 Romina: Oh this is our calculus book!
42 Angela: That was?
43 Romina: Oh, that's bad, Angela.
44 Pantozzi: Well, we didn't use it that often.
283
45 Romina: I just remember the guy on it.

46 Pantozzi: [Inaudible]
47 Angela: I don't think I looked...We want Mike Aiello's paper, right?
48 Romina: You guys., if you're getting your papers, can I have mine? Ha ha.
49 Magda: This one is...
50 Pantozzi: Here's a whole bunch of stuff.
51 Romina: I actually took notes Magda...see now they're helping us..
52 Angela: Oh Yeah, I got a four on that one!
53 Pantozzi: [inaudiblej
54 Romina: In class... oh Angela too.
55 Magda: [inaudiblej
56 Romina: I'm probably the only one of us who took notes...
57 Magda: We took some notes too.
58 Romina: Oh, I remember this...the Riemann sum we're going to stop there [laughs]
59 that's the one where he draws the little boxes and you add them up
60 Magda: Yeah.
61 Romina: I was I couldn't remember I was like I hope that's what it is... remember
62 he drew the integral and then drew the boxes and then add all the boxes up
63 Angela: I didn't remember that's what it was called.
64 Romina: Yeah, that was the first words, so I figured... Guys, I have all this, do you
65 want me to read it... this was our actual textbook.
66 Magda: I think she's got a different book.
67 Romina: OK, do you want me to read.. .guys I have all this, do you want me to read
68 it? This was our actual textbook...
69 Angela: Do we have to each do this, or can we like come up with one big thing?
70 Romina: We have to come up with one big thing. ...
71 Angela: All right, good.
72 Romina: I think, you're the one who said I should read the question...
73 Angela: It says we can ask other students for help, but I don't know.
74 Magda: I don't like how this is written.
75 Angela: Let's look through papers that might be more helpful, right?
76 (Angela and Magda point at a paper, laughing together)
77 Romina: Is there not just like a definition of what the Fundamental Theorem is?
78 Magda: Well I have this, you can read this, but I don't like this book.
79 Angela: Get another one Magda.
80 Romina: The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus... If f is an integrable.. I can't
81 even say it., function... blah blah blah g(b) and g(a) etc. I remember
82 that... all right, we're good to go...
83 Angela: This one... All right, teach me...
84 Romina: Angela, I have to look at my stuff... I remember seeing it
85 Angela: You guys took calculus in college... I can't remember this stuff.
86 Magda: Basically, isn't it just taking the integral of the thing, of the function and
87 then ...
88 Romina: [reading out of the Foerster text] OK, g(x) equals the integral of ... OK
89 from point a to b of this, the function... equals g(b) - g(a)
90 Angela: Do that.
91 Magda: Come again, OK, then it s.
92 Romina: So OK...
93 Magda: Just take the integral between the interval
94 Romina: OK, isn't that the one where., the a, b... the integral of all of this minus
95 the integral of all of this equals the area from here to here, [draws figure]
96 Magda: Yes.
97 Romina: All right, I got it.
98 Magda: Well basically...
99 Angela: I got it now that you drew that.
100 Magda: The integral is like the area underneath the graph, right?
101 Romina: I'm not going to be able to understand Mike Aiello's work.
102 Angela: Then let's get rid of Mike Aiello's work...
103 Romina: And Brian...
104 Angela: [laughs]
105 Angela: There are none of Magda's, by the way...
106 Romina: Did you do that on purpose?
107 Magda: Where's yours?
108 Romina: Robert I can't understand.
109 Angela: Ah ha, my homework.
110 Romina: Well.
111 Magda: What exactly are we looking for?
112 Romina: I don't know. That's you.
113 Angela: Something to jog our memory. That's me.
114 Romina: Michelle.
115 Angela: That's not me. My handwriting is not that neat.
116 Romina: That's me, it has hearts on it.
117 Angela: That's you, too.
118 Romina: That's me, I don't even know why I...
119 Angela: That's you, too.
120 Romina: That's me.
121 Magda: [inaudible]
122 [laughter]
123 Romina: Where is he, is this just my pile of work?
124 Angela: You did a lot of homework.
125 Romina: Oh Jeff, there we go.
126 Angela: I saw him this weekend.
127 Romina: I saw him too... I don't do things in pen. Maybe it is mine. This when we
128 went for the afterschool thing.
129 Angela: This looks like my handwriting.
130 Romina: The three of use when we were practicing for stuff... yeah.
131 Magda: Yeah.
132 Angela: Something of Magda's.
133 Romina: Ankur, we can take some of Ankur's stuff because he writes neat.
134 Angela: Does Angela do anything? That's me writing in red pen.
135 Romina: Angela, here we're getting into Angela. Robert I won't understand.
136 Angela: [inaudible]
285
137 Magda: He was so smart.

138 Romina: They think on a different level.
139 Magda: I took a math class with him... and he only came to class once... and he
Â(\ aced... came to class, took the exam in 40 minutes and left...got A's...
141 Angela: He didn't do so well on that one though.
142 Romina: Oh, me neither, 80 percent. Ugh.
143 Angela: Oh God, Eighty is terrible.
144 Romina: Now it's good. Take so damn long...
145 Angela: That's definitely me..., I think it's me.
146 Romina: [inaudible]
147 Magda: How do I know what I got on this?
148 Romina: Angela... oh no, the second one.
149 Angela: All right, that's it. OK.
151 Angela: Let's look at this stuff.
152 Magda: Oh my god I wrote like, such a... so much.
153 Angela: You still write like that Magda.
154 Romina: What exactly do you want us to look for?
155 Magda: Yeah, I don't know...
156 Angela: I just thought this might help jog our memory, kind of thing, I don't know.
157 Romina: Because they [pointing to the Foerster textbook] go through a big long
158 explanation, and I just, I was like OK.
159 Angela: OK, we can do that...
160 Romina: No, I just like what do we...
161 Magda: What does the theorem mean? Doesn't the theorem mean that it just shows
162 the area underneath like a function?
163 Romina: Yeah.
164 Magda: You know, there's like definite integrals and like indefinite integrals, you
165 know what I'm saying?
166 Angela: What if we...
167 Romina: I don't remember.
168 Angela: What if we...
169 Magda: You know, definite is between a and b,
170 Romina: Oh, OK, so this gives us the area for a definite integral.
171 Angela: OK, so we should define it, like start off by saying this is what this is...
172 no?
173 Magda: Finish it...
174 Angela: OK.
175 Romina: You can be the writer, this is the first time ever I'm not the writer - I never
176 worked with you guys
177 Romina: But after that, OK now what are we looking for?
178 [silence]
179 Romina: OK, thanks for answering me...
180 Angela: I'm sorry, I can't talk and write at the same time
181 Magda: What am I writing down?
182 Romina: I wrote actual write-ups... so maybe that will... I wrote something about
183 the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
184 Magda: OK, talk.
185 Romina: This one isn't through... this one is about continuous functions. I don't
186 think I did. (Angela whispers.) Do you want paper?
187 Angela: Yeah, that could help.
188 Romina: I don't know what that is...
189 [silence]
190 Magda: Do you have grades on your stuff?
191 Angela: 4's and stuff like that.
192 Magda: I have... one paper.
193 Romina: I don't know what.
194 Angela: No grade on this test.
195 Magda: A circle, [inaudible]
196 Angela: Mmmm.
197 Romina: Do you think it was the first thing we did?
198 Angela: What?
199 Romina: The fundamental theorem of calculus - when we got to class.
200 Magda: I think we started with
201 Angela: I don't know.
202 Magda: Derivatives first.
203 Romina: And then we...
204 Magda: And then we did that.
205 Angela: How the heck do you people remember this?
206 Romina: I have no idea what half this stuff is
208 Magda: Yeah, well, then...
209 Angela: Don't write on there.
210 Magda: You know, then like a, b... f of x dx that equals that [Magda writes
211 f(x)dx = F(b) - F(a) on the paper]
Ja
212 Romina:
Why don't you write it on a clean piece of paper?
213 Magda:
No, I'm just saying...
214 Angela:
Magda... So this is it, this is what this is
215 Magda:
Yeah, it says exactly that on here [pointing at the Foerster textbook]
216 Angela:
Oh look at that, it does, but here it uses g's
217 Magda:
This is basically it, you take the function and then you, you know...
218 Romina:
Read this read after this out loud and see if that...
219 Angela:
Read out loud? You want me to read this, or after this?
220 Romina:
So we can hear... Read, I guess read...I don't know... up to that wasn't
221
that read where it says fundamental theorem of calculus highlighted
222 Angela:
But it doesn't really say anything it just says in this section you are going
223 to use what you discovered to put together the fundamental theorem of
224 calculus
225 Magda:
[inaudible]
226 Romina
Read out loud so I can hear it.
227 Angela: The top graph in figure 5-8 is a function g, an indefinite integral of F.
228 That is, g(x) = (integral sign) how do I say that?
229 Magda: Integral of f of x dx.
230 Angela: By the definition of indefinite integral, g prime of x = f of x. because g is
231 differentiable, the mean value theorem applies to it on a, b, in brackets,
232 or on any subinterval of a, b.. do you want me to continue?
233 Magda: So...
234 Romina: OK.
235 Magda: What exactly are looking for, really? I don't...
236 Romina: So basically this is like... we learned about the Riemann sum first, which
237 is like our very primitive way of getting the area underneath the
238 Magda: Integral.
239 Romina: I remember he taught us this, you make it smaller and smaller.
240 Magda: You do the... and then we had the midpoint, is what he starting off with, I
241 think.
242 Angela: [reading a paper] inaudible.
243 Romina: So then.. .Isn't it impossible to get the area under like an indefinite...
244 don't you need like two points to ... do you know what I'm saying? How
245 would we get the area underneath this (pointing to the book)
246 Magda: You take the integral between a and b
247 Romina: So that's how we make an indefinite definite? I don't know what that is, I
248 just remember is that what it kinda is? Do you have any idea what I'm
249 saying?
250 Magda: No.
251 Romina: If they gave us a line, we couldn't figure out
252 Angela: Why don't you just draw things
253 Romina: How to figure out the area I'm just saying, if they just give as a line, we
254 couldn't... if they... if we... we had like the bell curve for example,
255 [Romina draws graph] we really couldn't... we couldn't figure out the
256 area, because this would always gets smaller... don't we have to kind of
257 make it an approximation so we take a really far corner here and a really
258 far corner here...and take the area between like that.
259 Magda: Yes.
260 Romina: So this is basically what that is.
261 Magda: But it doesn't have to go to infinity, it could be like any curve.
262 Romina: But if it's any curve, wouldn't I be able to figure it out? Like, [draws on
263 paper] can't I figure it out?
264 Angela: But not if it was like this and this and that [draws a wiggle that crosses the
265 x axis and then increases]
266 Romina: But if it goes like that then.
267 Angela: I don't know...
268 Romina: How do you do... break it up...
269 Angela: I guess...
270 Romina: You're the math one...
271 Angela: I'm not.
272 Romina: She is. Do we really have to break it up, is there a way, I don't remember.
288
273 Magda: Well...

274 Romina: There's not a way you could just figure it out, is there? you'd have to get
275 the equation of the line,
276 Magda: No well, if you take the integral, knowing that, if you take any integral
277 between a set of points, you don't even have to know how the graph looks
278 Angela: Yeah.
279 Magda: To figure the area underneath it cause you could be taking like sine of blah
280 blah blah of like some ridiculous equations, and some of the equations,
281 you wouldn't even know what they look like... you wouldn't even have
282 to know what the graph looks like, you can take the integral of it, you can
283 just plug the numbers and get the answer
284 Romina: I don't remember how to take an integral I don't think.
285 Magda: You know, it's like to a higher power.
286 Romina: Well that, OK, but in practice, I don't know if I'd be able to do it... none
287 of this is going to be useful to us...
288 Angela: (inaudible) There are three parts to the question... and it might help if we
289 like attack each individual question...
290 Magda: What does the theorem mean?
291 Angela: What does the theorem mean? Magda?
292 Magda: I don't know what the theorem means... it means; it lets you know how to
293 find the area underneath the graph that's what I always thought of.. I
294 would define them maybe...
296 Romina: I'm just looking because I wrote about everything... all right, this might...
297 Magda: I'm just trying to like draw simple graphs and kind of..
298 Romina: I think I have a write-up from him about... [silence] all right, read
299 this...[silence as Romina reads a handout from her high school calculus
300 class (appendix E)| ...remember this equation you said at the beginning
301 F(b) - F(a) / (b-a)
302 Magda: That's the slope, isn't it?
303 Romina: Yeah.
304 Magda: It gives you the slope
305 Romina: Why did you say that?
306 Magda: Well, OK, no, this is a simple x squared graph, [pointing to the graph she
307 has drawn] and this is an integral of that, an x to the third graph and then
308 basically when you take the integral you want to find the area underneath
309 the thing so it's basically you find the value of the point here minus the
310 value of the point here what the value here is minus the value right here
311 that gives you the area, but when you connect them, it's like a line, which
312 is...the slope... and I don't know what I'm trying to say but...
313 Angela: [laughs] that was the first thing I started to understand... I don't know.
314 Romina: Is it, when you do, so this is the integral?
315 Magda: This is the integral of x squared.
316 Romina: OK, so when we're doing that, you want to find, what we're doing is
317 finding all the area under this
318 Magda: Yes.
289
319 Romina: Minus all the area under this, but how does that relate to the actual... do
320 you understand what I'm asking?
321 Magda: Well, the actual graph, the point right here, (pointing to the points labeled
322 F(b) and F(a) minus this point right here, is the area underneath the graph
323 Romina: I don't understand that; how can... say this point is two, and this point is
324 one, you can't, what do you mean?
325 Magda: OK well,
326 Romina: Two two.
327 Magda: Say this point is two and this point is one, like this, so its 2 -1 = 1 so the
328 area underneath that is one.
329 Romina: I'm not getting that
330 Magda: OK, let's use...
331 Angela: Yeah.
332 Magda: This is x squared, and the integral of that is 1/3 xA3, alright, so and say
333 you want to take the integral between 2 and 0, and say this is like 2 and
334 this is 0.
336 Romina: Good call, Mags.
337 Magda: So that 2, and that's zero, so plug in 2 here, two to the third is 8, 8/3, right.
338 Romina: Uh hummm.
339 Magda: Minus ... minus that is zero, so the slope...no, not the slope, the area
340 under here is 8/3.
341 Romina: OK, now I understand what you're saying.
342 Magda: So that's and this... I kind of like drew it in the wrong direction, this graph
343 is supposed to be on top here
344 Romina: Where's my...
345 Magda: And then if you go back...
346 Romina: Do we have down what the theorem means.
347 Angela: I don't have it written down.
348 Romina: Like I'm saying, is that all that it...
349 Angela: What the theorem means, what the theorem is for, and why the theorem is
350 true.
351 Romina: Someone read this, because I mean... I think that's like right after we
352 probably did it.
353 Magda and Angela read what the paper Romina gives them (see appendix)
354 Romina: I got all excited and then I got to limits and then I stopped...
356 Romina: | inaudible |
357 Angela: This is this, right? [pointing to paper (see appendix)]
358 Magda: F(t) will be this, this line...
359 Angela: Right.
360 Magda: The integral will be this line.
361 Angela: OK, sorry, I'm like all I'm Englished out I can't read anything that's math
362 anymore.
363 Romina: Can you guys read my handwriting?
364 Angela: Absolutely not!
290
365 Romina: We're getting closer - this is what I learned right before I learned the
366 Fundamental Theorem...
367 [laughs]
368 Romina: I swear, it really is.
369 Magda: Wow, you have... Did we have to write journals like this?
370 Romina: Apparently not!
371 Magda: I could have sworn I did work in this class.
372 Romina: You did it with me.
373 Magda: So why isn't my name on here?
374 Romina: Ask him. No. I wrote my own Magda. What's the date on that?
375 Magda: October 8.
376 Romina: We're
377 Angela: This is October 14.
378 Romina: Almost there.
379 Angela: Kind a.
380 Magda: ...[inaudible] intervals...
381 Angela: A calculator...
382 Magda: A calculator wouldn't....
383 Angela: I don't know Magda, You know more than me...
384 Magda: I don't know anything... this is like Analysis I wanted to plug and chug
385 the numbers.
386 Magda: You don't understand, I learned so many different ways of taking
387 integrals, it's... I don't even... now my sister is taking calc 2 so I'm like
388 refreshing my memory
389 Romina: This is too old. Or we could have looked at a test that said the F T C . All
390 right, here it is, let's see...
392 Romina: You look at this, I'll look at the other ones.
393 Angela: What am I going to look at?
394 Magda: Oh my god, that's... [inaudible]
395 Angela: You just handed me something.
396 Romina: No, I was keeping that, I was going to show that to you in a second.
397 Angela: I'm not going to understand this.
398 [students are looking at papers]
399 Romina: I formed the name of a country using all of our initials,
401 Romina: And I wonder why I don't know what the fundamental theorem of calculus is.
402 Angela: I used to know...
403 Romina: Did you read my statement?
404 Angela: No, it had something to do with limits and derivatives...
405 Romina: OK, what the FTC is
407 Angela: I remember this paper.
408 Romina: Would it have stuff to do with, like uh, tying in the whole idea like, like
409 you know, how a derivative and an integral is kind of like tied together,
291
410 and the whole limit, finding the specific slope, and using the integral to
411 find a specific slope of a point.
412 Magda: Yeah, because if you take an integral,
413 Romina: Isn't that what the question...
414 Magda: And you take it back to it that's kind of like the integral.
415 Romina: The derivative of the integral
416 Magda: The derivative of the integral is the actual function.
417 Romina: And when we take the integral to find like the slope of certain points on.
418 Magda: On the integral?
419 Romina: Say there's a line.
420 Magda: OK.
421 Romina: And you like, you want to know the slope at a certain.
422 Magda: So you take the derivative.
423 Romina: OK.
424 Magda: Slope is derivative, area is the integral
425 Romina: Area is the integral... OK.. I don't..
427 Romina: I don't... did you get anything off that test on the thing...
428 Magda: Well, I don't know what I'm looking at - 1 can like do, figure out the
429 problems, but that doesn't tell me what...|laughs]
430 Angela: Everyone's got this test but it doesn't quite help.
431 Magda: Which.. .what is the graph
432 Romina: I don't know... do you guys... Is that the graph? I don't even know what
433 the graph is.
434 Angela: I have no idea.
435 Magda: Hold on...
436 Romina: Which one's the graph?
437 Magda: When the graph of f is shown in the graph... I'm guessing this is the graph
438 right here.
439 Romina: No I drew that in. Is that the graph?
440 Angela: This... it probably is, you found that out, that out (pointing to the area)
441 that and that, you shaded that in so this is probably the graph.
442 Magda: That's the graph, OK. Then what is it asking?
443 Angela: No, that's the graph...
444 Romina: That's the graph Magda it goes boom boom boom boom... that's, I don't
445 know what that is yet.
446 Magda: OK.
447 Angela: You should be more thorough in your explanations.
448 Magda: Oh, this one's the integral, probably, because you're adding this area, this
449 area up, and then this area.
450 Angela: And it keeps going up... and here it's negative, so it goes down.
451 Romina Didn't we take these tests in uh...blue books... didn't we, because we
452 don't have the answers to the tests?
453 Angela: Didn't we do it with loose leaf? We didn't take these in blue books...
454 maybe the final or the midterm...
292
455 Romina: Well I'm just saying maybe. I have something written in there that I
456 don't have now?
457 Angela: Probably. Yeah, probably.
458 Romina: All right, here's something. the integral from a to b minus the integral
459 from a to c equals the integral. a to b minus a to c .
460 Magda: Can I see?
464 Angela: What are we trying to figure out?
465 Romina: I just want to see it has anything if this is leading us anywhere I'm not
466 sure what he wants.
467 Magda: So the integral of this is this, so say this is "a",
468 Angela: We basically have to teach a class on the fundamental theorem of calculus.
469 That's...
470 Romina: It's from b to c, right?
471 Magda: Area right here, that's the area from a to b minus the area from a to c
472 is the area between here and here... so it's like.
473 Romina: Zero.
474 Magda: No, You're subtracting more, so it's the area left over...so it's the area
475 between b to c. [Magda draws on the graph representing xA2 she drew
476 earlier]
477 Romina: That's what I said Magda...[laughs]
478 Magda: Anyway, I like drawing stuff...uh yeah.
479 Romina: I need to talk to him because I don't know exactly what he wants.
480 Angela: 5 points...
481 Romina: Is he out there? I'm like, I don't have a direction here...
482 Angela: We have like 400 books... like I think the point of this is to be teaching
483 ourselves... reteaching ourselves how to do this. That's what the point of
484 this is.
485 Romina: Angela...so stand in a corner and don't listen...
486 Angela: I'm just thinking... the point of this...
487 Romina: We have a question for you.
488 Pantozzi: Sounds like I'm being called down, to the principal's office.
489 Romina: Please, sit... no. We're like just like going through our old stuff.
490 Magda: What exactly are we looking for?
491 Romina: We knew what it was right off the bat, you'd be pretty impressed.
492 Pantozzi: OK.
493 Romina: We knew.
494 Pantozzi Well, the collective we.
495 Romina: We know what it is, what exactly are you looking for?
496 Pantozzi Well, lets go back to the task.. .1 was doing this for Anna you know, a
497 couple of months ago, she asked me, something I learned, something that.
498 Romina: So if I told someone...
499 Pantozzi If someone came up to you and said that they're in calculus now, and
500 they've taken the first three chapters, four chapters of the book, and
293
501 they've gotten to this fundamental theorem section... I think I might have
502 told you the story of what happened at my final exam.. .in calculus I, I
503 took it early because I needed to help my dad with catering...and so they
504 just gave it to me in a room in the math department office...so I was in
505 there, I got to question 10, it was something about the FTC but I didn't
506 really know what it meant, but I knew it was a big F and a little f and a g,
507 and an integral sign, so I tried to string some of that together.
508 Angela: A's and b's
509 Pantozzi: So I tried to write something and make some sense out of it but I wasn't
510 really sure what to say about it... so as I said, imagine this person has
511 come to you and has just done this section and I really didn't get it so and
512 you took calculus before, so.
513 Romina: Isn't it just the area underneath the curve...
514 Pantozzi: Well, I can't answer that question, right now.
515 [laughter]
516 Pantozzi: However what I want you to do is put together, you know, I can be that
517 person when I come back in again but you want to put together something
518 to say to this person.
519 Magda: Oh, so we're going to present to you...
520 Angela: A presentation...
521 Magda: Present to you.. .and then you're going to be asking us questions...
522 Pantozzi I might ask you some questions, I don't know what I'll say.
523 Angela: That's WRONG... sorry...
524 Pantozzi No, I definitely won't do that, because that's not my role in what I'm
525 doing now...no but that's the way I want you to think about it... you
526 looked, looked at some textbooks, you knew something right off the
527 bat...but imagine you're telling, you're trying to help this person do those
528 three things that you underlined before. So you are going to put together,
529 you are going to meet with them tomorrow morning, and I want to sound
530 like I know what I'm talking about because I took calculus and this
531 person's coming to me for help, you know, so plan together what you
532 would say to them. You know, start here, you understand this...what
533 exactly would you say to them... plan that out, you can put diagrams on
534 the board.. .reenact it, try it out first with yourselves. And then try it out on
535 me, that sort of thing.
536 Angela: When we try it out I'll be the student who doesn't know anything
537 Kidding... not really.
538 Magda: I think what it means is, I'd say it's the area under a graph [Pantozzi
539 leaves)
540 Angela: Of any graph?
541 Magda: Under a function, under some kind of function
542 Romina: I guess we would have to would we have to go into Riemann sums ?
543 Magda: The example of this and this... it's really not a function... I don't know...
544 Angela: Shouldn't we define under - under could be like all the way under.
545 Magda: The x axis cutting off at the x axis.
546 Angela: Yeah, but How do we word that?
547 Magda: I don t know... like copy it right from of the book.
548 Romina: What if the graph goes underneath the...
549 Angela: That's plagiarism...
550 Romina: Magda...
551 Angela: Copy my papers... I'm not just going to steal something out of the book
552 we're not going to learn anything it if we do it like that.
554 Magda: Page 49.
555 Romina: I have a question for you: What's the integral of that? Is it all of this
556 [pointing at an area that extends off the page to the left]
557 Angela: This and this, right?
558 Romina: Just this.
559 Angela: This stuff, or is it that?
560 Magda: It's all that. It depends on...
561 Romina: What's under this, nothing?
562 Angela: It would be here too?
563 Magda: Yes. That's what it would be.
564 Angela: So between the graph and the x axis.
565 Magda: Um hum.
566 Romina: How would we find., like is it all this?
567 Magda: Well that could go into infinity.
568 Romina: Does it go to infinity?
569 Magda: There could be a cut off point.
570 Romina: Like here? (She draws a point)
571 Magda: You can take limits like as x approaches infinity or something like that
572 and then.
573 Angela: Can you do this without a graph? Is it formalized?
574 Magda: You can have definite or indefinite integrals and then take limits I
575 remember I did something with indefinite integrals where you take limits
576 Romina: He saved that for 4 years and you're writing on it!
577 Magda: Like integral from infinity to infinity...infinity to infinity it's something
578 like the limit as x approaches or is it t approaches infinity from in or is it
579 Romina: You're getting into letters here... what's h?
580 Magda: F of t... I don't remember you change it to t.. it's something with t's and
581 you start taking limits.
582 Angela: What?
583 Magda: I don't know, I was actually helping my sister do this yesterday.
584 Angela: This is why you know things., right?
585 Romina: We're not getting very far here.
586 Angela: OK. can we talk about defining this I know you said it's the area, but what
587 about if you're like not doing a graph.
588 Romina: Should we like...
589 Angela: Do we have to do a graph to do this
590 Romina Should be start really basic?
591 Angela: Yeah, we should.
295
592 Magda: Like a real life problem - what is it like acceleration, velocity, and like
593 something [she moves her hands in a downwards motion]
594 Angela: Oh, god,
595 Romina: Speed, velocity, acceleration,
596 Magda: How does it go?
597 Angela: Is it like when Mr. Pantozzi taped himself in the car.
599 Magda: That's the real life.
600 Romina: If we have like a graph, that's the.. I don't remember.
601 Magda: It's like something...velocity, acceleration, it goes up
602 Romina: The derivative is acceleration... no... if you have speed, speed, the
603 integral is...
604 Romina: Do you remember this?
605 Angela: I don't remember this.
606 Romina: It's probably in those books.
607 Angela: The last time I did any of this was in high school.
608 Romina: Oh, and my major is physics...
609 Magda: But you know everything is a function, you know speed, it's some kind of
610 a function.
611 Angela: You took math classes... my math classes were like what's 2 + 4.
612 Magda: Hold on. If you have a function of speed, OK first you are driving, say OK
613 it's zero, lets say you were going 5, and then 10, right, then it goes like
614 this, then you can like level out, so your speed no your.
615 Angela: Your acceleration.
616 Magda: Your acceleration would be
617 Angela: Like would be the difference between these points, from here to here, and
618 then from this to here, like that...
619 Romina: Cat! ... Or not...
620 Angela: Please Romina, I was understanding things,
621 Magda: The speed.
622 Angela: Don't bring the cat back.
623 Magda: Hold on, what is it, the speed, the velocity, If you have the speed, you're
624 looking for the acceleration, and what else?
625 Romina: Distance.
626 Magda: OK, distance.
627 Romina: I can't remember...
628 Magda: The distance would be...
629 Romina: Do you know?
630 [laughter]
631 Romina: We're not allowed to ask.
632 Magda: So...
633 Romina This is such a sad display,
634 Angela: They're sitting back there laughing... these students...
635 Magda: (inaudible 1
636 Romina Wouldn't distance be the integral, how much area you went.
637 Magda: Yeah, distance.
638 Romina: Oh, so it was distance.
639 Magda: Distance is the integral, then it was speed, acceleration. Speed is the
640 function...
641 Angela: Speed is the function... So let's write that down, so Angela can
642 understand things. Speed is the function, this would be like f(x),
643 Romina: Distance...
644 Angela: And distance
645 Magda: Do distance is the integral,
646 Angela: I did something right.
647 Romina: I don't know if that's right... and acceleration is the derivative,
648 Angela: Distance, acceleration.
650 Romina: D/dx or the little thing.
651 Angela: What did you just say?
652 Romina: D/dx.
653 Magda: Intervals...
655 Romina: All I'm saying is this Angela.
656 Angela: Oh, OK.
657 Romina: Doesn't sound... Are we sure that's right.
658 Angela: No.
659 Magda: I'm pretty sure that's right. That makes sense. If you have speed you
660 travel, you accumulate distance.
661 Romina: Cause then, we could explain that, break that down, with rectangles, and
662 trapezoids, and then whatever
663 Magda: No, no no, I agree agree agree
664 Romina: This theorem lets you evaluate definite integrals exactly by algebra using
665 indefinite integrals - so that's what it does - 1 guess we missed that line
666 before, (reading from the book.)
667 Angela: We can't copy that out of the book.
668 Romina: We saw that before we were like wa ha? That's what we were saying
669 before.
671 Romina: You get a definite with an indefinite.
672 Magda: Well an indefinite integral just means you don't have bounds on it, isn't
673 that it.
675 Romina: Yeah.. .you're the one who taught me what...
676 Angela: What it does.
677 Romina: It makes an indefinite.. .no, you don't need to write that down, it's just.
678 Angela: Don't we have to answer.. .Isn't that part of the question? No, what it's
679 for.
680 Romina What it means.
681 Angela: What it means, what it is for.
682 Romina Well, we have the equation...
683 Angela: Why is it true? That's the third part of the question.
297
684 Magda: Because we read it in every single book.

685 Romina: No, didn't we just explain that?
686 Angela: The textbook tells us so. Mr. Pantozzi...
687 Romina: You just sat there before and explained it,
688 Magda: Oh with my little...sign.
689 Romina: With the., yeah.. .put in the numbers.
690 Angela: Can we...
691 Romina: Do we assume they know what an integral is?
692 Angela: Let's assume that they don't...
693 Romina: We need to explain what an integral is?
695 [Magda excuses herself to use the restroom.]
696 Angela: All work ceases until Magda returns. I think we should start with the
697 basics, because it makes it easier to explain other things... because if we
698 like start in the middle he'll ask us questions and we might not be prepared
699 to answer them... get away from it...
700 Romina: Do we have to get into derivatives, explain that?
702 Romina: I don't think 1 can... I don't...
703 Angela: Excuse me...I'm going to steal Magda's book. Is that the textbook we
704 used?
705 Romina: Yeah.
706 [Romina is reading.]
707 Angela: Remember this guy Euler?
708 Romina: What's the mean value theorem?
709 Angela: A what?
710 Romina: The mean value theorem.
711 Angela: I have no idea. I'm telling you I really remember nothing, it's terrible. It
712 makes me sad. I should take calculus next year.
713 Romina: Do you know what the mean value theorem is?
714 Angela: Of course she does, she's Magda.
715 Magda: Mean mean... isn't that over b - a I don't know. I think that's what it is.
716 Magda: I came up with, how about we start, OK, say you have a function [ she
717 draws a parabola) maybe this.
718 Angela: X squared.
719 Magda: And then the, OK well, the integral of it would be, well, it's the area
720 underneath the graph, say, all right, so basically, lets start plotting it little
721 by little kind of deal.
722 Angela: Can we use graph paper?
723 Romina: Here, wouldn't.
725 Romina: Here wouldn't, Magda, look at this, isn't this like the mathematical
726 explanation of it [pointing out the explanation in Foerster page 216) Do
727 you understand it?
728 Angela: I'll plot x squared.
729 Romina I don't really OK, so g is the, is the integral of the function?
730 Magda: G, I don t know what g is, how do they define it. G is... Well, g(x) is the
731 integral of f(x) [on page 216 it says integral (no limits of integration) of
732 f(x)dx = g(x)
733 Romina: So the derivative of the integral is the actual function.
734 Magda: So the derivative is... do you have a pencil so I can like...
735 Romina: Rewrite it on...
736 Angela: Pencil doesn't show up on camera.
737 Romina: Here, rewrite it on the thing. Give me the paper...
738 Magda: OK, basically this says that, OK...hold on. G(x) equals the integral of f(x),
739 right.
740 Romina: Yeah.
741 Magda: So that means...
742 Romina: What does cl mean - I just read this I really don't remember.
743 Magda: Let cl be the points, the first and second... that's the different cut-off
744 points.
745 Romina: OK.
746 Magda: So g ^ ) is [she writes g\cx) on her paper]
747 Romina: Is the function.
748 Magda: Is the function It's f(x)
749 Romina: So here, write like an arrow underneath it, so we know it's f(x).
750 Magda: Which is f(x), [she draws an arrow between g'(c,) and f(cx)\ no, f(C[)
751 Romina Is equal to
g(*i)-g(g)
752 Magda: G(x,) - g(a) over the change in x. [She writes equal to
Ax
753 g'(c,)-J
754 Angela: What's this then?
755 Magda: It's f of c,. The actual function.
756 Angela: OK.
757 Romina: Go g of...can you draw.
758 Magda: The graph of..
759 Angela: Do that.
760 Magda: So f(x) would be, say this, right?
761 Romina: Um hum.
762 Magda: Use like simple functions, [she draws a parabola]
763 Romina: Then the integral would be...
764 Magda: Then the integral of it would be the xA3 graph.
765 Romina: OK.
766 Magda: So then here this says that the actual function at some point Cj.
767 Angela: Just draw a point on there.
768 Romina: Is our "a" constant?
769 Angela: What?
770 Magda: Hold on. "a" is the interval that it's on. So say your interval would me like
771 from zero, OK, this is your a and this is your b...
772 Angela: (inaudible]
774 Magda: X sub 1, into intervals of equal width...g of one so OK, so basically,
775 you're dividing this into smaller intervals.
776 Angela: Umm.
777 Magda: So.
778 Romina: So it's kind of like...You're dividing them until, you get like one... is that
779 what that's saying?
780 Magda: Well yeah this would be like xl, x2, x3 right.
781 Angela: Um hum.
782 Magda: So this is xl, so that would be g(x,) [pointing to the x axis and the cubic
783 graph] So that would be like this is the xl here, so this, minus g(a) which
784 is the original point which is here, over the change which is the distance
785 here.
786 Romina: OK, so that gets us the area? Does it?
787 Magda: Did I... gets us c,... (as she points to the g'(c,)she wrote on the paper.]
788 Angela: That gets us this...right?
789 Magda: Which is on the original curve is... yes, that gets you the area.
790 Romina: The slope of...
791 Magda: No, that gets you the area.
792 Romina: Isn't the slope on our f the area on the g?
793 Magda: Isn't the slope on our f this is our f... no...
794 Romina: Isn't that what an integral is...
795 Magda: This is our f...
796 Romina: By finding the area you find the actual slope...
797 Magda: This is our f(x) so what are you saying?
798 Romina: Like the slope from..
799 Magda: Of a...
800 Romina: Of a point is the area under it.
801 Magda: The slope of a point%
802 Angela: Slope between these two points is the area here is what she's saying. Like
803 from a to x 1 would the area under here.
804 Romina: No, isn't that why we take the integral?
805 Magda: No no no no. The slope would be this... like the slope would be this...
806 like the slope at x one. [Magda draws a linear graph underneath the graph
807 of the parabola.]
808 Romina: The derivative is the slope.
809 Magda: Yeah.
810 Romina: So what is the purpose of the integral? Why do I need to know the area?
811 Magda: The whole thing like with the distance, with traveling the distance, and
812 stuff like that
813 Angela: Ok, what is that whole thing?
814 Magda: Ok, if you're traveling some speed over like whatever, and you want to
815 find the
816 Romina Wouldn't that be the slope?
817 Magda: Well, the slope...
818 Romina What's velocity?
819 Angela: Distance over.. .no...[laughs]
820 Romina: I was just asking...I thought you knew I don tknow...
821 Angela: I feel so...
822 Romina: Go on.
823 Magda: I don't know if I'm explaining this right.
824 Angela: I don't know Magda. I have no idea what you're talking about.
825 Magda: How about if we go ahead and draw.. .the graph.
826 Romina: I'm saying because you can figure...
827 Magda: This is what it's saying.
828 Romina: I understand by looking at it, because I know what the final product is
829 supposed to be but I don't know how anyone looking at that [the three
830 graphs now on the paper] would understand it, because we can't explain
831 it.
832 [Silence]
833 Angela: What if we do it formula wise...like would that...would that help?
834 Romina: Hold on, is each x, are the x's the intervals...?
835 Magda: Say it again.
836 Romina: Are the x's the intervals?
837 Magda: Well, if you divide them into intervals , xl, x2, x3... I'm still not getting
838 what the cl, c2 is.
839 Romina: Bring out another book and see if they have it the same...maybe an easier
840 proof.
841 Angela: Is there a third grade version of this...that I can handle? [Angela is
842 drawing a parabola on the graph paper]
843 Romina: Are these people kidding me with these books? This one's not any better I
844 don't think.
845 Angela: Here's your graph Magda.
846 [Magda continues to look at the Foerster page 216]
847 Magda: The points the first second and third...
848 Angela: Should I do...
849 Magda: The conclusion of the mean...
850 Romina: This one's not working for me... do you get that? [She hands over the
851 Contemporary Calculus textbook] It's a completely different proof.
853 [Romina goes leaves the table to pick up another book]
854 Romina: How about a teacher's guide?
856 Magda: So this is going to be 1, 2, 3, maybe we should like...
857 Angela: Double.
858 Romina: Photocopy this?
859 Magda: Here's more graph paper. Here. Use this.
860 Angela: I feel like we're in the middle of finals or something.
861 Romina: We could just draw on the board... maybe that would be easier.
862 Angela: Are we taking the middle or what
863 Magda: Yeah just take the middle... I'm still wondering what the cl means.
864 Romina: Yeah, I don't... did you see the time?
865 Magda: C one.
866 Romina: There s another one with like time and height...it might, that might...
867 Magda: It looks like it's the points on the first, second, and third subintervals... so
868 it basically like c3 is any point on this interval? Is that what it's saying?
869 Romina: I don't know, that's why I didn't learn like that. Isn't it something about
870 like our intervals getting smaller and smaller and smaller... is that what it
871 is for?
872 Magda: Yeah, well, if the intervals are smaller and smaller, it's more accurate...
873 Romina: Yeah, so is that what that is trying to say? Then we add together like the,
874 like if our intervals are getting smaller, so we have more intervals, and we
875 add them together, and it's getting smaller, it's more accurate,
876 Magda: Because if this... doesn't make sense, OK because if this is actually that,
877 and you are multiplying it by the change of x so this like say this is
878 two...this is two...[pointing a point on the graph of the parabola]
879 Romina: Is the C in the point or the area.
880 Magda: No, it has to be the point, it's a point.
881 Romina: So if we're doing height times width,
882 Magda: Yes.
883 Romina: OK. SO we're doing height, that's
884 Magda: Well, no, it's not height, it's whatever,
886 Magda: Say this is 2, you're multiplying whatever the function, so whatever the
887 function is, if it's 2, then it's 4, times whatever the change is so basically
888 what you are doing is like 2... if it's 4 times .5 say that's like change of x,
889 so that little thing equals 2.
890 [Romina draws a graph, and labels points a and b on the x axis.]
891 Romina: What are the x's?
892 Magda: X is this.
893 Romina: Well, but.
894 Magda: This is your x.
895 Romina: So what they're saying is...like at the bottom [pointing to the bottom of
896 page 216)
897 Magda: You divide by the change in x.
898 Romina: No like I don't, so... so like xl.
899 Magda: X2.
900 Romina: They're taking x2, x3, x4.
901 Magda: Yeah.
902 Romina: So they're taking this minus this which will get me this [draws area under
903 her graph between xl and x2.) Am I wrong?
904 Magda: G is., yes, that's right.
905 Romina: And they're adding this plus this to get this...so they're doing all this, so
906 eventually, you get b - a.
907 Romina OK, I got the bottom half figured out.
908 Magda: Where are you looking? [Romina points to the bottom of page 216 in the
909 Foerster text] OK that makes sense.
910 Romina OK, here, they're doing... this isn't our g function, this is our g prime
911 (referring to the graph she has drawn.)
302
912 Magda: Yes,

913 Romina: So here they're doing g of xl.
914 Magda: No, no, this is your g function, because f of... no.
915 Romina: Then, how is that.
916 Magda: No it is g prime.
917 Romina: So here... x one minus g(a)
918 Magda: Hold on... g prime.. Which is also f of x.
919 Romina: I don't get why you're dividing the change over x, I don't get why you're
920 doing that, if it's the derivative.
921 Magda: Well draw the integral of that... no, the integral? [Romina begins to draw
922 a new graph.)
923 Romina: I don't know the integral, I was just guessing x to the third. Is that right?
924 Angela: Is that it? [inaudible] Forget it, never mind.
925 Magda: Yeah...
926 Romina: So I did it backwards. I'm not going crazy here. [Referring to what the
927 integral of the graph she drew would look like.] This is a negative x
928 squared, yeah, so it's that.
929 Magda: Yeah.
930 Romina: You guys looked at me like I had five heads. It's the same...
931 Angela: Wait a second... did I just do this wrong?
932 Romina: OK, so what is this?
933 Magda: So now...
934 Romina: G(xl)-g(a)over.
935 Magda: You're doing this?
936 Romina: Yeah, I'm just writing it down cause I can't...
937 Magda: Gofx.
938 Romina: Then what's the next one just so I can see what the pattern., is that g.. oh,
939 that's g prime.
940 Magda: No it's g.
941 Romina: Equals g prime (c2) I don't understand what this is.
942 Magda: That's what I'm trying to figure out. So let's try this.
943 Magda: G(xl) so this is your xl.. .so g(xl) [she places a point on the x axis of the
944 "integral" graph Romina has drawn] is right here.
945 Romina: Um hum.
946 Magda: So g(xl) is right here.
947 Romina: OK. Minus...
948 Magda: Minus g(a) which is this point right here,
949 Romina: All right...divided by...
950 Magda: The change.
951 Romina: When they say, OK, the change, they mean this part [she indicates the
952 change in x between the two points she has drawn on the x axis.
953 Magda: Yes. Which is just x 1 - a .
954 Romina: All right. Why did I have to make it so damn complicated.
955 Magda: So...
956 Angela: I think we have to figure that out.
957 Magda: Explain this.
303
958 Romina: OK, see that's where I was going wrong, I wasn't looking at this as this is
959 the integral function. That's why I was not getting it.
960 Angela: But this is the integral function, right?
961 Romina: No see how she... this all.. .All this ( referring to the symbols in the text)
962 was happening on this graph. I was not understanding that... that all is
963 happening on that, am I not...
964 Angela: Isn't this... this?
965 Magda: Isn't this the slope at the point there (pointing to Romina's g' graph.)
966 Romina: Yeah. Isn't that what you just did? And the slope that's what I was saying
967 - isn't the slope the area?
968 Angela: Yes! Yes it is.
969 Romina: No, no I don't know, that's why I'm.. I don't know...
970 Magda: If you're dividing by the change, it is...
971 Romina: That's the slope. That's why I was thinking this was the slope from that.
972 Angela: This is also the change, is it not?
973 Magda: Yes, yes this is the whole... we did it, somewhere... here, isn't that it?
974 Angela: Yeah.
975 Romina: Yeah.
976 Angela: All right. Now, how does that pertain to what we're doing? Now that
977 we've figured out what the book is trying to say...
978 Romina: No I am just... I still am lost. This is the slope, [pointing to the calculation
979 of slope on her paper.]
980 Angela: Right.
981 Magda: Yes.
982 Romina: Oh, so this is saying the derivative is the slope. Isn't that., that's all it's
983 saying.
984 Angela: Yeah.
985 Romina: I'm sorry we wasted all that time trying to figure that out.
986 Angela: Well, maybe it will help.
987 Romina: I still don't know where... did the other people go about this a lot faster
988 with this?
989 Magda: This is one, this is...
990 Angela: Where's Mike Aiello when you need...this is one two, three, oh man. Nice
991 job Magda.
992 Magda: Say our g(x) was this, we're doing this area manually. This is point five.
993 Angela: OK.
994 Magda: So the area...
995 Angela: Can we get different colors. Can we get different color pens, is that
996 possible?
997 Romina: This is why I don't like working with girls.
998 Elena: Do you need pens?
999 Angela: We can use those, that will work. No, just because everything like would
1000
1 \J\J\J look the same...
1002 Romina: [reading from the Teacher's guide to AP Calculus) Use the Fundamental
1003 Theorem to evaluate definite integrals, That's what we're doing.
304

1005 Romina: Wait wait wait... [reading from the Teacher's guide to AP Calculus] Use
1006 the FTC to represent a particular antiderivative and the analytical and
1007 graphical analysis of functions so defined.
1008 Angela: I have no idea what that said. So the area...
1009 Romina: The antiderivative. Isn't that the integral... of the derivative?
1010 Angela: You're asking me? Magda?
1011 Romina: I'll just it here and talk to myself.
1012 Angela: I don't know what that is. I have no idea. I'm like re-learning this all right
1013 now.
1014 Romina: This is a very poorly made teachers manual.
1015 Angela: He gave us a teacher's manual?
1016 Romina: Yeah, that's what I'm saying...
1017 Angela: ... isn't it?
1018 Romina: It's like a how to teach.
1019 Angela: Oh, that should help a lot, right, Because that's what we have to do?
1020 Romina: Thanks...
1021 Magda: What are we going to use - a midpoint kind of deal.
1022 Romina: You can use all of them...
1023 Angela: Can we do that thing...
1024 Magda: Can you elaborate?
1025 Angela: Are you going to do this? Is that going to help? [She draws the graph of a
1026 function and rectangles under it.[
1027 Magda: Yes, that's what I'm trying going to do.
1028 Angela: Midpoints...
1029 Magda: That's what I'm... so we're going to use the midpoints.
1030 Angela: Yeah, that's what I meant.
1031 Magda: OK, so this is one bar.
1032 Angela: So we have to find the midpoint there. I'm sorry Magda, I should have
1033 made it better.
1034 Magda: This is the second point.
1035 Angela: Is there an exact...
1036 Magda: Hold on, hold on. Which one is which?
1037 Angela: Ignore that, it's this one. It's x squared...x squared.
1038 Magda: Right here.
1039 Angela: No, Magda, I think halfway would be higher up I think.
1040 Magda: No, about right here.
1041 Angela: Oh, from here, to here, I was like, what are you talking about Magda?
1042 Magda: Then here, it would probably be like...right?
1043 Angela: Do you want me to start getting numbers for you?
1044 Magda: Yeah.
1045 Angela: Ooh, a graphing calculator, I haven't used one of these in a long time.
1046 [Whispers to Magda.]
1047 Magda: Well, just...
1048 Angela: Find the area of the rectangles.
1049 Magda: Um hum.
1050 Angela: I'll wait until you re done.
1051 Magda: Yeah. So like you're going to be doing .25 squared.
1052 Angela: Why .25?
1053 Magda: Because we're using our...
1054 Angela: Oh, because it's the midpoint.
1055 Magda: Yeah,
1056 Angela: finaudible]
1057 Romina: You know what I think we should do? We should first, explain, explain
1058 the calculus and the area,
1059 [laughter]
1060 Romina: Then we should explain definite integrals, and then we're going to do
1061 calculus and area by the Riemann sums,
1062 Angela: Isn't that cheating, using the teacher's manual?
1063 Romina: It's not telling me how to do it, because apparently the teacher's supposed
1064 to know, because they've taken these math classes over and over. And
1065 then we're going to go into definite integrals and antiderivatives, and then
1066 comes the FTC. We have this stuff, just don't have integrals and
1067 antiderivatives, that's the whole thing that I made you look at that you
1068 apparently didn't...
1069 Magda: Well, integrals and antiderivatives, aren't they the same thing?
1070 Romina: Well that's what I thought, but why did they write it out like that?
1071 Angela: Shouldn't we assume that the student knows that?
1072 Magda: Well, antiderivative, it's like one has like how the graph moves up and
1073 down because you can kind of start taking the integral at any point. It's
1074 something...
1075 Romina: I'll keep that open just in case we decide to uh....
1076 Magda: Isn't that the whole issue with plus C. that's the difference between and
1077 antiderivative and an integral.
1078 Romina: That sounds really familiar, Magda, but I don't know,
1079 Angela: it's not really helping much.
1080 Romina: I just, there was, there was a thing... antiderivative
1081 Magda: So the height right here is what?
1082 Angela: Oh, I just have to do that thing... squared.. .point 0625.
1083 Magda: Times the change in x is point 5.
1084 Angela: I knew that Magda.
1085 Magda: So the area of this little... the first triangle.
1086 Angela: So it's like, hold on. Times the change in x, that's what we're
1087 doing...equals area of..
1088 Magda: Area of...
1089 [laughter]
1090 Romina: What are you guys doing?
1091 Angela: I'm trying to write this down so I know what I'm doing.
1092 Magda: It's the area, OK. It's the area, that's it.
1093 Romina: I can't find it in here.
1094 Angela: I'm going to make a little chart. Yeah!
1095 Romina: What are you...?
1096 Angela: I was good at this stuff back then.
1097 Romina: ... oh doing a Riemann sum.
1098 Magda: Using the midpoint.
1099 Angela: This is .5 though, right? X is .5? No?
1100 Magda: Yes. No, change of x is point 5.
1101 Angela: And., wait that doesn't help, that messed up my chart. So why are we
1102 using point 5... oh
1103 Magda: Because it's the mid.
1104 Angela: Because it's the midpoint? I'm sorry. And that's the area. [Angela is
1105 making a chart of values of JC and A. Her first entry is .25 and .03125.]
1106 Magda: Yes, that's the area.
1107 Angela: So we're doing... if the change is .5 then we're doing .75, right?
1108 Magda: No, no no, the change is always point 5.
1109 Angela: Right. But from .25 to .75 it's .5.
1110 Romina: I don't have any clue what you guys are doing and I'm sitting right here.
1111 Angela: We're just finding the areas of rectangles
1112 Magda: Rectangles.
1113 Romina: The whole rectangle?
1114 Magda: Finding the area and like ...our change in x is .5. So that's our change in x
1115 right here.
1116 Romina: Why is it .5 if it goes over... oh.
1117 Magda: And we're using the midpoint which is the midpoint between .5 which is
1118 .25.. .to figure it out. So .25 into that function.
1119 Romina: But you're not doing... It looks like you're using the rectangles on the left.
1120 Magda: Well no, we're using the midpoints, we're using the whole thing.
1121 Romina: It's not... it just doesn't look like that OK.
1122 Magda: But what are you saying?
1123 Romina: When you're saying midpoints aren't you supposed to be taking ...
1125 Romina: Which ones are... oh that graph. Midpoint. OK, now I... it just looked
1126 funny. It looked like it was.. I don't know. And you're going to add all
1127 those together to get the area.
1128 Magda: Um hum.
1129 Angela: How far are we going up?
1130 Magda: Like 3.
1131 Angela: OK.
1132 Angela: So this is 2.75.
1133 Magda: Uh hum.
1134 Angela: Oh, that was wrong, [laughter]
1135 Romina: All right now what are we doing after this?
1136 Magda: We kind of want to prove...
1137 Romina: That's our intro to area and calculus right there.
1138 Angela: Yeah, we did something.
1139 Magda: 1,2,3.
1140 Angela: You really should label these things, Magda.
1141 Magda: Alright so, the area, like of the little things, the little things, when you add
1142 that all up, that's our estimate of the area between the interval of 0 to 3.
1143 Angela: Um hum.
1144 Romina: Hold on, what are we doing , right now, are you finding the area
1145 underneath
1146 Magda: X squared.
1147 Romina: OK, and then...
1148 Magda: OK, can you add that up so, that's our estimate of the area.
1149 Romina: How does that connect to the integral?
1150 Magda: Well now, this is our integral.
1151 Romina: Yes.
1152 Magda: of an xA2 function, so this is f(x) = 1/3 xA3, right, and basically this is...
1153 we're finding the area on the interval of 0 to 3. So using our like theorem
1154 of calculus, or... just substitute that in. 3 cubed is 27 divided by 3.
1155 Romina: But why , why does that work?
1156 Magda: Just because it does.
1157 Romina: I think that's what he's asking, we have to know that.
1158 Magda: Hold on, well first we're explaining what it means,
1159 Romina: OK.
1160 Magda: and then why it works. Isn't that the last question.
1161 Romina: What is the theorem for,
1162 Angela: That's the area.
1163 Romina: And why the theorem is true.
1164 Magda: So this is the estimate. So hold on 3A3 is what, 27, divided by three is 9,
1165 and it's nine,
1166 Angela: So this is very close, yeah, we did something.
1167 Magda: OK, so that's like the estimate.
1168 Angela: Ok, now explain what you just explained to her to me, because I was
1169 typing in numbers and I missed it.
1170 Romina: No, we didn't get anywhere, that's what we have to do like, why does that
1171 like, why does that work?
1172 Angela: This is this, right.
1173 Magda: Yes.
1174 Angela: OK.
1175 Romina: Yeah, that's it. When we plug in, 3, we get the area,
1176 Angela: We get 9, which is close to.
1177 Romina: Why does that work, that's the question,
1178 Angela: [writes F(x) = 1/3 xA3 on the paper.] Well it's there already.
1179 Romina: Rewrite it. Forget the teacher's manual. This is the part where we're
1180 [Magda draws a new figure]
1181 Magda: So basically what we're doing here is we're doing the distance, isn't that
1182 the distance right here.
1183 Romina: I don't know if that's right though, I think but...
1184 Magda: I don't know...
1185 Romina I think it's speed acceleration, distance.
1186 Magda: Hold on, I m not saying that, I m not going into that...I m just drawing
1187 this line,
1188 Romina: What are you asking me then?
1189 Magda: I'm trying to see, I mean, what f(x) I mean F(3) - F(0)
1190 Angela: Whatever, that's close.
1191 Magda: Is this number minus this number. [Magda points to two points on the
1192 graph she has just drawn.] So what does that give us? I know that gives us
1193 the area, because we know that.
1194 Angela: [whispering] but why...
1195 Romina: Here, let me look... [Romina picks up the Foerster book.]
1196 Magda: Well basically what we're doing here is%OK, basically what we're doing
1197 here is taking the area... OK, give me the numbers...
1198 Angela: Point 3.
1199 Magda: Ok, it's 1, 2, 3,4, 5, right, it's like point 3, right? so it's here. I mean, it's
1200 at .25 OK, so it's here,
1201 Angela: No, it's .28.
1202 Magda: So it's here...
1203 Angela: It doesn't help, it's tiny.
1204 Magda: This is one, so at .25, it's point 3 so it's somewhere here.
1205 Angela: OK.
1206 Magda: Then at .75 let's see this is one. it's like a third way up.
1208 Magda: then at 1.5.
1209 Angela: 1.25.
1210 Magda: 1.25.
1211 Angela: It's .78, it's like here, right?
1212 Magda: Then at...
1213 Angela: 1.75.
1214 Magda: 1.75 it's 1.5.
1215 Angela: 1.5.
1216 Magda: So this is two. [making a mark on the y axis.] So this is like here.
1217 Angela: OK, and 2.25 it's 2.5.
1218 Magda: 2.5?
1220 Magda: OK.
1221 Angela: And then it's 3.7 at 2.75. ... maximum, I'm sorry.
1222 Magda: So basically, if you plot those points you get this.
1223 Angela: Umhum...
1224 Magda: That's what it looks like, right?
1225 Angela: That's that? Is that that? [Referring to the previous graph that Magda drew
1226 f(3)andf(0)on.]
1227 Magda: Well, yes, that's what it looks like.
1228 Romina [whispering] Speed velocity, distance.
1229 [laughter]
1230 Angela: You can explain that one.
1231 Romina No, I.
309
1232 Magda: Well no, we're wrong, because area is change of x multiplied some by
1233 some height, so it's not like a point on the axis, so scratch that [she
1234 crossed out the plotted points]
1235 Angela: Why did we scratch that?
1236 Magda: That's not the y, the y is the height. You know what I'm saying.
1237 Angela: Right...
1238 Magda: So basically I'm not graphing this, basically I'm supposed to graph this,
1239 against the h?
1240 Angela: But doesn't that work, though? If this is x and this is y (pointing to the
column of area values) doesn't that work?
1242 Romina: That would be the integral, right? This book is not very...
1243 Magda: No, no, because if you actually think about what we know already, then if
1244 this is., the integral is supposed to the xA3 function, 1/3, hold on, is it? 1/3,
1245 if you put 2.75, what is that?
1246 [Angela uses the calculator.)
1247 Magda: Divided by three?
1248 Angela: 6.9.
1249 Magda: So it doesn't work .
1250 Angela: It doesn't work.
1251 Magda: So that's not what... that's not the y.
1252 Romina: This... you... you can't have the x and the y, this x and the A on the same
1253 graph. You can have these two on the same graph, can't you, and this is
1254 your... the integral.
1255 Angela: But if you plotted this, wouldn't it be, like, but thinking in terms of like
1256 speed velocity, acceleration,
1257 Romina: We obviously don't know that, so we should stop using that!
1258 Magda: Hold on, hold on.. .but that's the area. So this is this...
1259 Romina: I don't.. .didn't you do like.. .If you do the x... then you did the... what
1260 did you multiply by.
1261 Angela: That.
1262 Magda: We're saying here that on the interval...
1263 Angela: And the function was x squared.
1264 Magda: ...from 0 to .5,
1265 Romina: What do you mean... [she writes x2 • Ax = A.]
1266 Magda: The area...equals .03125, right?
1267 Romina: Isn't xA2 our height here?
1268 Angela: Yeah.
1269 Romina: So wouldn't we have to graph x and xA2 on our g' and then we have...
1270 Angela: Yeah, that's this graph, that's what that is...
1271 Romina: So what are we trying to graph on the same graph? And then we're... I
1272 don't know what you're trying to do then.
1273 Magda: Hold on, oh my god, this is the area.
1274 Angela: Yes, we've established that.
1275 Magda: And then using the integral, is supposed to give you the area on that.
1276 Angela: Isn't that what we just did?
1277 Magda: Hold on.
310
1278 Angela: And you said it was wrong.

1279 Romina: Magda, try to explain it to us instead of being like just sh sh. We don't
1280 follow you if you're four steps ahead.
1281 Angela: [inaudible] Come on, help us out Mags. You're the accounting major. You
1282 take math.
1283 Romina: .03125 is the area of... ? The first?
1284 Angela: That first little section there.
1285 Romina: See, we need...
1286 Angela: That whole rectangle thingie.
1287 Romina: OK.
1288 Angela: Yes, rectangle, not rectangle thingie.
1289 Magda: So now the point at... isn't it at point .5, is supposed to equal the area, so
1290 this is .5, so this is supposed to equal....03125... I mean, around.
1291 Romina: Yes.
1292 Angela: That's what I'm doing.
1293 Magda: Point 5 [cubed] divided by 3...
1294 Angela: .41. .041.
1295 Magda: Well, it's because it's an estimate.
1296 Romina: But OK, I understand what you're doing but, then, don't we, to take the
1297 integral of this, blah blah blah blah it's this, right.
1299 Romina: My question was not important.
1300 Magda: Hold on, hold on, hold on. I think I got it now.
1301 Angela: We have clean paper.
1302 Romina: Yeah.
1303 [laughter]
1304 Angela: .. .to keep crossing things out.
1305 Magda: At .5, the area is..
1306 Angela: The area is .03.
1307 Romina: Is this the integral? that you're.
1308 Magda: The same thing...
1309 Angela: Are we drawing the same thing we drew 2 minutes ago?
1310 Romina: Yeah, and we can't go on...Magda, my only question, is going to be really
1311 basic, just listen to me.
1312 Magda: OK.
1313 Romina: You know what I... what function is this? [she draws a graph with area
1314 filled in underneath. ]
1315 Magda: Of what though?
1316 Romina: What is this.
1317 Angela: Fofx?
1318 Romina: This is my g prime?
1319 Angela: Integral?
1320 Magda: What function?
1321 Romina: That's what I don't get...
1322 Magda: OK, f(x) is xA2 that is our example.
1323 Romina OK. [Pointing to the graph she just drew] Is this our f(x)?
311
1324 Magda: No.

1325 Angela: No. x squared is our f of x.
1326 Romina: This is our integral.
1327 Angela: Yeah.
1328 Romina: But see You know how when we draw the integral, and then we do the
1329 area underneath...
1330 Magda: Yes.
1331 Romina Isn't that what we do with our g prime?
1332 Magda: No, it's not the area underneath the integral, it's the area underneath the
1333 function.
1334 Romina: But when we.. I understand that but I'm saying that's how we've been
1335 drawing it so every time we say this is our g of x...this really is, this is...
1336 if you figure out the area of this [she traces the area under the graph] this
1337 [pointing to the graph that she has drawn the area under] would be the
1338 integral of our g of x [she writes integral symbol g(x)]
1339 Magda: Correct.
1340 Romina: So why do we keep drawing this [She traces the graph] and trying to
1341 figure that out [she traces over the area]
1342 Angela: Were not doing that this is the F of x.
1343 Romina: So my question is how does this [She traces over the area she has filled in]
1344 change into that other graph that's the part I'm not getting.
1345 Magda: What do you mean.
1346 Angela: I think that's what we're trying to get too.
1347 Magda: This...
1348 Romina: So we're all lost at the same spot
1349 Angela: I think so
1350 Romina: Do you understand what I'm saying - how does this OK, this is our f of x,
1351 or our G prime this is my G prime [she traces over the graph again] and I
1352 want to figure out the area under my g prime to get to my G yes.
1353 Angela: When did we switch to G's.
1354 Romina: That's what the problem was in the book.
1355 Angela: OK. I'm like...
1356 Romina: G is the integral and G prime is the derivative.
1357 Angela: OK.
1358 Romina: OK no it's the function and not the derivative of the function
1359 Angela: I know what you meant.
1360 Romina: Yeah OK. This is our g prime, this is our g, when I get all this [she runs
1361 her pen up and down across the area under the graph] how do I graph this
1362 to get my I don't know I don't even know whatever.
1363 Magda: Ok well this is your f of x.
1364 Romina OK, so we went from... [she draws a new graph, the graph of a parabolal
1365 so I want to go from here to here [She marks off points on the x axis
1366 labeling them a and b] and when I graph my integral [she draws the graph
1367 of a cubic function]
312
1368 Romina: I don't get how this |she fills in the area between the graph of the parabola
1369 and the x axis] turns into all this [she fills in the area above the cubic
11~7f\
10 /U graph)
1371 Magda: No no no, no area.
1372 Angela: The line.
1373 Magda: The point.
1374 Romina: That do you mean equals this point [she draws a point on the cubic graph
1375 above the location of b on the x axis.] you mean this point is the area of all
1376 these together.
1377 Magda: Yes. Well this point...
1378 Romina: Say this area here, this area is 2 [she traces over the area between the x
1379 axis and the parabola between the points at x = a and x = b)
1380 Magda: OK. And this areas is 2...
1381 Romina: And this starts at - 1 . . . is this 1 ? [Pointing to the point above the point at x
1382 = b.\
1383 Magda: Well.
1384 Angela: Is it?
1385 Magda: Whatever b is., oh this point is 1?
1386 Romina: This point is equal with my b and this point is equal with my a.
1387 Magda: OK.
1388 Romina: And the area of this is 2.. so this is negative one, say [she points to the
1389 lower point| does this have to be 1.
1390 Magda: Well, lminusl minus...is, yeah, um hum... Correct 1 minus minus... is a
1391 plus, correct.
1392 Romina: So each point on this [she makes points on the graph of the cubic function]
1393 is like a really skinny rectangle kind of [she makes little rectangles
1394 between the x axis and the parabola]
1395 Magda: Yes and that's what I was saying here.
1396 Romina: But I wasn't getting you and that's why I wanted to ask this.
1397 Magda: Yes.
1398 Romina: All right now go.
1399 Magda: Well basically what we're graphing here is the areas at point 5 the area is
1400 that and at 1 the area if that [she points to points she has just drawn above
1401 the x axis at x = .5 and x = 1] and it kind of builds up so when you the...
1402 get to the final point you get that 9 [she draws a third point to the right of
1403 the first two at x = 3, with a greater y value than the first two points.]
1404 Angela: And this graph [pointing to what Magda has just drawn] is that? [pointing
1405 to 1/3 x cubed on the graph paper drawn earlier]
1406 Magda: Is that, yeah...[pointing to the symbols F(x) = l/3xA3J so you're kind of
1407 like stacking it up.
1408 Magda: Yeah.
1409 Romina: So you're just putting it on top of each other%
1410 Magda: Um hum.
1411 Romina Yeah, OK...so I think we know what the integral is.
1412 [laughter)
313
1413 Romina: I think we've beat that to the ground... why does that., like why does that
math work.
1415 Angela: And on to the fundamental theorem of calculus.
1416 Romina: No I mean well then,
1418 Romina: ... the a and the b that's the fundamental theorem of calculus.
1419 Magda: Well then of you take like the area between - not of this graph of course -
1420 like the point between here and here that's going to give you this little area
1421 right here [pointing to the graph on the graph paper]
1422 Angela: Approximately.
1423 Magda: Approximately.
1424 Romina: The fundamental theorem of calculus is just an easier way...
1425 Magda: No, look.
1426 Romina: ...to do the integral it's like the definite integral, right?
1427 Magda: Well no because...
1428 Romina: It's a way to figure it out...
1429 Magda: .. .you've got to take the integral to figure out the actual area
1430 Romina: Yeah.
1431 Magda: It's not an easy way of taking the integral because you have to take the
1432 integral anyway you know what I'm saying.
1433 Romina: Yeah, I... so you're saying that that we didn't discuss what the
1434 fundamental theorem of calculus is.
1435 Angela: No.
1436 Romina: We didn't.
1437 Magda: Will technically we did.
1438 Romina: All I thought we did because I thought were moving on after that.
1439 Magda: Yeah because if you think about it if OK then you have this point.
1440 Romina: We don't even know we discussed the fundamental theorem.
1441 Magda: We did, OK.
1442 Angela: We did?
1443 Magda: Yeah.
1444 Romina: Because I thought we're done with the theorem part like what it is... are
1445 you not done?
1446 Angela: I am done.
1447 Romina: Really... Are you not done? Angela, for all I know we could have just
1448 breezed right over that part.
1449 Angela: what we just did that's what that is right... that this area is this graph [She
1450 points to the graph of the cubic function on the graph paper.]
1451 Magda: Yes.
1452 Angela: OK... I'm hearing voices... and that's what the fundamental theorem of
1453 calculus is.
1454 Magda: And this would be .03125... hold on a second...this will be .03125 and
1455 this will be .03125 plus .28125.
1456 Romina: Yes.
1457 Magda: Yes so we accomplished that
314
1458 Romina: I am with you there, but does that explain the fundamental theorem of
1 AZQ calculus.
1460 Magda: Well technically yes I guess.
1461 Romina: Well the student should be able to jump from this point to that conclusion
1462 now why does it work.
1463 Magda: Well if you take that and say you want to the integral between .5 and 1
1464 Romina: You just...
1465 Magda: Of the F of x function right so you take this number and you take that so
1466 you'll get...
1467 Romina: Scary...Ok, so why does it work.
1468 Angela: That's f of a, right....I'm wrong...I don't know...forget what I just said...
1469 Romina: What do you mean? No, ask.
1470 Angela: It doesn't make sense to me. I'm confused.
1471 Romina: What's not making sense?
1472 Angela: Nothing I'm OK.
1473 Magda: Well the slope of that.
1474 Romina: Angela, you know how we always say I get it,, and then they ask us
1475 questions and we don't know... Just ask us a question then.
1476 Angela: I'm ok I was just going off on a tangent because I have...
1477 Magda: Well the slope between this would will be f(l) minus f(.5) over. 5
1478 Angela: Over the change in x.
1479 Magda: That will be the slope of this.
1480 Angela: Yes.
1481 Magda: Of our "integral" (signals with quotes with her hands)
1482 Angela: Right.
1483 Romina: Which will be the derivative of our integral.
1484 Angela: Which would be the...
1485 Magda: Which would be the...
1486 Romina: Which would be our g prime.
1487 Angela: Wouldn't that be the area...isn't that the area like Romina just drew
1488 here... cause it's like.
1489 Romina: You just told me slope was derivative.
1490 Magda: Yes slope is derivative.
1491 Angela: Isn't that the same thing? [inaudible |
1492 Romina: So if that's our integral, we just figured out of the slope of the integral that
1493 would be the derivative.... Yeah, We're not doing well.. Am I completely
1494 off?
1495 Magda: I don't know what you're asking.
1496 Romina: This what you did right here didn't you just figure out the slope from here
1497 to here.
1498 Angela: Yeah.
1499 Romina And isn't this our integral.
1501 Romina So the slope of the integral would be the derivative of the integral would
1502 be the function we started with% I just didn't understand what you guys
1503 for doing that's why I said that.
315
1504 Angela: It's like what you just did here (pointing to Romina's graph) that's what
1505 that is.. .this is 2 and that's going up 2 and that's why it ended up at 1
1506 right... I'm thinking in very elementary terms here
1507 Romina: Oh boy.
1508 Angela: Yeah? No?
1509 Romina: This is drawn...
1510 Magda: Do you have that book with the g's in it.
1511 [Pantozzi enters the room]
1512 Romina: Can I just ask did the first group go in a completely different way.
1513 Pantozzi: I didn't watch most of the first group just as I didn't watch most of this.
1514 Romina: You guys did.
1515 [laughter]
1516 Pantozzi: Their lips are sealed.
1517 Romina: I feel our group can't really work apart we're not the same in parts.
1518 Angela: What?
1519 Romina: If everyone else was here we wouldn't be doing this.
1520 Angela: Aren't the 3 of us working here together
1521 Romina: The whole group I mean whole group.
1522 Angela: If I had to work on these by myself I'd be in a lot of trouble.
1523 Magda: OK so what are we saying.
1524 Romina: I just asked you a question% I had no idea what you guys were doing,
1525 Angela: how about we use this to explain that... that should be our first part we
1526 need to organize ourselves a bit better it's driving me crazy.
1527 Romina: I think we have the integral part down what the integral is all that stuff.
1528 Angela: OK this and this can go together.
1529 Romina: You can throw this in.
1530 Angela: OK next step.
1531 Romina: What the theorem means.
1532 Angela: Isn't that we just did.
1533 Romina: Yeah that we just did% Ok, and what the theorem is for.
1534 Angela: No I think we just did what it is for.
1535 Romina: To find the area%
1536 Angela: Right, that is what it's for.
1537 Magda: Hold on
1538 Angela: That it means is that [pointing to Foerster textbook [we can't copy that
1539 because I don't plagiarize.
1540 Romina: Angela, I'm going to hit you, we're not plagiarizing it... obviously if we
1541 don't understand I can't plagiarize it. OK, what the theorem means can we
1542 do that like whole thing about the theorem is as our intervals reach zero...
1543 Angela: What?
1544 Romina: The Riemann sum, as our intervals reach zero
1545 Angela: Getting smaller?
1546 Romina: OK can we get that far.
1547 [laughing]
1548 Angela: Words like get smaller that I understand.
1549 Angela: Is that what it means Magda? (Magda looks)
316

1551 Romina: That's what an integral means but the fundamental theorem of calculus is
1552 an integral from a to b.
1553 Magda: Yes. it's like on a defined area.
1554 Romina: OK.
1555 Magda: OK.
1556 Romina: So what it means is if we take the Riemann sum from a to b as the
1557 intervals get smaller
1558 Magda: It becomes more accurate.
1559 Romina: It becomes the integral and as it reaches zero and That's like the whole
1560 limit thing if something is going to reach zero you can switch it and it's b
1561 -a.
1562 Magda: Um hum.
1563 Romina: OK.
1564 Angela: I missed that.
1565 Romina: Remember the limit as h approaches zero.
1566 Angela: I'm telling you, I don't remember
1567 Romina: The limit...as h approaches infinity,
1568 Angela: That looks familiar to me but I don't know what it means though.
1569 Romina: No that's wrong as h approaches zero.
1570 Magda: The intervals get smaller and smaller.
1571 Romina: Does that% am I on crack here.
1572 Magda: How about you use slope.
1573 Angela: OK you mean they're just getting smaller the change in x%
1574 Romina: Yet to the point that they're not actually squares they're just [she motions
1575 up and down with her hands]
1576 Angela: And what about., blah blah blah this making it more accurate like making
1577 it not being a rectangle but a trapezoid.
1578 Romina: No that's with a Riemann sum remember they did first they would have
1579 these all even with the left and the then they centered it and then we got
1580 really high powered and use the trapezoid did trapezoid come first.
1581 Angela: OK. that's just what we did, OK.
1583 Magda: Basically that's why it works because it isn't that cause like [looking at the
1584 book and pointing]
1585 Angela: You need to complete a sentence first for us to understand.
1586 Magda: This will cancel that and this will cancel that and x will cancel that you
1587 know what I'm saying, then you'd be left with.
1588 Romina: B minus a.
1589 Magda: Yeah.
1590 Angela: All those steps in the middle don't count.
1591 Romina: So we do have what it is for what it means and why it's true.
1592 Angela: Why it's true?
1593 Pantozzi I sat down because you have about 15 minutes left on the tape.
1594 Romina: We haven't gotten very far for you.
317
1595 Pantozzi: That's not it like I said with the other group I don't know what you talked
1596 about, I gave this to you as a task to get you talking not for you
1597 specifically to answer this isn't a test of what you remembered or anything
1598 like that... so if you talked., like I heard you say did we even talk about
1599 the fundamental theorem of calculus for the last hour... I mean even if you
1600 didn't if you talked around it that would be great stuff for me in terms of
1601 this research also so there is no problem there...um...reading my question
1602 now and listening to you for the last 10 minutes or so, perhaps I should
1603 give asked what does the theorem say.
1604 Romina: Isn't that kind of like we did.
1605 Pantozzi: Or maybe that's what it means, I don't know.
1606 Angela: That area is that.
1607 Romina: I don't get like "what it means" is that just stating the theorem.
1608 Pantozzi: See I'm not sure what I meant by what I said either.
1609 [laughter]
1610 Romina: If you don't know...
1611 Angela: You want us to directly answer each question
1612 Pantozzi: Well sometimes people will say a theorem like you can read a sentence to
1613 me.
1614 Romina: That's what I thought it means...
1615 Pantozzi: And not understand what it means...so when you're going to meet with
1616 the student tomorrow who is taking calculus now, and wants to know
1617 about this what might you say to them first to help them.
1618 Angela: We like started with the graph.
1619 Romina: But probably tell them what the book says.
1620 Magda: We'd start with like saying that, like a simple graph.
1621 Angela: .. .actually counts for something.
1622 Pantozzi: OK , this is something you've talked about for a while,
1623 Romina: Yeah...
1624 Pantozzi: So for the last 10 minutes or so you can pretend I'm the student or pretend
1625 one of you are the student and just go through whatever you want to
1626 present to them just to summarize.
1627 Angela: I can be the student.
1628 Romina: OK, so you know what the fundamental theorem is, I mean you know
1629 what the equation states.
1630 Pantozzi: I've seen the equation.
1631 Romina: SO we have that.
1633 Pantozzi Like I've seen that I've read that. [I point to the theorem in the Foerster
1634 textbook. ]
1635 Romina: OK. we went a lot of places with this.
1636 [laughter]
1637 Pantozzi I know what a derivative is.
1638 Angela: Well we basically did that but we made it with a graph.
1639 Romina: The first thing we did was we took the function.
1640 Angela: We used f of x, x squared as our function.
318
1641 Romina: And essentially we talked about what the integral was, how we want to
1642 find the area underneath our x squared from point we designated points
1643 from like a ...
1644 Magda: From like one to three, that's what it was.
1645 Romina: So we did that and do you know what the Riemann sum is?
1646 Pantozzi: Yes.
1647 Romina: OK.
1648 Angela: We did that.
1649 Romina: So we took a Riemann sum underneath that area and then basically we...
1650 what the integral is is stacking on the each area% under., yeah I don't
1651 know where that went...
1652 Angela: Points., there you go...
1653 Romina: So do want to explain that? you wrote it.
1654 Magda: Well basically what we did is that we figured out that at .5 the area would
1655 be .03125 and basically that is doing the change of x which in our case
1656 was .5 times the height which would be the.
1658 Magda: .. .y if you plug it into here [points to the equation f(x) = xA2J and that's
1659 our area, so at .5 that would be that [she points to the point on her graph at
1660 .5, .03125] so at .5... and at one you would just add this and this together
1661 and then you just keep going.
1662 Angela: Keep adding.
1663 Magda: Keep adding it up and then you get to the integral.
1664 Pantozzi You get a graph?
1665 Magda: Yes which is the integral of the f of x.
1666 Pantozzi OK.
1667 Romina: So then we went on to., so if we add up all those areas right there, we get
1668 our area from... did we start at zero? Zero to 3.
1669 Magda: To 3 which equals 9 like which is if you actually take the function you get
1670 that.
1671 Angela: It's right down there.
1672 Magda: If you take that.
1673 Magda: But with our estimates how we're showing it we're doing with the area of
1674 the rectangles it came out to 8.937 which is like the estimate and so
1675 basically and then as you make your change of x smaller and smaller will
1676 become.
1677 Angela: More accurate.
1678 Magda: More accurate... which is actually what the integral is.
1679 Romina: So then if you take, that's kind of sloppy that was our first but if we have a
1680 graph and we want to know the area from a to b what you basically do is%
1681 and this like after we know what a Riemann sum all that so we have an
1682 integral, you know what an integral is... you take the integral of all of this
1683 [from the left up to b] of all of b and then you take subtract the integral of
1684 a which is all of this, then you know exactly the integral from a to b and
1685 that's the fundamental theorem of calculus.
1686 Angela: And it took that long for us to figure it out.
319
1687 Pantozzi: This is the same question I asked the other group near the end given that
1688 you've just been talking about this for a long time there's going to be a
1689 second session where after I've watched the tape I'm going to see what
1690 ideas you guys brought out I'm going to have, going to bring some more
1691 things to that here I just gave you some books and said go ahead talk about
1692 it in the second session I'll bring some things that specifically you might
1693 be interested in knowing... so after you've talked about the fundamental
1694 theorem of calculus for this amount of time what questions do you still
1695 have about it if any., like what might you want me to bring to the next
1696 section... next session... to either help you explain it more or to help you
1697 understand it more.
1698 Romina: I'm not getting... go ahead.
1699 Angela: May be a specific problem with numbers or like what you were saying
1700 before speed velocity acceleration kind of thing.
1701 Romina: Could you just answer that really quick?
1702 [laughter]
1703 Romina: Speed velocity distance acceleration you know how one's a function one's
1704 the integral of the function... one's the derivative of the function... could
1705 you just tell us which one's the function and which one's the derivative
1706 and which one's the integral.
1707 Pantozzi Velocity is the derivative of position or distance
1708 Romina: Position...
1709 Pantozzi Or distance.
1710 Angela: Distance.
1711 Romina: OK, and acceleration is the derivative of velocity.
1713 Angela: See I said that.
1714 Magda: What is it again?
1715 Pantozzi It's position velocity acceleration (Pantozzi: Moves his hands in a
1716 downward vertical motion) position is the first thing, where you are, and
1717 the derivative of that is the velocity and the derivative of that is
1718 acceleration.
1719 Magda: So we were right, we were saying we had velocity.
1721 Magda: We had that...
1722 Romina: What we did...for a long time.
1723 Pantozzi So you still have some questions about that issue velocity acceleration.
1724 Magda: But we didn't really know what acceleration was.
1725 Romina: No we didn't know what velocity was.. I get...
1726 Angela: What was the formula for that?
1727 Romina: All that stuff we explained to you that I understand about it but.
1728 Magda: That more is there to it?
1729 Romina: Yeah, like what?
1730 Magda: This is definitely like the big the most important thing but like what else
1731 do you like is there to it?
1732 Angela: Like specific problems would be the only%
320
1733 Romina: Why is it true like?

1734 Pantozzi: So that's something you didn't get to...
1735 Angela: We were supposed to figure that out.
1736 Romina: Yeah like we just hit a rut like we couldn't really I understand integral I
1737 understand all the stuff under... but I just don't see why the uh...
1738 Magda: But isn't this kind of why? (pointing to the book)
1739 Romina: Yeah, I understand that but%
1740 Angela: Isn't what why we were doing like why isn't doing it out like that and
1741 plotting it out and figuring it out... isn't that why.
1742 Romina: I don't know...
1743 Pantozzi: I don't know what to say...
1744 Romina: What more do you want for us to answer this?
1745 Pantozzi: I can't answer that question because I didn't watch the whole thing that you
1746 did.
1747 Romina: You're going to beat yourself over the head when you watch this
1748 [laughter]
1749 Romina: [inaudible 1
1751 Pantozzi: Well as I said at the beginning the reason I'm researching this is that this
1752 is the fundamental theorem of calculus and they name it that for some
1753 reason and there's some interest in if you've if you've learned all the
1754 separate things what happens when you try to you know you've mentioned
1755 integrals you mentioned limits.. I don't know if you mentioned derivatives
1756 at all in your conversation.
1757 Angela: Sort of.
1758 Romina: That's where we sort of got into problems I understand integrals and the
1759 limits
1760 Pantozzi: Um hum.
1761 Romina: And I understand that the derivative of the integral would be the function
1762 and the integral of a function is that just didn't make sense but but I don't
1763 see how they're all tied together too much [looks to the other two students]
1764 do you understand what I'm trying to say?
1765 Pantozzi: You said the integral of a.
1766 Romina: No that was bad., like the derivative of an integral would be the function
1767 [see motions down with her hands] and like the integral of the derivative
1768 would be the function.
1769 Magda: Um.
1770 Romina: I don't know why I was trying to say that but I see how that process works
1771 see that
1773 Romina: But I don't understand it all.
1774 Pantozzi I'll end this way then and then we can chat, suppose you had to put a
1775 bumper sticker on the back of my car about the FTC, perhaps you
1776 wouldn't put it on your car... is it possible to put it on a bumper sticker?
1777 Or um...
1778 Angela: How big is the font?
321
1779 Pantozzi: Good question.

1780 Romina: See, I understand that when I look at it. (Referring to the book.)
1781 Pantozzi: Yeah?
1783 Angela: Well I didn't when I looked at that I had to relearn this because it's been so
1784 long since I've done it I'm not going to say I understood it
1785 Romina: Isn't this just what it is?
1786 Angela: Now looking at it I get it...
1787 Pantozzi: Well I can't answer that right now.
1789 Pantozzi: I could say yes, I could say no.
1790 Romina: I mean like
1791 Pantozzi: I'm interested in what you thought...
1792 Romina: We probably have a shallow understanding of it.
1793 Pantozzi: Why do you think that?
1794 Romina: Just wait until you watch the tape.
1795 Pantozzi: Well why do you think that right now. I didn't watch the tape.
1796 Romina: Because it can't be that simple, it can't just be the graph from a to b... I
1797 think it is.
1798 Angela: I think we learned why at one point didn't we? I remember knowing
1799 things.
1800 Romina: We figured out why we didn't use the textbook in class.
1801 Pantozzi: [inaudible]
1802 Romina: We did... did we not go through this.. .We tried to understand this for a
1803 good like half hour.
1804 Angela: Who needs a textbook when you got Pantozzi?
1805 Romina: Yeah, I was really badgering.
1806 Pantozzi: So let me end this way this time and I'll really end this time... the student
1807 hasn't taken this section yet - the way I posed it in the task is that they
1808 already took it and want some help with it so hey, you took calculus, and
1809 I'm supposed to learn the fundamental theorem of calculus, what's that
1810 going to be about? Now I'm going to leave and I don't know how much
1811 time there is on the tape, but answer that question in a short, bumper
1812 sticker sort of thing and the font can be about this big.
1813 Magda: Basically what I would say...
1814 Angela: Yeah, but we could say this and this... but generally speaking what is it.
1815 Magda: The fundamental theorem is I would say its taking the integral on a
1816 defined interval.
1817 Romina: Function.
1818 Magda: Taking the integral of a function on a defined interval.
1819 Romina: I like it.
1820 Angela: Taking what?
1821 Romina: Having never taken this class, would they know what an integral is, is
1822 that?
1823 Angela: Well I'm sure they would if they're going to be learning the fundamental
1824 theorem next.
1825 Romina: Well I think that s good for me.
1826 Angela: Should we write that down for him.
1828 Angela: OK.
1829 Magda: I don't know, right.
1830 Romina: That's the fundamental theorem...it's kind of simple for... isn't it?
1831 Angela: What?
1832 Magda: Well basically what you're doing when%
1833 Romina: No I agree with you, that's why, I agree, but I just don't always, uh... I
1 Q1A don't know how to go about...
1835 Magda: I would probably draw a graph and be like.
loJyJ
[laughter]
1837 Magda: Do what we did here draw a graph.
1838 Angela: Yeah but we're just putting something on a bumper sticker you can't just
1839 draw a graph you have to say something right.
1840 Magda: I'd be like the area in green is this minus the area in blue.
1841 Angela: Obviously he's trying to get us to articulate everything we just did in, like
1842 a few short words.
1843 Romina: This is what I would write. [She writes integral sign b - integral sign aj
1844 Angela: That's what you're going to say to somebody.
1845 Romina: I don't know what else to say that makes sense - and I'd give them the
1846 picture.
1847 Magda: You need an f there [she adds a f to Romina's equation]
1848 Romina: OK, if we got all like.
1849 Angela: So this is our bumper sticker.
1850 Romina: No, but it's not, it's a point on the f. Oh yeah, you're right, you're right.
1851 And I would draw them that picture.
1852 Magda: Hold on, hold on, then it wouldn't be the integral?
1853 Romina: I know Magda, it just made sense to me. I'm just kidding.
1854 Magda: Well then...
1855 Romina: You guys took me all serious.
1856 Angela: OK, this is our bumper sticker, what does it say?
1857 Romina: No, but the area, the integral at point b is that, minus the integral at point a
1858 is that, equals integral from point b to a...how else would you write that?
1859 It does kind of that does make sense to me, that's why I'm not a calculus
1860 teacher.
1861 Angela: The book...
1862 Magda: That would be a and b [writes integral of f(x) from a to b]
1863 Romina: Oh, yeah yeah yeah.
1864 Magda: That's how I would write it.
1865 Romina: I have no idea.
1866 Magda: And that's what it equals.
1867 Romina: And then draw.
1868 Angela: OK.
1869 Romina: I just don't think its...
1870 Magda: And then that would equal F(b) - F(a).
323
1871 Angela: But how do we say this not using like math language and graphs though?
1872 Magda: It's the area under...
1873 Romina: The integral from negative infinity to b of f of x minus the integral of
1874 negative infinity...
1875 Angela: No, no, I mean like, I don't know...
1876 Magda: What's the... using position, velocity acceleration.
1877 Romina: Shut up with that, we don't know what it is...can't use that, we don't
1878 understand it.
1879 Angela: You're not supposed to be telling the person exactly what it is, he just
1880 wants the general idea.
1881 Romina: If someone didn't understand it, I'd draw a graph, and be like, you have a
1882 function...
1883 Angela: But that's what we're not supposed to do.
1884 Magda: If they don't know about integrals, I don't think they would be asking us
1885 about the fundamental theorem of calculus. What he's saying is...
1886 Romina In my sophomore year of high school, I was driving with Mr. Pantozzi, I
1887 believe it was here, and his car was dusty... and we were talking about...
1888 or maybe it was precalculus, I don't know we were talking about calculus
1889 and whatever, and I told him, I really don't want to take calculus, and he
1890 was like, that was like blasphemy, but whatever, and he goes, well, you'll
1891 be fine, and he drew a graph, and he asked how much distance did they
1892 cover from here to here, and we like shaded it in, like with the dust, and all
1893 that distance, and he's like oh, the area, I'm like yeah, the area that is how
1894 someone explained it to me...
1895 Angela: OK.
1896 Romina: And he's a teacher, so I think that's fine that I explain it to someone like
1897 that.
1898 Romina: And then we did...someone...and he was like, explain acceleration. He's
1899 like if someone starts here, if this is like speed, and this is distance, you go
1900 like this, what does that mean
1901 Magda: You're accelerating.
1902 Romina: That's how we learned it, in dust. If you can handle that, you'll be fine in
1903 calculus.
1904 Magda: Well that's why you put in real life kind of like.
1905 Angela: Words.
1906 Magda: Terms.
1907 Angela: I'm just a person who likes words.
1908 Magda: And basically like the f(x) would be like the different like accelerations
1909 you could be accelerating at like 5, you could be accelerating at 10, and
1910 that's going to be like your function, you know.
1911 Romina What more could we say? ... Call him back in. Tozzi! OK, good because
1912 that was just going from bad to worse.
1913 Sergei: One minute left.
1914 Romina Just wrap it up, we're done.
1915 Sergei: [inaudible]
324
1916 Romina: That's a wrap, people. Do you remember how you explained calculus to
1917 me?
1918 Pantozzi: Do I remember?
1919 Romina: Yes. In your car on the dust?
1920 Pantozzi: [silence]
1921 Romina: He doesn't remember...
1922 Pantozzi: Which one was this?
1923 Romina: We were in your car... we had to have been coming here, where else
1924 would we go together?
1925 Pantozzi: [inaudible]
1926 Romina: And you were driving and you did it with the dust on your dashboard.
1927 [laughter]
1928 Pantozzi: And what did I draw.
1929 Romina: You drew...
1930 Angela: A graph.
1931 Romina: You drew this first, because I was like, I don't want to take calculus.
1932 Pantozzi: I do remember this day, so don't worry about it.
1933 Romina: I don't want to take calculus you said, well, it's going to be easy, you did
1934 this, and you're like, if this is speed, and no... no this is distance or time...
1935 time.. I think it's time... whatever, or something like that, and you're like
1936 what's happening here, and I said you're accelerating and then you did
1937 how much distance did you cover and I said all this... Do you remember
1938 this? ... why isn't it good enough for me to explain to you?
1939 Pantozzi: What, just now, you mean, or...
1940 Romina: That's exactly how we would explain it if you asked us what the
1941 fundamental theorem of calculus was.
1942 Pantozzi: Did we get that on tape before.
1943 Romina: What?
1944 Angela: Yeah.
1945 Romina: Yeah, oh yeah.
1946 Pantozzi: What you just said before...
1947 Romina: Yeah.
1948 Pantozzi: OK.
1949 Romina: Why is that bad?
1950 Angela: OK.
1951 Pantozzi: Has anyone said it was bad.
1952 Angela: ... language.... I was like how would you say it with words?
1953 Romina: I don't like learning math with language.
1954 Angela: See I can't... I don't think I could do it any other way. It's the way I think.
1955 Pantozzi That's why I love talking to students, especially you guys, because there's
1956 always a difference of opinion.
1957 Romina: Hey, you used to make us write remember?
1958 Pantozzi Um hum.
1959 Angela: See how that's how I remember things... writing...
1960 Romina: These books are really bad.
325
1961 Angela: I can't read math language... I mean graphs help me more than other
1962 things but like just articulating it in regular words is the best way for me.
1963 Romina: That's regular words for me.
1964 Angela: Yeah, but without a graph. And without a formula...
1966 Pantozzi: You guys must have read my dissertation proposal, because that's one of
1967 the things I'm interested in, what representations of the idea do you like to
1968 use... so you said words are good...
1969 Magda: Symbols and graphs...
1970 Romina: Yeah, and I'll do words... but words are kind of just the filler, because
1971 you're explaining the graph., if you sat there with hands folded...and the
1972 fundamental theorem of calculus, say you have a function... you have a
1973 function point a to point b its so much easier to just draw the graph if you
1974 just sat there hands folded if you have a function, a function point a to
1975 point b, from negative infinity... it's so much easier to just do this
1976 Angela: I don't even mean like that. I mean like using plain simple.
Appendix B: Transcript of Session 1 with Group 2 , June 25,2003
1 Pantozzi: So, I will get just right to it.

2 Brian: All right.
3 Sherly [laughter]
4 Mike: I don't like this question.
5 Brian: I'm might need to grab a textbook...
6 [laughter]
7 Sherly: Grab a couple on your way back...
8 Brian: I really.
9 Pantozzi: Go ahead.
10 Brian: I need a refresher because I'm lost... everybody really want one?
11 Sherly: Yeah.
12 Mike: Yeah.
13 Brian: Everybody?
14 Sherly: Bob said no.
15 Pantozzi: I mean if the first hour of this session is you quietly reading, that's no
16 problem.
17 Maher: I should also point out that I have at least a dozen calculus texts in my
18 office... feel free to request what you want.
19 Pantozzi: I've also got the teachers guide to AP Calculus.
20 Sherly: Where was that when we needed it?
21 Maher: Where was that last year?
22 Pantozzi: It still has some stuff in it... I bookmarked the pages that state the
23 fundamental theorem
24 Brian: This is the bookmark?
25 Pantozzi: This bookmark, this color... there are lots of bookmarks in my books from
26 home, but this bookmark is the page that says the Fundamental Theorem
27 of Calculus
28 Brian: Riemann sums.
29 Pantozzi: You may need to look at something else besides this... this is some
30 book... guy who tried to explain what calculus was about... it's not a
31 math textbook.
32 Sherly: Words.
33 Pantozzi: Words, with some equations in it, so., all this stuff is over there.. Like I
34 said, I also have questions that you did while in my class, some old AP
35 calculus questions, and stuff like that, so, at any point.
36 Mike: [inaudible]
37 Sherly: [inaudible]
38 Brian: [inaudible]
39 Robert: [inaudible]
43 Brian: What's a Riemann sum?
44 Sherly: What?
327
45 Robert: That's where you have the squares, right, and its like, left sum, right sum,
46 Mike: There's left and middle too.
47 Robert: Yeah.. .is left plus right divided by two something like that
48 Mike: Something like that...
51 Sherly: What's this left hand sum thing?
52 Brian: Is that part of the Riemann thing?
53 Pantozzi: In terms of the last sentence on the task, you know, you can look
54 anywhere in the calculus book, if someone understands, like I said,
55 remember it's not an individual test... and you can say, hey, I remember
56 this, I remember this part, that's fine, you can use the board. Do
57 kickstands.
58 Sherly: That's after...
59 Brian: Standing on the head...
60 Pantozzi: Yes.
61 Brian: Keeps the blood flowing...
62 Pantozzi: I've been told that often.
63 Brian: Yeah.
64 [silence]
65 Brian: Reading that first page was just like., whoa...
66 [silence as students read texts]
68 Brian: Just laughing...[light is turned on in room] sun out
69 Sherly: I can't read like that though.
70 Brian: The light is keeping me warm though...
71 Sherly: You can keep it on.
72 Brian: Chill.
74 Brian: It's so cold in this building...
75 Sergei Do you want me to turn it off?
76 Sherly: You can leave it on if you need it...
78 Sherly: Oh Really?
80 Sherly: I thought he needed it...
82 Sherly: Can you turn it off?
83 Brian: Have we got anything productive right now?
84 Sherly: Well, the fundamental theorem...
86 Sherly: [reading from Hughes-Hallett] it isn't a proof, because there is a slight
87 term of error.
88 Brian: Lets you evaluate definite integrals exactly using algebra and indefinite
89 integrals.
90 Mike: How bad is your definition?
91 Sherly: Huh?
92 Mike: How bad is it?
93 Sherly: My definition is OK... I understand it... well, I don't understand it, but,
94 Brian: OK.
95 Sherly: The rate of change.
98 Sherly: Where's yours?
99 Brian: I need to go back to page 1 of this book.
100 Robert: The Precalculus book.
101 Sherly: But why is it theorem two?
102 Mike: Yeah, I was thinking that.
103 Sherly: [reading from Ostebee-Zorn] for any well-behaved function f and any base
104. point a, Af is an anti derivative off. What's the antiderivative is the...
1 vrr
105 Mike: Mmm? The antiderivative is the...
107 Mike: The integral... the anti derivative is the integral.
108 Brian: How do you figure that out?
109 Sherly: The integral?
110 Brian: Antiderivative integral.
111 Robert: Integrate.
112 Brian: What ever.
114 Mike: The derivative of is x squared is 2 x and then the other way around
115 Brian: All right.
116 Mike: Would be like the antiderivative.
117 Brian: All right that makes a lot of sense to me right there.
118 Mike: [to Sherly] it's kind of easy but that's all it is.
119 Sherly: Wait, but OK. Here, look at mine...
120 Brian: So what exactly does it prove?
122 Brian: I'm hoping it tells me straight up like this is what it does.
123 Sherly: But here, look at mine...
124 Sherly: When you take the area - when you take the rate of change, the slope, But
125 it shows when you multiply it out but there is a small error.
126 Sherly: Mine.
127 Robert: It tells the relationship between integration and differentiation.
128 Brian: So do you need a Riemann sum?
129 Robert: I don't think so.
130 Brian: That has nothing to do with the equation here?
131 Robert: You use the Riemann sum the equation is too hard to integrate or if you
132 don't know how to integrate?
133 Brian: Find like the area between the two points.
134 Robert: It will give you an approximations you know what I mean.
135 Sherly: That's the same thing yours says.
329
136 Robert: I think it says something like... take the differences of the antiderivative
137 and you get the derivative- or something - you take the this, this is the
138 slope, which is derivative, and these are antiderivatives shows that they're
139 like related.
140 Sherly: Say it again... Say it again one more time... I didn't hear you.
141 Brian: I see the slope thing
142 Robert: Take the slope, right, rise over the run, remember, area under the graph,
143 would be the same, take the integral, then the derivative, these two points,
144 divided by the interval, you get the slope of the derivative it would be the
145 same showing the relation between antiderivative and derivative
146 Sherly: But then my question is...
147 Brian: What's that area thing right there? Is that how we figured that out?
148 Robert: Yeah the top.
149 Brian: Thek
150 Robert: F(b) - F(a) that's the area under the graph from the two points.
151 Brian: Between the two points
152 Robert: And that's like you divide that by this... the interval, that's the slope.
153 Sherly: But one of our questions is what is it for.
154 Brian: Divide the area by the interval
155 Sherly: That's what it means - right, what is it for?
156 Robert: Yeah, to show like to show the relation between derivative and
157 antiderivative I don't know.
160 Robert: It gives you a number
161 Brian: OK, I'm going back to the book for a couple of minutes.
162 Robert: Me too. A way to evaluate a definite integral without having to do the
163 limit of a sum
164 Sherly: That's what mine says
165 Brian: Beautiful, we've got what it's for now.
166 Sherly: And look I've even got properties.
167 Robert: Aww man, I don't got that...
168 Brian: I have nothin'
169 Sherly: Go get another one...
170 Robert: Use to find the area.
171 Sherly: [speaking to Robert] can you interpret this for me... the limits of
172 integration [she hands the Hughes-Hallett text to Robert]
173 Robert: Its saying you have the integral from b to a.
174 Sherly: Can you draw it out ?
175 Robert: Like if you have the integral form here to here, it's the same as the
176 negative integral from here to here, you know what I mean?
178 Robert: From a to b, and b to a
179 Brian: Is that like a number line thing? Absolute value.
180 Sherly: OK.
181 Robert: This is like if.. ,you have a, b, c,, the integral from a to b, and the integral
182 from b to c and you add them together, you get the integral from a to c.
183 Sherly: OK. That's all it's saying?
185 Sherly: What does that have to do with the derivative?
187 Robert: They'd have c and b here too...
188 Brian: A plus b and b plus c equals...
189 Robert: So say the integral from here, and the integral from here, equals the
190 integral from there, [pointing to the figure in the text]
191 Robert: OK. This one's simple,
193 Brian: I'm going to put this book away....
194 Sherly: Why is this theorem true?....your textbook has all the things it has...
195 Mike: (inaudible)
196 Sherly: OK what does this mean? think of the definition of the definite integral as
197 the limit of a sum of areas of rectangles.
198 Robert: What?
199 Sherly: You read it then, [passes book| it says the definite integral of the sum of
200 areas of rectangles.
201 Robert: Where does it say that?
202 Sherly: Bottom.
203 Robert: OK. It's good.
204 Sherly: But what...
205 Robert: What is it for?
206 Sherly: I don't know what is it for?
207 Brian: "I" is imaginary, right?
208 Robert: Right.
209 Sherly: I forgot about that.
210 Robert: Square root of negative one or something
211 Sherly: So what's...
212 Robert: Oh, wait, when its like that,
213 Brian: Ayi?
214 Robert: That's a subscript that's just,
216 Robert: Like saying it could be anything, x 1, x 2, x 3, etc.
217 Brian: Why do they use the same letter?
218 Robert: I think they usually use i and j .
220 Robert: I don't know why
221 Brian: I feel like I need to do a problem to see this stuff.
222 Sherly: I was looking at one of them, but I didn't feel like working it out, so.
223 Brian: Yeah... I could do one out of the book... say you have to do this...
224 Sherly: Right.
225 Brian: See this [points to Larson text] helps me understand it a lot better than this
226 Sherly: That's because he's explaining it you
331
227 Brian: But I can even look at this and see it what he's talking about
228 Sherly: So what does the theorem mean?
229 Brian: What does it mean and what is it for is it the same thing?
230 Sherly: No.
231 Robert: Well like it's the same thing as derivative - because like if you take b, so
232 it's really small you know what I mean?
233 Brian: The tops really small
234 Robert: And the bottom really small, and then you take the limit, you know
235 whatever Then you get the derivative.
236 Sherly: What do you mean, take the limit?
237 Robert: Remember the definition of the derivative?
238 Sherly: I know...
239 Robert: Its like x + delta h or something then minus f(x) yeah...
240 Brian: I've got to write that down.
241 Sherly: Say it again one more time
242 Robert: No lets...
243 Brian: They do definite integrals first.
244 Sherly: We all understand how it's the rate of change and how it's the slope,
245 whatever, so that's what that means But it's not,
246 Brian: But what are we figuring out?
247 Sherly: But we don't understand what its for.
248 Brian: What kind of problem would be on the table, to say, hey this is how you
249 have to solve it
250 Sherly: Well, they have lots of nice examples... do you want to try working a
251 problem up?
252 Brian: Now you can do that for any given graph, right?
253 Robert: Yeah, I think so... as long as it has an antiderivative.
254 Brian: Does that actually come out to give you an answer for something? Or it
255 just give you a figure, and you say, all right, that's what it is
256 Robert: I don't know...
257 Sherly: What did you ask him?
258 Robert: It finds the you know, area under a graph.
259 Brian: But what does that area tell you? Like if you find the area underneath a
260 graph...
261 Robert: The total change between...
262 Sherly: Look, When I take my econ courses, when we do price and quantity, the
263 area would be revenue, and then we do marginal cost, and that's how we
264 break it down. But that's what, it's not like, it means., something.
265 Robert: The total change, it gives a graph of total change
266 Brian: Its like this is at zero, right,
267 Robert: Yeah, it was zero, it was like 20, and the whole area under the graph, and
268 then it goes up to 20, that is how much it changed, and it changed 20 total.
269 Mike: Give me an easy econ class.. I have one more class to take...
270 Sherly: Intro?
271 Mike: No, it has to be a 300 level.
272 Sherly: You did intermediate already? Did you really?
332
273 Mike: I have only one more class to take.

274 Robert: [inaudible |
275 Sherly: Work in class... it's just one final... a bunch of quizzes but its easy... he's
276 a good teacher...
277 Mike: I still haven't made my schedule for next semester...
278 Sherly: What are you waiting for?
280 Robert: What's the second theorem of calculus?
281 Sherly: What, there's more to it?
282 Brian: That's mine...
283 Sherly: Who came up with this?
284 Brian: I'm that secretive. Secret.
285 Robert: Probably that Newton guy.
286 Brian: Riemann?
287 Sherly: Is it? I thought that was just Riemann sum from the past five minutes of
288 what I picked up.
289 Brian: It's somehow incorporated in this. I'm going to go with it - or Simpson.
290 Sherly:
291 Brian: Simpson... Simpson's rule or something....like.
292 Mike: Graphs or something... approximate...
293 Robert: [inaudiblel
295 Brian: Integrals. Now what are we going to do... This right here right, that's the
296 fundamental theory - right here, that's the equation can you break that into
297 separate parts and can be like all right... this is how you get F(b) right, and
298 then say...there's something else that leads up to how you got to f(b) you
299 know what I mean?
300 Robert: Yeah yeah...
301 Brian: Like can this get broken down into like a 100 different steps - and all
302 those steps is what makes it the fundamental theory?
303 Robert: I don't know. I see the proof.
304 Sherly: Well, they're doing it from another way, from the derivative
305 Brian: But I'm saying,
306 Sherly: And then taking the integral...
307 Brian: But I'm saying... this is the final... thing.
308 Sherly: Beats the hell out of me, I'm sorry. Um.
309 Robert: There's a picture of your man right there.
310 Sherly: Who?
311 Brian: Simpson?
312 Robert: No, Riemann.
313 Brian: Yeah.
314 Sherly: What's the right hand...
315 Mike: If I can find it...
317 Mike: You can take it from the right side...
318 Robert: Three kinds of tiny little pieces...
319 Mike: You can take it from the left side or the right side...
320 Robert: Cut the interval into tiny little pieces.
321 Mike: Left right midpoint, trapezoid, you get different answers from each
322 one...you get it?
323 Sherly: But that's where the error comes from?
324 Mike: And this is kind of like the best, this is the second best, and this doesn't
325 really matter. It doesn't
326 Sherly: And that's why it's not a proof.
327 Mike: Exactly.
328 Sherly: But what is it for?
329 Mike: What does the theorem mean?
330 Robert: To find the area under the graph.
331 Sherly: I know, but in the bigger picture?
332 Robert: I think it's like if you take smaller intervals, over and over and over, you
333 know and add them all up , you'll get the area under the graph.
334 Mike: So it's just about area
335 Robert: Yeah area.
336 Mike: Finding area.
337 Robert: Area under the graph - that's what I think...then you keep taking smaller,
338 and it gets more accurate or something.
339 Sherly: Is there more than two properties?
340 Brian: See this right. Now how is that clearly a choice? Is there something where
341 you have to have x squared and add a one or something? Right, isn't that
342 something? Where its 3x to the square or something and you have to have
343 x to the third.
344 Mike: When you go up.
345 Sherly: When you go up.. 3 x squared?
346 Robert: Yeah, that's the antiderivative
347 Sherly: Yeah, I hate...
348 Robert: Exponent plus one divided by exponent plus one
349 Sherly: You could do the derivative (laughing)
350 Brian: I'm guessing that just kind of rings a bell
351 Robert: | inaudible |
352 Brian: If it's the limit 5 to 2 3xA2 dx [reading from contemporary calculus] One
353 choice for f is f(x) is x cubed... xA3
354 Robert: Integral from 2 to 5 of this equation.
355 Sherly: [to Mike] x cubed.
356 Mike [to Sherly]
357 Brian: Obviously I know you have to substitute it in, but I wouldn't know what
358 you would do.
359 Sherly: XA3 is the antiderivative of 3xA2.
360 Mike: No, it's just that.
361 Sherly: Which is what I just said.
363 Robert: Isn't that the graph of the slope or something, because it says, like this is
364 this... so you want to figure out the position, um, position, What's the
365 antiderivative of slope - position?
366 Sherly: Wait, say that again.
367 Robert: Like when you take like the antiderivative or integral of slope, what is
368 that, position., or...
369 Sherly: Or something else?
370 Mike: Distance...
371 Robert: Distance graph, position graph, you know how you take a position
372 velocity acceleration...
373 Mike: You're talking about a velocity graph, type, what is that.
374 Robert: So what is the integral of slope?
375 Mike: The slope being., what graph are you talking about there? You talking
376 about the distance time or the velocity time graph?
377 Robert: Yeah, yeah.
378 Mike: Which one?
379 Brian: The one in the book.
380 Sherly: You can't say yes to both.
381 Brian: Just say yes.
382 Mike: So you're telling me if he asks you what it means then you give me that
383 [points to the Larson text] That seems to me more like, why is it true, you
384 know, in words. But what does that mean, in words... I don't have an
385 answer, but.
386 Sherly: Why is it true.
387 Mike: That's more like why it is true.
388 Sherly: Oh yeah...
389 Mike: But what does it mean?
390 Sherly: I want to put this up, it's from the book.
391 Mike: That's it....when you have a continuous function, there is an
392 antiderivative.. it makes sense... that's it...
393 Sherly: But you can't...
394 Mike: That's it!
395 Brian: XA3's derivative is 3xA2. Because then when you go backwards you bring
396 the thing down and then you subtract one
397 Robert: It says here, when you take f(5) - f(2)
398 Brian: Figured that out I didn't know where they got x3
399 Robert: When you take the derivative the constant gets turned to zero
400 Brian: Now I'm seeing how they're adding the plus 3... well the plus C that's the
401 vertical shift
402 Robert: When you take the derivative it's a constant gets turned to zero.
403 Sherly: Why continuous -
404 Mike: That's it
405 Sherly: You can't... why continuous...
406 Mike: That's it.
407 Mike: If it's not continuous, you can't find the true derivative
408 Sherly: Derivative? Why not?
409 Mike: If it's discontinuous it goes up to infinity [Mike gestures upwards with his
410 hands; on paper, he draws a graph with a gap in it, with a question mark in
411 the gapj Like if it's a graph like that.
412 Sherly: What was i?
413 Mike: Um.
414 Sherly: Open intervals
415 Mike: Yeah, that's like if you start from this point, and go up to infinity - the
416 integral will give you a graph, not just a number you know, I mean the
417 derivative's ... it will give you a function, not a number.
418 Sherly: Wait, why.
419 Mike: See, that's on a closed interval, so this when you get a number... if this
420 wasn't closed, it would give you a function. It has something to do with.
421 Robert: Definite integral
422 Mike: [reading from Ostebee-Zorn textbook] that's all it saying, for any function,
423 for any function
424 Sherly: Right, so that's what that means.
425 Mike: That's all it means
426 Sherly: But we're not done.
427 Mike: We're definitely not done, definitely...
428 Robert: Here it says the theorem states that differentiation and integration are
429 inverse operations.
430 Sherly: [laughsj big words that one...
431 Mike: [to Robert] Read that theorem two right there. How easy is that one? It's
432 just like true. You know what I'm saying?
433 Robert: Informal version, there you go, all we need is the formal version.
434 Mike: We don't need the formal version, they're not asking for the formal
435 version they're asking us to explain it to some student, you know, you
436 really shouldn't give them a formal version cause they wouldn't
437 understand it.
438 Robert: So are we done?
439 Sherly: No...
440 Mike: Definitely not done.
441 Mike: Got something funny there...
442 Sherly: Got pop ups there?
443 Brian: I see so much stuff that, which.
444 Sherly: It makes sense when you're reading it, but I just don't want to regurgitate
445 it out
446 Brian: All right, so I think we're about done, right, we know what it's all about.
447 Robert: Be nice.
448 Sherly: We still don't have why its true.
449 Brian: We know what it means... Lets take it step by step .. what does it mean?
450 Do you know what it means
451 Sherly: It shows you the rate of change, and it shows you how to integrate when
452 you have that
453 Brian: What does that mean?
455 Sherly: How to integrate! I don t know...
456 Mike: ... .What does the FTC mean?
457 Sherly: It shows you the derivative at a certain - between two endpoints for a
458 definite integral
459 Brian: So what does that mean?
460 Mike: Shows you.. .mean.
461 Sherly: It shows the area of the graph.
462 Brian: That's what it can be used for to show the difference.
463 Sherly: What it..
464 Mike: Means is.
465 Sherly: That...
466 Brian: Why is it true?
467 Robert: To find the integral without using the limit - there's no limit thing in
468 there...
469 Sherly: I'm still hazy on the limit thing...
470 Robert: We don't need limits because we have the fundamental theorem of
471 calculus...
472 Sherly: [Laughs]
473 Brian: It's true because we said so ...
474 Sherly: It's not...true, well the theorem is true.
475 Robert: Our boy Riemann hooked us up.
476 Sherly: [laughs] Why is it true?
477 Brian: To show that it's true, don't you have to just prove it, show the steps that
478 make it true...
479 Sherly: But with the left and right sums.
480 Brian: This and this it equals this, right, when you do this and this, it equals that,
481 you can do that with that, and you can do that with that... boom.
482 Sherly: But left and right sums are showing that the error is there, so that's what
483 I'm...
484 Robert: What error?
485 Sherly: The error.
486 Mike: Error.
487 Sherly: Error.
488 Brian: Gotcha.
489 Sherly: Show them your page that they had...
490 Mike: If I could find it... it disappeared..
491 Sherly: What you're up to...
492 Mike: I don't know, it's coming up...(inaudible)
493 Sherly: I think you passed it.
494 Mike: [inaudible |
495 Brian: What are you looking for...
496 Sherly: Remember how there was the graph with the left and right sums, but there
497 was that little part on top, because you were taking the area of the
498 rectangles, because the graph was like, you know.
499 Brian: Those four graphs on the bottom of the page?
501 Sherly: There was that little extra area, so like that s why I don t understand why
502 the theorem holds true.
503 Brian: Maybe because you counter it with a little something on the other side
504 Sherly: What's that...
505 Brian: Right cause isn't there one where the graph was above the rectangles and
506 below the rectangles?
507 Sherly: Middle...
508 Mike: But its not like ... I swear it's not there...
509 Sherly: That's why we have an index...
510 Brian: If the kid's in calculus, and doesn't know the fundamental theorem of
511 calculus.
512 Sherly: [laughs] He should be shot, right?
513 Mike: Well, we don't know it.
514 Sherly: 386.
515 Brian: True. Can't make it too difficult, you know what I mean... we have to
516 show them the basic...
517 Mike: I think it's a lot simpler than...no, keep on going.
518 Sherly: It it's.
520 Brian: Is that this card?
521 Sherly: What card?
522 Mike: Absolutely not.
523 Brian: Most...
524 Sherly: Yeah, but like look here...
525 Mike: Yeah but there was that good picture.
526 Brian: Rewind the tape.
527 Brian: I'll help you out... There's something there.
528 Mike: Did you steal it...
529 Sherly: Yeah...when you weren't looking.
530 Mike: Nothing...
531 Sherly: Why does the theorem hold true?
532 Mike: Well I think um, we still haven't figured out what the theorem means?
533 Sherly: Because... what do you mean?
534 Mike: What does it mean? Definite..
535 Sherly: It gives the rate of total change, that's what it means
536 Brian: What math book doesn't have definitions.. .come on, We've got to
537 talk to Webster's about this.. .there's a whole market for you out there.
538 Mike: Here we go.
539 Brian: Websters...
540 Robert: Websters...
541 Mike: What would you say is the derivative... I mean the definition of the
542 antiderivative of a graph
543 Sherly: I don't know I've never looked at is as...I've always looked at it as...
544 Brian: The antiderivative is a graph of the slope
545 Mike: Of whatever graph it is an antiderivative of.
546 Brian: Yeah.
547 Robert: Isn't the antidenvative above?
548 Mike: No, above or below, it doesn't really matter.
549 Brian: Anti.
550 Robert: Derivative is slope, so it's anti-slope.
551 Sherly: So if someone gave you the slope, you're not going to...
552 Mike: I should have said slope of derivative
553 Sherly: Derivative, yes.
554 Brian: Negative slope.
555 Mike: I said anti, I didn't mean that
556 Sherly: But that means if someone gave you slopes, and you just [silence] what
557 you calculate, do what you get the graph of the...
558 Mike: No, I was just asking that, the definition of anti... and see if it says
559 anything.
560 Sherly: Stop laughing.
561 Brian: I'm sorry...its funny... I think I need like a week refresher course or like a
562 year.
563 Sherly: What was the mean value theorem
564 Robert: Uh... take an interval, and multiply it by something.
565 Mike: How do you remember that?
566 Robert: I don't think we ever., did that.
567 Sherly: It says for a proof of the fundamental theorem from another point of view,
568 see problem 14
569 Mike: It's where you find a point in the center and multiply it by the change and
570 get something
571 Sherly: Can you draw a picture.
572 Brian: Point in the center of what... Like this here [points to the picture in LHE
573 Calculus]
574 Robert: Yeah, like you draw a point in the center and then you get a rectangle and
575 you get like a rough estimate.
576 Sherly: Of what.
577 Brian: I'm not sure.
578 Robert: Of the area under the graph
579 Sherly: OK.
580 Brian: If you just take a half
581 Robert: Like just take any point on the graph
582 Mike: Too big... that right there...
583 Robert: So it says if a number somewhere in here, that you pick a number in here,
584 it will give you the value of the integral.
585 Mike: This is a number, it's a finite number like 6,
586 Sherly: Yeah.
587 Mike: Then there's some way you can make a rectangle of 6.
588 Sherly: OK.
589 Mike: That will equal this odd shape, and it will hit a point on there.
590 Sherly: What will hit?
591 Brian: Point on the slope?
592 Mike: Say you have this weird shape right here, there's your graph
593 Sherly: OK.
594 Mike: But this is 6
595 Brian: Come on...
596 Mike: We're adults here...
597 Mike: You can make a rectangle...
598 Brian: That area is 6 or that 6 is a point?
599 Mike: The area is 6
600 Brian: I've got something for you guys.
601 Robert: Right here.
602 Mike: Let's say you have a graph, and let's say this spans like whatever 20 units,
603 and this is your area, and your area is like 6, all right, you can make a
604 rectangle that's 20, that will equal 6,
605 Sherly: Um hum.
606 Mike: That will if you put it up here, it will pass through some points that's all it
607 saying.
608 Brian: Is that just because some of the graph is lower and some of its higher?
609 Mike: Well yeah, but that's a number, that's all it saying.
611 Mike: There's points here, that's all.
612 Robert: There's one point that has to equal the area under the graph
613 Mike: At least one point.
614 Sherly: Oh, OK.
615 Brian: Now the points that the graph and the box intersect are they significant in
616 any way?
617 Mike: Um, possibly.
618 Robert: No.
619 Sherly: Why not?
621 Sherly: Because in this little drawing...
622 Brian: It seems like they would be important.
623 Sherly: You know what I mean in this drawing this has got more space...
624 Mike: This is just like an average.
625 Sherly: Well I mean.
626 Robert: Maybe this is where it's equal has like the same value right.
627 Mike: I don't think it really matters where it hits, its like how tall that box is to
628 make it 6
629 Robert: Like changes, yeah.
630 Brian: Because the distance between is going to stay the same...
631 Mike: What does that mean to what we're trying to do anyway?
632 Sherly: (inaudible]
633 Brian: I don't know... It gives us a basis to work with... and that will turn into
634 something else.
635 Sherly: How can you explain something when you don't understand it yourself?
636 Brian: What is it?
637 Sherly: What is it?
638 Brian: I don't know... It seems like what it is isn't really.
639 Sherly: It seems like something that is so close to be true but isn t but they feel
640 like using it anyway, so
641 Brian: I'm an outsider, I don't know what that means.
642 Sherly: What do you mean?
643 Mike: Explain it to me. It's the Rutgers coming out in me,
644 Sherly: Well at least you got a graph, right?
645 Brian: It's so...
646 Sherly: It's so what?
647 Brian: It's the Rutgers coming out in me, pretending like you don't know
648 anything about anything... You have to explain it to me, which is kind of
649 true in this case.
650 Sherly: Why?
651 Brian: I don't know, because I really...
652 Sherly: I like where they have the word problems where you actually put it into
653 real life situations, you know like, that's easier for me to understand.
654 Brian: When you put it into the symbols and stuff this is this and this is that... I
655 have no idea.
656 Sherly: Exactly.
657 Robert: Just draw a table ...
658 Brian: Its like I'm reading some foreign language pretty much ... but the areas,
659 that's making sense to me.
660 Robert: Yeah,
661 Brian: A little bit...
662 Robert: Call it a day.
663 Mike: Got to get out of here.
664 Brian: Good session guys.
665 Sherly: But we don't know why its true.
666 Mike: All I have is a question mark on my page
668 Robert: [Reading from the book] You know that by the mean value theorem.
669 Sherly: Is it true because... go ahead.
670 Robert: I was saying, by the mean value theorem, you know that there exists a
671 number so that it's equal blah blah blah exactly, mean value theorem,
672 that's it.
673 Sherly: And that's why its true.
674 Robert: Sure.
675 Brian: How does that apply to all calculus.
676 Robert: I guess cause it's saying you can find a number...
677 Sherly: Why is this the fundamental... why not.
678 Brian: It's got to be the basis of everything, right? What makes it that?
679 Sherly: The problem is we keep asking questions ourselves so we can't.
680 Brian: I mean in the basis of calculus, I mean I haven't taken it in so long.. .What
681 is it all based on, integrals and such.
683 Brian: Mike, Rob?
684 Mike: Yeah, but...
341
685 Sherly: Didn't you take a calculus course this year?

686 Mike: A year ago.. .three years ago.. .1 haven't taken it...
687 Sherly: What else did you learn like with calculus?
688 Mike: I haven't used any calculus in...
689 Brian: What's calculus based on, like what is the main foundation of calculus?
690 Sherly: Hard core calculus for you.
691 Pantozzi: Ask me the question again.
692 Brian: All right, I'm looking at calculus like a building, you know what I mean,
693 its got to start somewhere.
694 Pantozzi: All right.
695 Brian: What if the basis of it like isn't there one thing that everything it all boils
696 down to.
697 Mike: The one idea it's the one we have to... the fundamental theorem we have
698 to define that so asking him to do it won't help.
699 Pantozzi: Well the umm people who are said to have invented the calculus
700 Brian: Yeah...
701 Pantozzi: They were interested in two main questions how fast is something going
702 and an instant so like instantaneous rate.
703 Brian: Oh like the cat problem.
704 Sherly: What cat problem...
705 Mike: Summer.
706 Sherly: Oh the cat.
707 Pantozzi: And also the... how should I put this one...like how., how things build up
708 like um... you might remember in calculus we rotated things around to
709 make solid objects to make solid objects and you had to build it up piece
710 by piece.
711 Brian: Like areas...
712 Pantozzi: Like you can approximate...
713 Brian: Like the rectangle that we just...you weren't in here.
714 Pantozzi: Could be... I wasn't in here so ...rate at which things happen and the rate
715 at which... the way things accumulate put it that way... so those of the
716 two main kinds of questions I understand calculus to be built on that was
717 way back in the 1600's and then they had ideas that they couldn't prove
718 and then like years later... that's how you get these big textbooks like
719 someone will add a little thing here, there's limits, you know to find... the
720 limit concept and then there's derivatives and so I guess what it's built on
721 is.
722 Mike: Limits...
723 Pantozzi Those questions., so all you see in these books here is answers to those
724 questions that involves how fast is something changing or how is
725 something accumulating... and does that sort of answer your question?
726 Brian: Yeah...
727 Pantozzi If you want to talk about math logic, mathematicians will want to put
728 things on a provable basis like do you guys remember your geometry
729 class... were you all in that same geometry class.
730 Brian: Freshman year?
342
731 Pantozzi: Back in Freshman year?

732 Brian: Mrs. Kerr...
738 Pantozzi: There were like postulates, you know, this is taken as a basic idea and then
739 you build things from that.
740 Brian: OK.
741 Pantozzi: So um... you know like points and planes and then they built theorems
742 upon theorems... in calculus, a lot of books they will say it's built upon
743 limits so things are based upon being able to say what a limit is.
744 Brian: OK, you know how he wrote this equation right... this F(b) - F(a)
745 Sherly: Which is the fundamental theorem.
746 Brian: Is that technically the equation for it, like the bare bones.
747 Sherly: Yes.
748 Pantozzi: Well, you've got the equations for it
749 Brian: Now is this... do other things come from this or is this like a compilation
750 of everything...
751 Sherly: Well this is the fundamental theorem,
752 Brian: ... else you know what I mean does this get broken down into other
753 equations for other things or is this the starting point for all other
754 equations.
755 Pantozzi: That particular thing you're pointing at?
756 Brian: Yeah.
757 Pantozzi: Well, as I was saying before we started videotaping... even in the different
758 books, I don't know if you've noticed this... the different books will have
759 a different starting point like this one will say the fundamental theorem is
760 this.
761 Sherly: Um hum.
762 Pantozzi: And I think you might have another that says something a different thing
763 like to see that one there, where it says fundamental theorem, and this one
764 here, those don't say...
765 Sherly: Where are you looking?
767 Pantozzi I'm looking at that box right there...
768 Sherly: But...
769 Robert: Aren't there multiple fundamental theorems.
770 Pantozzi Well there's different ways people can go about trying to explain it.
771 Robert: Oh yeah.
772 Mike: Oh, what do they mean, not the same words...
773 Pantozzi I guess one thing I could point out, did you look at the AP calculus thing.
774 Sherly: No.
775 Mike: No.
343
776 Robert: I know that one said that anti derivatives and derivatives continuous or
777 something find derivative.
778 Pantozzi: The fundamental theorem is supposed to pull like everything, pull all the
779 big ideas together, derivatives, integrals, antiderivatives...
780 Brian: Together... OK.
781 Sherly: [inaudible!
782 Pantozzi: That's one of the reasons we're doing this research because it's supposed to
783 pull all the ideas together but.
784 Brian: Doesn't always...
785 Pantozzi: Mathematically certainly it does all if you have all this stuff has been
786 accepted as true in the mathematical you know community.
787 Brian: But for kids sitting there and looking at it, it's like oh.
788 Pantozzi: Yeah I mean... I might have told you about my own experience there was
789 one section it was section 4.3 and we did that for one day... there was a
790 test about the fundamental theorem of calculus and then we went on with
791 our lives.
792 Brian: Yeah.
793 Pantozzi: But there must be some reason it's called the fundamental theorem of
794 calculus OK, and then I think there's even one book that says it's important
795 because... blah blah blah.
796 Sherly: Because you can learn how to integrate.
797 Robert: Without limits.
798 Pantozzi: Did you find out anything about what it does or what you do with it? One
799 of the questions on there.
800 Brian: The areas under the graph finding uh I don't know.
801 Sherly: Here I'll tell you.
802 Brian: Yeah, Go for it.
803 Sherly: Using the Fundamental Theorem, page 168,
804 Mike: It's good.
805 Sherly: My book The Theorem enables us to reconstruct a function f from
806 knowledge about its derivatives and then they have an example about
807 um... give me one second.
808 Brian: Like you want us to put it in real words,
809 Sherly: I don't understand how...
810 Brian: That's mathematical, mathematically speaking right there, right,
811 Sherly: Well no here they give you an example about bacteria population and ive
812 you time and how fast you're growing.
813 Pantozzi That's part of the question the theorem is supposed to say something...
814 supposed to...
815 Brian: Give you something.
816 Pantozzi Give you something... if someone says what is this about there ought to
817 be some way I think overheard you say something about what is it what
818 does it say you're looking for one sentence that would say.. I thought I
819 heard you say....give me something that says
820 Sherly: Concrete.
344
821 Pantozzi: What it's all about...so I'm looking in here, maybe something in here will
822 help you [opens Teachers Guide to AP Calculus]. Why don't you read, all
823 look at... read it out loud or something.. .read No. 4 first., once you look
824 at 4, then look back at No. 2 and No. 3 because it refers back to those two
825 goals.
826 [students read]
827 Pantozzi: It goes on to the next page.. .That's the end of it there...
834 Pantozzi: That stuff is highlighted because I read this the first summer before I
835 taught calculus. This was something that helped me so that's why I'm
836 showing it to you now.
837 Sherly: When you taught it to us, did you approach it from derivatives first? Do
838 you remember?
839 Pantozzi: Remember I was telling you about what questions calculus is supposed to
840 answer?
841 Sherly: I remember you did the same question the last day of class as the first day
842 of class. That's one of the things I remember.
843 Pantozzi: Did I really do that?
844 Sherly: Yeah.
845 Pantozzi: That's good, I'm glad I did that. I think I was trying to do that.
846 [laughter]
848 [laughter]
849 Pantozzi: I know that a couple... two times after I taught your class I did it from
850 integrals first, but I think I might have done it with derivatives first.
851 Sherly: But it just says right there that they don't like it when you teach it with
852 derivatives first.
853 Pantozzi: Well, right, that's what it says... but you could, as I was saying before, do
854 it more than one way...
855 Mike: What would be the difference?
856 Sherly: What's that?
857 Mike: What would be the difference?
858 Sherly: Because one thing...it's like you're... you're learning derivatives and then
859 OK, the antiderivatives is just the opposite of that and you're not satisfied
860 if you learn what the integral is from the beginning like you see more
861 sound into like you know.
862 Brian: More things open up.
863 Sherly: Yeah, it seems like you're getting explanation rather than just hey, this is
864 it.
865 Mike: I think it's easier to understand the derivative first,
345
866 Sherly: It is easier to understand the derivative, but like when it comes time to
867 learn the integral, like
868 Mike: The other one first would probably be better...
869 Sherly: But to do integrals you'd have to teach derivatives first, wouldn't you?
870 Pantozzi: To do integrals would you have to teach derivatives first?
871 Sherly: Yeah, because you're
872 Pantozzi: That's a good question, and part of why we're doing research like this.,
873 because there's been lots of...You see all these calculus books are
874 different.
875 Mike: [inaudible] Let's say that you've got a graph and you make the integral,
876 Sherly: Right.
877 Mike: You then you know that that's the derivative, so you're kind of learning
878 twice, two at the same time.
879 Sherly: Yes, but there's a whole section on you know too.
881 Brian: You have to be able to see that though.
882 Mike: Well you might pick that up, you might not. Then when you learn
883 derivatives are, you can see...
884 Brian: I see when I did that was actually right in front of my face.
885 Mike: That's probably why...
886 Sherly: I remember when xA3 went like that all the even ones went like that and
887 the odd ones went the other way... do you remember that?
888 Brian: Nope. [Sherly laughs] the direction of the graphs.
889 Pantozzi: You said you could both of them, integrals and derivatives at the same
890 time?
891 Sherly: Because they're like complementary...
892 Mike: Well, let's say you ask someone to create an integral from an existing
893 graph, or from some information .. .you know, some points. What they're
894 creating it from, from is its derivative, correct? Right? The integral you,
895 right?
896 Sherly: Yes!
897 Brian: I don't know...
898 Mike: So as they're making the integral, they don't know that what they're
899 making it off of is its derivative. So they can pick that up and then when
900 they learn about the derivatives and see it's the opposite, and say wow.
901 Sherly: It's like when you do it but you don't realize what you're doing.
902 Mike: That's what I was doing before... you can go backwards.
903 Robert: Like multiplication and division,
905 Robert: Like multiplication and division are like inverse, you don't really know,
906 you learn one, and then learn the other.
907 Pantozzi Maybe, you know, can you give me a concrete example of what you guys
908 are talking about?
909 Mike: Like if I give you...
910 Pantozzi What did you say, make a graph?
346
911 Mike: Let's say someone gave you a graph, or points, the graph of 2x, and then
912 they showed you how to make an integral.
913 Brian: All right:
914 Pantozzi: You can draw it too. You could use the board.
917 Mike: I don't even know...
918 Sherly: 2x.
919 Mike: 2x is like this.
920 Sherly: [laughs]
921 Mike: This is probably way off. But let's say the first day of class they gave you
922 that. And one thing is you have to you have to pick a point too where to
923 start from... or is it the other way around?
924 Sherly: A point on the graph?
925 Mike: You have to pick a point like where zero would be, and then you build up
926 from that. You know what I'm saying... and then this is like -10, so I
927 have to go down,
928 Sherly: OK.
929 Mike: -8, down, until I hit there and then I start going back up. [Mike draws a
930 graph] You know what I'm saying so that's how you make your integral.
931 If I start...
932 Sherly: Wait wait, wait do that again?
933 Mike: You know what I'm saying? You pick a point,
934 Sherly: Yeah.
935 Mike: Where like where your beginning would be.
936 Sherly: OK.
937 Mike: And here is like, like this is your slope line, and this would be your slope
938 of -8, so you go, you know what I mean? think of it as like xA2 minus
939 something... you know what I'm saying?
940 Sherly: No.
941 [laughter]
942 Brian: That could be at zero...
943 Mike: [inaudible]... Let's say I pick 2x. Because the whole thing I've been
944 reading is like... a base point, base point,
945 Sherly: OK.
946 Mike: You have to pick a points...
947 Sherly: Between two points...
948 Mike: And you have to pick a point to make so let's say here's you're zero...
949 that's way off. [laughter] So you're starting like right here.
950 Pantozzi: If you use the board you can erase it
951 Mike: Nah... so you're starting here and so from your slope is zero.
952 Sherly: Yes.
953 Pantozzi: So what are you making right now.
954 Mike: I am making an integral...
955 Pantozzi: You're making an integral...
956 Mike: From a graph.
347
957 Pantozzi: A graph...

958 Mike: Right, so.
959 Pantozzi: So this is an existing graph and you're going to make an integral.
960 Mike: So.
961 Brian: Is that line 2 x.
962 Mike: It's something
963 Brian: It's something
964 Mike: It's yx, I don't know.
965 Brian: Not perfect...
966 Mike: So you go to the next spot and that would be like one, so you kind of
967 increase.
968 Sherly: The next... OK.
969 Mike: You kind of like can't see it but the next one would be like 2 then 4 you
970 know what I'm saying?
971 Sherly: No, where you getting this from.
972 Brian: It's x squared right... y squared...whatever...
973 Mike: This would be 1... if you trace it back 2, 3 ,4 like on the y coordinate.
974 Sherly: Yeah, I understand.
975 Mike: So when you're here the slope would be one and when you're here your
976 slope would be 2, when you're here the slope would be 3
977 Sherly: Oh.
978 Brian: You make the...
979 Mike: You turn ... and that's how you make your integral so let's say this was 2 x
980 and then this would be x squared and you're used to seeing it like that, you
981 know what I'm saying? but you have to pick a point to start at
982 Sherly: That's nice, but...
983 Mike: And like you know, when they start doing that they start realizing... what
984 is the derivative... a graph of the slopes... what did I make that off of?
985 the slopes...
986 Sherly: Can you explain that? for me it's easier for me to see the integral and then
987 ask to get the derivative because you can see like the slope changing.
988 Mike: But it's harder to do it like that it's easier to just go backwards it's not...
989 Sherly:
990 Pantozzi When you say making an integral what does that mean to you.
991 Mike: Well like using like information or like points or like a graph
993 Mike: Making a graph well I don't know... I wouldn't say like the area
994 underneath it or something is that what it means.. .no... Probably not.. .but
995 let's say like you're making a graph,
996 Sherly: finaudible]
997 Mike: I would say that this is like the slope of some other graph right the
998 changing slope here would be negative 10 so I'm you know just using
999 this like, kind of like using that like as a...
1UUU
1 Iffc *-» ^ ^ v r-w r-w •
Say we're talking to the student here asking for help and other people have
rantozzi
1001 done this to me for help on things... people have come back for help from
1002 college and say hey I m in calc 3... I m going to have to go back and look
i r\f\ri
ILKJJ that up again...
1005 Pantozzi: So with this whole fundamental theorem thing you said that there are two
1006 things involved you're going to have... talking about integrals and
1007 derivatives...
1008 Mike: Uh huh.
1009 Pantozzi: So what can you tell me about just derivatives.
1010 Mike: They give you the slope...
1011 Sherly: They are the slope between two points on the integral and that it's a
101? continuous definite.
1013 Mike: No no like a derivative of a graph is a graph of the slopes at individual
1014 points you know like points.
1015 Pantozzi: OK.
1016 Mike: Kind of what a derivative means.
1017 Sherly: And the closer the points are, the more precise
1018 Mike: We're talking about and already continuous.
1019 Sherly: OK.
1020 Mike: And you want to know what an integral means?
1021 Pantozzi: Yeah, so what's an integral then? Don't... you've got the books...
1022 Sherly: It's the opposite.
1023 Brian: Index... what's the difference between a definite and an indefinite integral?
1024 Pantozzi: That's an important question.
1026 Robert: One is on a fixed boundary and one's on like...anywhere...
1027 Brian: Just a made up like infinite thing.
1028 Robert: You don't think put boundaries on the bottom you just put the integral sign
1029 and you just evaluate it.
1030 Brian: All right so I don't need to look at that well maybe I do a little bit...
1031 Robert: When it's like if you want to evaluate it from 2 to 5 that's when you use
1032 that fundamental theorem of calculus thing.
1034 Pantozzi: Well let me ask this then... suppose... would you mind going up to the
1035 board this time?
1036 Mike: Um... all right...
1037 Sherly: There's different colors up there.
1038 Pantozzi Just., draw a graph.
1039 Mike: It's going to be like a straight line because I'm very lazy. [Mike draws a
1040 line with a positive slope and negative y intercept]
1041 Pantozzi Sure, That's probably not a bad way to start. OK, can you draw the
1042 derivative of the graph.
1043 Mike: Oh, you do want me to do it?
1044 Robert: Just a straight line.
1045 Pantozzi This is the team period. You're trying to help this other person...
1046 Brian: I'm trying to understand so
1047 Sherly: It's horizontal, right. It's a constant.
349
1048 Robert: It's like a constant because there's only one x.

1049 Mike: ... be zero...
1050 Sherly: It's a straight line its horizontal.
1051 Mike: The derivative would be zero.
1052 Sherly: Know it's not zero because.
1053 Robert: It if its 2 x it's 2
1054 Sherly: Its what ever
1055 Mike: Oh, yeah, OK.
1056 Sherly: (laughs)
1057 Mike: Well this is...
1058 Sherly: Draw...
1059 Pantozzi: Use the other color.
1060 Mike: It's positive so it's something like that
1061 Robert: Yeah...
1062 Mike: Continued. All right.
1063 Sherly: Yes.
1064 Brian: I get that. It's like a line, right?
1065 Sherly: But see like when they tell you to do it backwards that's what I don't
1066 understand.
1067 Brian: So derivative is a graph of the slope?
1068 Mike: Do something...
1069 Sherly: To make the integral.
1070 Mike: OK.
1071 Pantozzi: In math it's never...
1072 Brian: ... a curve, right.
1073 Robert: Add up all the things under the graph.
1074 Brian: Say if it was like x squared right.
1075 Pantozzi: Draw x squared for him.
1076 Sherly: Like from there to there...
1077 Robert: Yeah
1078 Mike: Something like that.
1079 Pantozzi: ...and Brian was asking about.
1080 Sherly: But you know that because...
1081 Mike: He just told me to draw xA2 right?
1082 Sherly: Oh, OK.
1083 Brian: The derivative of that is not gonna be a straight line right?
1084 Sherly: For what?
1085 Robert: No, it's gonna be...
1086 Brian: For that.
1087 Sherly: X squared?
1088 Brian: No, right...
1089 Mike: It would be a straight line as in.
1090 Brian: It would?
1091 Mike: Yeah, it's straight like as in like.
1092 Sherly: It's a constant.
1093 Robert: A half...
350
1094 Brian: I'm just talking about not horizontal.

1095 Mike: No.
1096 Brian: I mean the only reason it that was because.
1097 Mike: The slope of that was the same as that.
1098 Brian: Because the slope of that was what ever... all right.
1099 Pantozzi: So what would the derivative of that look like?
1100 Mike: This one? let me fix that right here.
1101 Brian: You just go from left to the right because the slope is what decreasing and
1102 then increasing
1103 Mike: Well say this is x squared....
1104 Brian: How the hell would that look.
1105 Robert: 0 and above and just go like that right? [he motions with his hands to
1106 make a diagonal line through the airj
1107 Brian: That's all it would be? Oh yeah, Cause the left side...
1108 Mike: You know this point is 0 there so it's gonna be zero...and this is going to
1109 be something positive.
1110 Brian: So as you go further down the slope keeps increasing except negatively
1111 right...
1112 Sherly: Like the slope over there is...
1113 Brian: And it would be going up on the right side when the slope is increasing.
1114 Pantozzi: So how would you draw that.
1115 Brian: Wouldn't it be the same thing? Like...
1116 Sherly: Yeah.
1117 Pantozzi: We're talking about derivatives...
1118 Brian: It would go through zero too because at 0 there is no slope, right?
1119 Mike: Yeah, you know way that it goes through zero and you figure it's got to be
1120 something positive here and negative the same amount so it's basically like
1121 a line that would, you know, if it was x squared it would be 2 x.
1122 Brian: Gotcha on that one. Oh And that's like just taking the exponent down? So
1123 say if it were like x cubed it would be like 2x, 2x squared?
1124 Mike: 3
1125 Pantozzi: Yeah, for x cubed the derivative would be 3xA2.
1126 Brian: Oh, 3x squared.
1127 Pantozzi: If it was xA4 it was be 4xA3. That sort of thing.
1128 Brian: OK.
1129 Pantozzi: Those are the formulas that we came up with.
1130 Brian: Yeah, the basic like to subtract the one from the...
1131 Pantozzi: Yeah, exactly and there are different formulas for other graphs and stuff.
1132 OK. Thank you, thank you. Now, but now there's this thing about
1133 drawing the integral...
1134 Mike: Integral is different.
1135 Pantozzi So how do you do that? Let's talk about how to do that...
1136 Sherly: Draw like a squiggly graph, not one that's perfect.
1137 Mike: All right, I'll do that.
1138 Brian: The board sucks...
1139 [laughter]
351
1140 Sherly: And...

1141 Mike: I don't want to do this...
1142 Sherly: No because I don't get it and I want to know how to go about to integrate
1143 this.
1144 Robert: You want the area from like where you start to that point, I think.
1145 Mike: Too much work.
1146 Brian: To what point.
1147 Sherly: The area...
1148 Robert: The total area at that point.
1149 Brian: So if you say between like zero and two
1150 Mike: That's still...
1151 Robert: Yeah, it would be.. .you have to find out the area of that little...
1152 Robert: Yeah, it's like 10
1153 Brian: Triangle area.
1154 Robert: So like at 2 the anti derivative will be at 10, or like at 1 the area is 5, the
1155 anti derivative will be at 5
1156 Mike: That's why if you're accumulating areas you have to pick a starting point
1157 you can't just say from if you start from here this would be zero if you
1158 start from here this would be zero and go up.
1159 Brian: So that's like if the limits are from 2 to 5 or something is that where that
1160 would come into play.
1161 Mike: It's like from 2 to infinity or something....
1163 Mike: You know.
1164 Brian: You don't need an ending point.
1165 Mike: No.
1166 Brian: Just a place to start and then from here on
1167 Mike: Just a place to start you pick another point and the graph looks different
1168 like shifted over, all right.
1169 Pantozzi So pick a spot...
1170 Mike: Right there. OK.
1171 Pantozzi And Sherly you're asking...
1172 Sherly: How to make the integral.
1173 Pantozzi How to make an integral out of this..
1174 Mike: Take that next unit and grab a try to estimate that area however which way
1175 you want to do it left sum right sum whatever.
1176 Sherly: [whispers]
1177 Mike: In the then you just plot that or something.
1178 Robert: Yeah plot that like it would be at 2
1179 Mike: What would that be...
1181 Brian: Is that part under the graph considered negative area? Yeah?
1182 Sherly: Wait, what was that about?
1183 Brian: That's where you'd have to like subtract like.
1184 Sherly: Oh, the area?
352
1185 Brian: Say I was trying to find like from 0 to where that crosses you have to
1186 make two separate and just subtract.
1187 Robert: Yeah, it's like going positive and then when it's at it starts going down.
1188 You know what I mean?
1190 Mike: Then you grab the next one.
1191 Sherly: Right.
1192 Mike: Which obviously is more, like 2 or 3 or somewhere around there...
1193 wouldn't it be this right here this would be the slope of like whatever
1194 you're coming up with right up there [pointing to the graph of the
1195 integral.. .if I was going to make one I would just take a slope and draw a
1196 line with that slope it's harder to draw it and interpret it like either way but
1197 then.
1198 Pantozzi: Before you get into that., just, alright, Ok, well that's the way you say you
1199 doit.
1200 Mike: Because I have no way to measure this.
1201 Brian: How did you plot those two points up above? just find the area of that and
1202 then what ever that is that then you just go up?
1203 Mike: That is some area
1204 Brian: So say that was six then that point would be like six.
1205 Mike: Like seven or something.
1206 Brian: OK.
1207 Sherly: OK
1208 Brian: So that in turn would give you a rough graph of the area.
1209 Mike: And then, all this is kind of increasing but so it would be you can't really
1210 draw this.
1211 Robert: It would just go up all to where it crosses the x axis.
1212 Mike: But it's not going to be a straight line because it's not increasing like um...
1213 its hard to look at it like., it's like picture in your head...
1214 Pantozzi: Well draw a bunch of rectangles like you did you don't have to fill them
1215 all in, draw more of them...
1216 Brian: So that little area that isn't filled in, that rectangle, that just gets
1217 encompassed that gets played off as part of the estimation because you put
1218 the top left corner of the rectangle up against the graph,
1219 Pantozzi: Right now he is estimating the area... he's not getting the exact area.
1220 Brian: Because that area is miniscule pretty much...
1221 Mike: Here it's going up some kind of constant or looking like it because each
1222 one of these things is like the same...
1223 Brian: There's like a good ratio of uh...
1224 Mike: But over here you're still going up but you're like going.
1225 Robert: Less.
1226 Mike: Up less so I guess when you get these things...
1227 Pantozzi Draw it Mike it's not going to be perfect.
1228 Brian: Wouldn't it be just like...
1229 Mike: I could draw a straight line but when it's a straight line its...
1230 Pantozzi Well, you could draw a straight line first and then...
353
1231 Brian: Upside-down like an x squared almost... except...

1232 Pantozzi: ...help him out...
1233 Brian: It's going to come down eventually right cause the area start getting
1234 smaller on the other side of the axis right... if he continues that to where it
1235 crosses right it's just going to come down... could it still keep going up?
1236 Mike: I'm going to erase this you guys want that? those boxes.
1237 Sherly: What...why are you erasing?
1238 Mike: They're bothering me.
1239 Sherly: Oh...
1240 Brian: Are you're adding up that area is that why its going to keep going up right?
1241 Pantozzi: Accumulating the area.
1242 Brian: So it's not to go down ever right unless it goes to the other side right?
1243 Mike: Too (inaudible) over there...
1244 Brian: Like if you drew a graph for that whole thing right that he's got on the
1245 board right it would eventually start decrease a little bit.
1246 Robert: Yeah.
1247 Brian: But not that much.
1248 Pantozzi: Try to draw it.
1249 Brian: I'm not going to keep going up.
1250 Mike: If I was going to try to draw of the derivative I mean integral anti
1251 derivative for this right.
1252 Sherly: Laughs.
1253 Mike: But say this was like one, so I would draw a slope of one and its kind of
1254 increasing... when you get to here... here the slope is not really changing
1255 here... so here its starting to go this way... once you hit this here you start
1256 to have negative slopes and so you'll start to go down that's how I would
1257 see it like the slope changes instead of like adding on this is probably
1258 wrong.
1259 Brian: No
1260 Sherly: So when you.. .draw the...
1261 Brian: I think that's pretty much what it should look like except the slope at the
1262 end probably wouldn't be as much but round about...
1263 Mike: At the end it supposed to be right there going down and then going down,
1264 you start changing direction or something.
1265 Brian: But eventually it would end up going back up.
1266 Mike: And when you hit this point.
1267 Brian: And that's the integral that we're doing now.
1268 Mike: Well this is always going to be like going up as long as your graph is
1269 mostly like positive.
1270 Brian: I got that...
1271 Pantozzi: So tell me what you see right there now Brian.
1272 Brian: What do I see there with that thing there he just graphed?
1273 Pantozzi That thing he just graphed.
1274 Brian: It looks like a graph of area at that point a total graph of area for each
1275 point I guess above the graph or on the graph.
1276 Pantozzi Sherly, does that...
1277 Sherly: Yeah. That makes sense.
1278 Pantozzi: The original thing he went up there to do was what... draw an integral?
1279 Sherly: Right.
1280 Pantozzi: Has he done that?
1281 Mike: I don't see it as area that's how I draw it... I think of it as slopes changing
1282 Pantozzi: Mike's saying something else, he's talking about.
1283 Mike: That's what I was saying before, I couldn't draw it before as boxes like
1284 that...
1285 Pantozzi: The boxes didn't help you.
1286 Mike: No.
1287 Brian: I see what he's saying about slopes changing.
1288 Sherly: With the boxes the points were above
1289 Mike: I said it was six and it probably should have been like one.
1291 Pantozzi: I mean if we had...
1292 Mike: Here I can't really measure it... so doing it that way is easier for me.
1293 Pantozzi: Without trying, trying to put an idea in your head, I think when we did this
1294 I think we had graph paper. Like you could actually see that there was one
1295 square or two squares or something like that and here you're doing that
1296 without it.
1297 Brian: Gotcha. I am liking that I understand it now at least...
1298 Pantozzi: What does this have to do, does this have anything to do with the
1299 fundamental theorem of calculus?
1300 Mike: In that book right there, there all it says is one line: for any graph you
1301 know, maybe this one with a base point there is an anti derivative of it
1302 that's all it says no f b a divided anything... it's all like...
1303 Sherly: | laughsJ
1304 Mike: It's not like f b a , etc, that's all just - this is the basis of everything in
1305 calculus- that you can find that as long as it's continuous.
1306 Pantozzi: That that? which that? That thing you just drew there?
1307 Mike: When you have that [he points to the first graph he drew] you can find that
1308 too [the second graph he drew]
1309 Brian: And once you have that that you can find the derivative.
1310 Mike: Like all this other stuff comes from this
1311 Brian: I see that.
1312 Pantozzi Because he was talking about you were talking about slope when you said
1313 this.
1314 Mike: Yeah.
1315 Pantozzi I didn't catch all that.
1316 Mike: Well like when I made this.
1318 Mike: When I'm looking at this since I Well I don't know the actual slope is...
1319 say this is one and this would be two... so when I look get this...
1320 [sneeze]
1321 Brian: Bless you.
355
1322 Mike: This is increasing here so when I draw graph I have to make sure I'm kind
1323 of curving upwards and then when it starts to level off its kind of like a
1324 straight line and then it starts to decrease so it's kind of curving that way
1 io^ cause the slope it is changing you know as this changes I look at where
1 JZJ
1326 this is at and then I draw a line you know like according to it.
1327 Brian: Because once it crosses there you're still adding on but you're adding on
1328 less.
1329 Mike: Less.
1330 Sherly: That's why it's going down?
1331 Mike: Yeah like here is like the highest point so that's like the steepest slope.
1332 Brian: Would it go down though because you're still adding on to it
1333 Mike: When it goes down.
1334 Brian: But it would never cross zero.
1335 Pantozzi: What are you talking about?
1336 Mike: If this when like.
1337 Brian: Once it gets like., once you get into the negatives then it would start going
1338 down right.
1339 Mike: Yeah, if this was going like.. .down here the slope of this thing would be
1340 like 3 down you know... that's how like.
1341 Brian: I remember we had to match up points like on the axis like where it was at
1342 0 and you had to draw line up and it should be like that's where the curve
1343 it changes direction.
1344 Pantozzi: Uh huh.
1345 Brian: 1 just remember that
1346 Mike: And just like this is an anti derivative of this graph there is another graph
1347 this is the anti derivative of and that goes negative
1348 Brian: OK.
1349 Mike: But is that what the fundamental theorem of calculus is? ... like.
1350 Brian: Tell me Mike
1351 Mike: I don't know...
1352 Sherly: That's it's...
1353 Mike: Minus all the technical stuff that's what like it really you know...
1354 Pantozzi: I guess here's what the student wants to get to this section of the book and
1355 what they've., they have is this [I point to the book] and one of the things
1356 they want is., yeah.. .put this into words what does this mean.. .1 mean
1357 when I look at this statement here what should I be thinking about.
1358 Brian: OK.
1359 Pantozzi; So what I'd like you to do and if you need me to point out something
1360 more... or ask me another question no problem.. .trying to you know, to
1361 give you some clarification
1362 Brian: So that's like saying if we got that, you give the kid the picture and say
1363 this is what it's going to look like and this is like...
1364 Pantozzi Yeah you're going to give them something or you're going to sit with them
1365 and you're, then they're going to say give me some sense of what's going
1366 on with this
356
1367 Brian: OK, say you weren't given this you're given the integral of something you
1368 could always take that to make an integral
1369 Mike: You can take a derivative making an integral.
1370 Brian: All right, OK forget it.
1371 Sherly: No no finish your thought.
1372 Brian: My thought got lost in the mix..
1373 Pantozzi: That happens with integrals and derivatives.
1374 Brian: The integral was a graph of the area..
1375 Mike: Yeah.
1376 Brian: And the derivative is a graph of the slope.
1377 Mike: Yeah.
1378 Brian: All right I'll come back to you
1379 Pantozzi: So you know, they want to they want to be able to.. .from talking with you
1380 who have taken calculus already when they look at this, what you think
1381 when you look at this., and I know you haven't though about it in a
1382 while...and that's what you've been working through here...do think you
1383 could say something to the camera...you don't need to look at the
1384 camera...say something to each other about what you would say to the
1385 person at this point? or do want to talk about it or have me point out
1386 something else that you think might be helpful.
1387 Brian: I'm good I guess.
1388 Pantozzi I just want you to put it into some sort of order of what you're would say
1389 to the person, organize what you've talked about for the last hour.
1390 Sherly: Can you put these points up there like the f of b and f of a and use that to
1391 explain you know like use their terms in the thing where it says the
1392 integral between a and b whatever.
1393 Mike: I guess so. What they're saying is...
1394 Sherly: Yes, just actually point it out. If.
1395 Mike: At here, the area of this is like right there, [Mike points to a point on his
1396 integral graph] that's what that thing's saying, the a and the b,
1397 Sherly: And that's the.
1398 Mike: Yeah, hold on... [looking at the book]
1399 Sherly: Isn't it?
1400 Robert: On the bottom graph, just the integral from...
1401 Mike: Oh, you have the integral... so what is this saying ...so to find the area of
1402 this you take this point and this point and you do that minus that (Mike
1403 puts two dots on the "integral graph" he created.)
1404 Brian: To find the area?
1405 Mike: The area of this is like...that's all weird.
1406 Brian: That minus that, if that point was like say 12, and that point's at 2
1407 Mike: You've go to minus this from that.
1408 Brian: The area between those two points would be ten?
1409 Sherly: Right.
1410 Robert: Right.
1411 Brian: That's what that's saying?
357
1412 Mike: Right. The f of b ... you've got to take that little piece off, because you're
1 A 1 "X not counting...
1414 Brian: That makes a lot of sense, just because that's the graph of the area. Yes it
I'f ID is.
1416 Mike: You've not counting... got to take off that little piece there...
1417 Robert: It's 5 O'clock... yeah...
1418 Brian: Get out of here...
1419 Sherly: He's got an exam...
1423 Brian: Video time out.
1424 Robert: I've got to go...
1428 Mike: I've got class at 6.
1432 Brian: I don't have a class. I have to clean up though.
1438 Brian: Never going home again..
1439 Sherly: I don't go home anymore.
1440 Pantozzi: Here's just what I want you to do... Think about what you've said, I
1441 stepped in to let you ask me some questions.. You know, knowing it's not
1442 going to be perfect, you're going to meet with the student tomorrow,
1443 Brian: OK.
1444 Mike: This is the student?
1445 Pantozzi: The actual student.
1446 Mike: We're really going to meet someone tomorrow?
1448 Mike: | inaudible |
1450 Pantozzi: Whatever pictures you want to draw for them, whatever words you want to
1451 say to them, you can write, you can say it to each other, you can pretend.
1452 Sherly: Can we say it to each other?
1453 Pantozzi You can pretend you're the student...
1454 Brian: I am that student for real, no problem.
1455 Pantozzi So, OK.
1456 Mike: So we've got to do something that, draw a graph for them
1457 Sherly: You can do a visualization
358
1458 Mike: How do you do that without explaining it in words at the same time?
1459 Sherly: Explaining it in words.
1460 Mike: To get someone...(inaudible)... like I can create.
1461 Sherly: Well use an example that they had, with the bacteria growing...a certain
1462 time.
1463 Mike: Drawing like a graph...
1464 Brian: Like that? [Pointing to the board.]
1465 Mike: Yeah.
1466 Brian: Well it seems really simple to
1467 Mike: Well you can just stare at that.. .and it doesn't really...
1468 Brian: It doesn't really do anything for you?
1469 Mike: No.
1470 Sherly: I still have trouble with ... antiderivatives.
1471 Mike: I mean someone who doesn't know...
1472 Sherly: Like I get it but...but I don't think I...
1473 Brian: Like I can look at that, and you could put up two graphs on the board and I
1474 think I could get it but I don't know how to explain it...
1475 Sherly: I thought... I don't know...
1476 Brian: What does the fundamental theory actually like explain?
1477 Mike: It's like given, given a graph.
1478 Brian: It's like made up of a million different things... you know what I mean
1479 like.
1480 Mike: You know what I saying... given a graph and I'm just picking...any base
1481 point a, and say a is here, so you start here, there is an anti derivative of
1482 this.
1483 Sherly: Right...
1484 Mike: So you could actually start going negative from here... are you?
1485 Brian: Yeah.
1486 Mike: No wait, that's positive no that's positive, my bad...
1487 Sherly: You were...
1488 Mike: It's positive... but it's going this way.
1489 Sherly: No why.
1490 Mike: It's positive.
1491 Sherly: But it's going, but the slope is.
1492 Mike: But I'm saying the slope is negative on this graph.
1493 Sherly: Yeah.
1494 Mike: But we don't...
1495 Sherly Oh, OK.
1496 Mike: It's just positive the slope is positive on this graph but the area,
1497 Brian: You're talking about the area.
1498 Mike: And when it gets here it's zero.
1499 Brian: Then it's zero
1500 Mike: .. should be zero here., then you start going down.
1501 Brian: Negative.
1502 Mike: Until.
1503 Brian: Until you get back to here, right?
359
1504 Mike: Yeah, this is zero.

1505 Brian: It's going to start leveling out like you did there fpoints to the board]
1506 Mike: How is this going to work.
1507 Brian: Just keep it coming.
1508 Mike: Yeah, its...
1509 Brian: A little less steep then flat right there.
1510 Mike: Yeah it's going to go is it going to go up out of there probably maybe...
1511 maybe not depending.
1512 Sherly: And it goes up?
1513 Mike: It's all... up... like I can't it's kind of like.
1514 Sherly: Once you draw it I understand.
1515 Mike: Let me do this again.. .it's not looking it's looking real weird if you start
1516 from here you're going positive until you get there you're going negative
1517 this whole time.
1518 Brian: Go down...
1519 Mike: ... work something...
1520 Brian: But then it starts getting less.
1521 Mike: Yeah, you go like.
1522 Brian: Right after the midpoint, right.
1523 Mike: You're going to be something...
1524 Brian: Then it's going to be flat when it's here.
1525 Mike: And then you start going.
1526 Brian: And then it's going to start coming back up.
1527 Mike: Yeah, Whenever there's like a... you're flat here.
1528 Sherly: Um hum.
1529 Mike: That means you're like a constant line so you know how I drew that,
1530 Sherly: OK.
1531 Mike: A constant line.
1532 Sherly: Yeah, OK.
1533 Mike: And that's what, that's what, your derivative would look like it would just
1534 go from there but you have to pick a base., a point.
1535 Sherly: Yeah.
1536 Mike: Says it's the same thing somewhat the same thing... you started it here it
1537 would probably look probably like the same thing anyway.
1539 Brian: When you just...
1540 Mike: When you started it here...
1541 Brian: It would go down right.
1542 Mike: It's basically like this graph shifted up and down.
1543 Brian: This would slide down, go flat, and then come back up?
1544 Mike: If you started from here... it would kind of be... it would just be., be..
1546 Sherly If you started from there?
1547 Mike: Yeah like alright,
1548 Sherly f inaudible |
1549 Mike: Let's say you started here, you're going down.
360
1550 Sherly: finaudiblej

1551 Mike: So you're then you'd be going... like it would be zero so it's like this.
1552 Sherly: Because your slope here is like negative and decreasing because.
1553 Mike: Right now it's zero so your slope is 0 and then it would be negative you're
1554 negative something like negative.
1555 Sherly: Why this way instead of ...
1556 Mike: Yeah, I don't know if it's this way or that way going down
1558 Brian: I think its...
1559 Mike: It's got to be the same way as this because actually its like this.
1560 Brian: It's the second way you just did it... because the area is not a lot to begin
1561 with but it keeps getting...
1562 Mike: It's actually like this because it's same thing as this just moved down.
1563 Sherly: Why what OK.
1564 Mike: And this starts going back up here if you start from this point it's just like
1565 you're just moving that thing up and down depending on where you pick it.
1566 Sherly: Why is it moving up and down if you're moving you know across?
1567 Mike: Because you're just picking a , all right... you're picking a point where it
1568 starts at zero suppose you picked here, I move this down until this is at
1569 zero.
1570 Sherly: Oh.
1571 Mike: You know what I'm saying? You just pick another... you know, it doesn't
1572 really matter what point to pick.. .you have the same graph, just like with a
1573 different...
1574 Sherly: It's shifted.
1575 Mike: Which makes sense like because like you know when you have x squared
1576 something when you do the anti derivative you come up with
1577 Sherly: 2x.
1578 Mike: 2x to the third... something x to the third plus C.
1579 Sherly: Oh.
1580 Mike: C is that up down thing you know what I'm saying.
1581 Sherly: Oh.
1582 Mike: You know what I'm saying, that was like that...
1584 Mike: You always had that plus C because remember when you went back,
1585 because when you went back it doesn't matter because when you do the
1586 derivative it doesn't matter there's no base point you're just doing the
1587 slopes off of it.
1588 Brian: [picks up book and gives it to Sherly) All that saying is that that C doesn't
1589 do anything it shows you how to...
1590 Mike: You know, it's that base point wherever you pick it...
1591 Brian: How to explain...
1592 Mike: So to explain this to someone who doesn't know?
1593 Sherly You hand them the textbook...
1594 Brian: Given a graph...
1595 Mike: Thank you. OK.
1596 Brian: No, um.
1597 Sherly: Are we starting from the integral and going back, or do you start with the
1598 derivative?
1599 Mike: No, you start from the derivative... Given a graph...
1600 Brian: Is that...
1601 Sherly: And the derivative shows the slope or the rate of change... what you say?
1602 Mike: So we say just draw like a graph?
1603 Sherly: Yeah, it would help...should we explain what the graph is?
1604 Mike: Yeah, I'll just given a graph., make it real easy...
1605 Brian: Of the basic thing.
1606 Mike: Just like a curve make it real easy OK, what to say., given a graph and a
1607 base point.
1608 Sherly: [laughs] and the graph is showing...
1609 Mike: There is an anti derivative.
1610 Sherly: An anti derivative... but this graph itself is showing...
1611 Mike: This is just graph.
1612 Brian: That's a graph.
1613 Sherly: OK.
1614 Brian: Just a graph...
1615 Sherly: All right.
1616 Brian: Any graph.
1617 Mike: As long as its like continuous and but we're not going to bother with
1618 that... but you know, it's assumed...but um... there is an antiderivative...
1619 Sherly: [whispers]
1620 Mike: Dude...that's basically what it means all right but if they say why.
1621 Sherly: Why?
1622 Brian: They're saying, if there's a graph and you have a point there is an anti
1623 derivative to it.
1624 Mike: Yeah,
1625 Brian: That's it.
1626 Mike: There's a definite anti... that's it if you don't have a point, then it's just a
1627 graph that doesn't have a spot on there, but um..
1628 Brian: What's the next step after that?
1629 Sherly: To actually make a integral?
1630 Mike: Yeah, we have to kind of explain...
1631 Sherly: How...
1632 Mike: So should we just draw.
1633 Brian: Find the area.
1634 Sherly: [inaudible |
1635 Mike: So let's say starting at C [he writes this on his paper]
1636 Brian: I don't think there's any way to make this like concise... anywhere the
1637 graph's below the x axis.
1638 Mike: Am I spelling that wrong?
1639 Brian: No. What is that a- tive...
1640 Sherly Deriv a tive. A. I don't even know how to spell it.
1641 Mike: That would be the first point on the anti derivative, the first point.
362
1642 Sherly: Wait why does it start?

1643 Mike: Because that is the base point.
1644 Sherly: Oh, is that why that's why it shifts.
1645 Mike: That's why it shifts, if I started it here, this would be zero.
1646 Sherly: Oh OK, now it just clicked.
1647 Mike: So now do we say it's like the area or something?
1648 Sherly: Yeah, that's the way we were taught.
1649 Mike: Well how do I write that? What do I?
1650 Brian: Um.
1651 Mike: It's not like, I don't want go into start drawing these little boxes six pages
1652 of, different, you know,
1653 Brian: Slopes?
1654 Sherly: Right, the area between that point and the axis right.
1655 Mike: Well it's the area underneath like a portion.
1656 Sherly: That point to the axis.
1657 Mike: No actually like an interval there so like over here its zero and the area is
1658 like something, right.
1659 Sherly: Oh.
1660 Mike: And the area of something plus that and it's less plus then what you had
1661 before because it's decreasing and then we get over to here and you're not
1662 adding any area to it
1663 Sherly: Right.
1664 Mike: And then you start decreasing
1665 Sherly: So when you draw it...
1666 Mike: So when I draw it's gonna be... it's going up.
1667 Sherly: Up less,
1668 Mike: Yeah, so it's going more.
1669 Sherly: Going up.
1670 Mike: So it's going like this.
1671 Sherly: Concave
1672 Mike: Uh mum.
1673 Sherly: And now because here its at zero.
1674 Mike: At zero...so it's going down.
1675 Sherly: Why not flat?
1676 Mike: No it is flat, because the slopes...
1677 Brian: Is there some formula where like the slope of the line minus or like a
1678 Sherly: Went does it change direction.
1679 Brian: Multiplied by the units to find something like that.
1680 Sherly: Say that again.
1681 Brian: I don't know forget it.
1682 Sherly: No, no say it.
1683 Brian: No.. .it's gone forget it.
1684 Mike: When it hits zero there that means this changes.
1685 Sherly: Right.
1686 Mike: From going increasing.
1687 Sherly: To decrease...
363
1688 Mike: To its basically like flat...and when this turns flat that means it changes
1689 from concave to concave whatever...
1690 Brian: Ofx?
1691 Mike: Something like that... I think it's what its called... so alright, we're at zero
1692 right there... anything...so we're dead flat.
1693 Sherly: Yes.
1694 Mike: Then we start going negative...
1695 Sherly: Down.
1696 Mike: Start going negative a small amount and increasing.
1697 Sherly: No isn't it the other way around, don't we go...
1698 Brian: Start going down...
1699 Sherly: We're going negative but a large amount?
1700 Brian: No, slow,
1701 Mike: Slow...
1702 Sherly: Oh oh.
1703 Brian: Because the area right there is really small [Brian gestures with his hand]
1704 Mike: So it's gonna look something like this until we hit there, when it starts to
1705 go this way.
1706 Sherly: Wait, why does it go that far down? Because
1707 Brian: There you see...
1708 Mike: Because this whole time, this whole time... it was negative.
1709 Sherly: It's negative...
1710 Mike: This was going like this and then it starts to go like this...until 1 get to..
1711 I'm sorry.
1712 Sherly: At that point it's... OK.
1713 Mike: That would be like the integral of that... but I just drew it now I'm not
1714 going to write it.
1716 Brian: It's hard to explain about negative area.
1717 Mike: Yeah, I mean...
1718 Brian: How to just scan from like left to right and see how it increases.
1719 Sherly: Alright, try explaining how you're doing the integral again and we'll try
1720 writing it out when you do it you know what I mean as you're explaining
1721 it.
1722 Mike: All, right, but, it's gonna be...it's not easy to write down.
1723 Brian: Let's leave this for group 2, and Say group 2, work from this...
1724 Mike: Alright, you want to write, I'll try explaining...
1725 Sherly: All right, when you're...
1726 Mike: Let me say it first.
1728 Mike: When looking at the original graph.
1729 Sherly This is all positive and this is all negative, we know that...
1730 Mike: You have to draw a graph that...
1731 Sherly Shows OK.
1732 Mike: Where it's slope.
1733 Sherly You just talk, I'll write it...
1734 Mike: .1 can't even pronounce it into words... I mean it is a graph of the area...
1735 Sherly: Right, but we're trying to explain how you draw the integral
1738 Mike: And say then from then on.
1739 Sherly: Ok, you're starting from zero, and then from then on.
1740 Sherly: See like.
1741 Brian: Any cross of the axis changes direction
1742 Mike: And the slope of the anti derivative is the value of the original graph at
1743 that point.
1744 Sherly: But the slope here is.
1745 Mike: So like if the slope is.. .the value at...
1746 Sherly: The slope isn't zero...
1747 Mike: No, the slope here is that value...the slope here is zero, right?
1748 Brian: What's the slope?
1750 Sherly: Yes, I keep confusing it, backwards...all right, so the value at a given
1751 point is... is the point on this axis.
1752 Mike: No, the slope here is that value.
1754 Mike: The slope of this graph any given point on this graph...
1755 Sherly: On this graph...
1756 Mike: Is the value at that point.
1757 Sherly: Yes.
1758 Mike: On this graph.
1759 Sherly: But to say it backwards.
1760 Mike: But you can't say it backwards...
1761 Sherly: Why not?
1762 Mike: Because we're creating this one.
1763 Sherly: OK. but the value at...
1764 Mike: We can't say this is a graph of the slopes of that you can't say that... you
1765 could say...
1766 Sherly: Yeah, OK, go ahead.
1767 Mike: You could say... that's why teaching it like that... you should teach
1768 derivatives first, then that, you know what I'm saying?
1769 Sherly: OK.
1770 Mike: So you can say from then on...
1771 Sherly: But OK.
1772 Mike: Draw a graph a new graph where the slope of the graph... see this is more
1773 confusing than anything, because it's like...
1774 Sherly The slope of the first graph.
1775 Mike: No, the slope of the anti derivative.
1776 Sherly Of the...
1777 Mike: At each point is ... the value at each point on the original graph.
365
1778 Sherly: The value... the slope of the ... well... whoa., that doesn't make sense..
1779 then I'm drawing a graph where the slope of the antiderivative at each
1780 point... but then like you're assuming that they know.
1781 Brian: What that is.
1782 Mike: No, I'm just saying... the slope of this antiderivative... I'm just calling
1783 this...the derivative
1784 Sherly: But...you're saying we don't have anything as the antiderivative...
1785 Mike: I'm just saying draw this graph as if the slope of this graph...
1786 Sherly: Oh, OK...
1787 Mike: Is...
1789 Mike: You know, all there... you know, it tells you how to, you know... so I'm
1790 saying draw this graph.
1791 Sherly: Yeah...
1792 Mike: As if the slope is equal to the value of the point right... you know what
1793 I'm saying? ...
1795 Mike: You just started another sentence.
1796 Sherly: No wait...
1797 Mike: Oh.
1798 Sherly: Draw this graph so that the slope of the anti derivative is equal to the value
1799 of the derivative.. .of the point on the derivative... of the point.
1800 Mike: That's what I'm saying , if you do say each point it's kind of like...
1801 because the slope of the anti derivative is a graph too, it's not a number...
1802 Sherly: Right, it's the graph of the derivative...
1803 Brian: Slope of this?
1804 Mike: Yeah, it's like each point has a different slope.
1805 Sherly: On the graph of the derivative, right?
1806 Mike: Write where the slope of the derivative at each point.
1807 Sherly: No, of the antiderivative
1808 Mike: Yeah.
1809 Sherly: Is equal to the value of the point on the graph.
1810 Mike: Yet but if you say at each point is equal to the value of the original graph
1811 at that same point.
1812 Sherly: Say it one more time.
1813 Mike: The slope of this graph at each point is equal to...
1814 Sherly: Is equal to...
1815 Mike: A point would be like you know, like c + lor something and the next one
1816 is equal to the value on this graph ... so like let's like say like here's the
1817 next point is like.
1818 Brian: Like at that point the slope is zero.
1819 Mike: Here's D.. the next point.
1820 Sherly Yes.
1821 Mike: And here's D on this one...
1822 Sherly OK.
1823 Mike: And kind of like over here the slope would be whatever it is up here...
1824 Sherly: Right.
1825 Mike: And here its zero, so the slope here is zero.
1826 Sherly: Yes.
1827 Mike: So say the slope at each point here...
1828 Sherly: Of the antiderivative.
1829 Mike: Equals the value...
1830 Sherly: Uh huh... of the point...
1831 Mike: At the original... it's kind of like messed up, you know what I'm saying?
1833 Brian: The value at the corresponding point on the original graph... See I'm sure
1834 if we were sitting there explaining it to them.
1835 Mike: That's even hard explaining it to ...Even then.
1836 Brian: Putting things down on paper is always tough.
1837 Mike: You miss so much stuff...you can't put it all down.
1838 Brian: Yeah.
1839 Sherly: It's easier like when you have like the transparencies.
1840 Brian: And Sherly: Make a "flipping" motion with their hands.
1841 Sherly: Exactly... All right, are we done?
1842 Mike: No that's just the first part.
1843 Sherly: Oh.
1844 Mike: What is the theorem for?
1845 Sherly: What is it...
1846 Brian: For solving problems in your daily life activities...
1847 Mike: Theorem for...
1848 Brian: For computing.
1849 Sherly: I do derivatives all the time in economics...with... like marginal cost and
1850 all that crap
1851 Brian: It helps us do math.
1852 Sherly: Yes. It helps us.
1853 Brian: That's what it does...
1855 Brian: So why is it true?
1856 Sherly: It's true because no one has proved it wrong.
1857 Mike: Why is it true? Why can't wouldn't it be true
1858 Sherly: Because no one has proved it...
1859 Mike: If I give you a graph you can't give me a graph that would resemble.
1860 Brian: Any graph you can always graph the area under.
1861 Mike: I could do that why wouldn't it be true... all it's saying is that there is a
1862 graph.
1863 Sherly Right.
1864 Mike: All it's saying is that this is the graph there is one.
1865 Brian: All graphs have some kind of area you can find and some kind of slope to
1866 find... anything...
1867 Mike: Even a graph that has no function to it...
1868 Brian: But still something...
367
1869 Mike: But there is a graph you give me anything and there is a graph that's all it
1870 saying as long as it's a continuous function.
1871 Sherly: Yeah but its not precise.
1872 Mike: But I don't think they're looking for anything technical they're not
1 QT\ looking for that
15 ID
1874 Sherly: Yeah, all right...
1875 Mike: Why wouldn't it be true?
1876 Sherly: Ok, for any graph you can draw the area under the graph.
1877 Mike: Yet as long as it... that's it but I don't know how to write that, you know.
1879 Mike: What is the theorem for are you done with that first part.
1880 Sherly: Yeah, that's fine. The theorem ... How about we go back to why it's true
1881 that easier.
1882 Mike: Because why wouldn't it be true?
1883 Sherly: Well remember like I was saying like the left hand right hand sum thing
1884 OK so, why...
1885 Mike: That's like proving like um... this number this number equals that, there's
1886 no problem here to answer
1887 Sherly: No. I understand
1888 Mike: It's kind of like explaining an idea, rather than an answer
1889 Sherly: Yeah.
1890 Mike: So what is the theorem for?
1891 Brian: Help.
1892 Mike: If you think about... It's just simple,
1893 Brian: Yeah...
1894 Mike: Its really nothing,
1895 Sherly: Show that you can...
1896 Mike: Its just that something is possible it's not really...its not really all like
1897 Sherly: So that it's possible...
1898 Mike: Yeah.
1899 Sherly: To make the integral of any graph?
1900 Mike: Yeah.
1901 Mike: It's not really anything that's out of his mind.
1903 Brian: It's what we think.
1904 Mike: In some sense it sounds like common sense, yeah, I can give you a graph,
1905 give me time, I'll do it.
1908 Mike: What is it for, it means something, then all those proofs tell you what it
1909 means, like slope means, like velocity and all that, and that stuff is related
1910 because of that and you can prove that,
1912 Mike: Prove it using all these little theorems
1913 Sherly: So the theorem is for, in English, to show that you can draw an integral of
1914 any graph and from there
1915 Brian: I don't know if it s just for that though.
1916 Mike: The theorem is...
1917 Sherly: Well, why not, what else is it for? I mean, like that's its main purpose.
1918 Brian: It's main purpose., then off of that, you can find...
1919 Sherly: Can you write.
1920 Mike: No, I can't write.
1921 Sherly: The theorem is - 1 can't spit out English right now
1922 Mike: Kind of like the theorem is for...
1923 Brian: [inaudibleJ The theorem represents...
1924 Mike: That given any... any continuous graph, you know,
1925 Sherly: Then an integral could be made of any.
1926 Mike: Of any continuous graph... do we have to give like examples now would
1927 that be like...
1928 Brian: I'm so hungry.
1929 Sherly: Me too., and then... Why is it true.
1930 Mike: Anti...
1931 Brian: There are certain given things in this world - lines have slope, Well...
1932 and uh...
1933 Mike: It's just...
1934 Sherly: Is it when you break it down into little pieces
1935 Mike: Give me a graph,
1936 Sherly: Exactly...
1937 Mike: Slope is a number, this graph pertains to a number, I can draw you a line
1938 with that slope,
1940 Mike: And I can do that every unit every interval,
1941 Sherly: Right.
1942 Mike: And that, you know, why wouldn't it be true? Why are they asking why is
1943 it true - there is nothing I can prove here so what you can say is like it's
1944 true because,
1945 Brian: Because it's a theorem and it wouldn't be a theorem without
1946 Sherly: Because Riemann over there decided to break things down and show how
1947 things add up...
1948 Brian: Man Riemann.
1949 Sherly: Does that work,
1950 Brian: Got some...
1951 Sherly There's a slight chance of error but its so infinitesimal
1952 Mike: We're not bringing Riemann into this.
1953 Sherly Yeah because well that's the only reason I can see why its true.
1954 Brian: Bring him over here... I don't know man.. .do we even need to write it
1955 down can't we just know and tell him... be prepared with something to
1956 say...
1957 Sherly See here... the argument we have given makes the fundamental theorem
1958 is plausible, but it is not a proof and it shows.. I'm sorry I'll explain to you
1959 in one second...
1960 Brian: Do what you gotta do...
1961 Sherly: Approximated by the Riemann sum which is like the rectangles, right, and
1962 how that little extra area that doesn't consist under it is a small change,
1963 like, the change in.
1964 Mike: Yeah, I get that.
1965 Sherly: So that's why its true, when you break it down,
1966 Mike: But the way we're explaining is not like a sum of areas
1967 Sherly: Well why can't we,
1968 Mike: Cause.
1969 Sherly: Can't we say that's why its true, because it's the sum of areas?
1970 Brian: Yeah, but those rectangles...
1971 Mike: But in this entire thing, there's nothing mentioned of area.
1972 Sherly: Well, we could start now...
1973 Mike:
1974 Brian: Those rectangles are hard to explain
1975 Mike: OK.
1976 Sherly: We can save that one for next time, how about that?
1977 Brian: You know I'm always game for that.
1978 Sherly: [inaudible] ...can you just write that down, when you break it down to
1979 rectangles and add the areas up, it's the same thing, so.
1980 Brian: But why?
1981 Sherly: Cause.
1982 Brian: Certain things just have to be accepted, you have to have an open mind...
1983 understand that thinking...
1984 Sherly: Yeah, but if you did that, if you believed anything, you'd believe things
1985 that weren't true, and then, you know.
1986 Brian: So?
1987 Sherly: Get screwed... that's why.
1988 Brian:
1989 Sherly: If you bought a new car and it turned out to be a lemon wouldn't you be
1990 unhappy?
1991 Brian:
1992 Sherly: Just take the car... some things are just meant to be...
1993 Brian: If I bought 5 new cars though, and only 2 of them worked real well, then,
1994 you know, at least two of them work.
1995 Sherly:
1996 Brian:
1997 Sherly:
1998 Brian: Only be happy with the good stuff.
1999 Brian: Does explaining integrals does that explain or prove.
2000 Mike: I don't know.
2001 Sherly: It doesn't prove anything, that's what it says, it's not a proof, it's just
2002 Brian: So why we think the theorem is true?
2003 Mike: I don't know, it's like saying, give me a number, I can you draw a box
2004 with that area.
2005 Sherly OK.
2006 Mike: Why is that true?
2007 Sherly: That s possible.
2008 Mike: Because I can...
2009 Sherly: Right.
2010 Mike: Give me a graph, I can draw you a graph, you know, why is that true,
2011 because I can, [laughter] give me a graph, I can draw you a graph how do
2012 you write that down.
2013 Brian: It doesn't seem like that has a point
2014 Mike: Yeah, to me it seems like we're just writing it, just writing down stuff,
2015 whatever writing really.. I don't know... help?
2016 Sherly: We think it's true because...
2017 Brian: Pantozzi...
2018 Sherly: Is he around?
2019 Mike: No, he's gone...
2020 Brian: We have ring like a bell.
2021 Sherly: finaudiblej
2022 Mike: Why is it true, because I believe it to be so.
2023 Brian: That's been our answer for so long I'm fed up... that's it... I don't
2024 know... I think we hit that wall
2025 Sherly: No, I think I'm just really tired.
2026 Brian: Need some fruit, give you that nice little burst of energy...
2027 Sherly: Yet but then the fruit...
2029 Sherly: Looks it is, it's telling you its rectangles, that's all you got to write, just
2030 that one little sentence it can be visualized by rectangles you know, -
2031 that's why it's true, because [bottom of page 170 in Hughes-Hallett]
2032 Brian: The rectangles are still an approximation
2033 Sherly: Right, but...
2034 Brian: Remember what it said in that book, if you tell them one thing, and, what
2035 was it, the integral and the derivative or the antiderivative, they're not
2036 really... (?)
2037 Sherly: Yeah, but... [silence] I don't know.
2038 Mike: I don't think anything really has to be proved here
2040 Brian: We need some professional help.
2041 Sherly: How do you multiply a function?
2042 Elena: Are you guys ready to talk with Ralph?
2044 Brian: We just keep running in circles...
2045 Mike: How do you multiply a function?
2046 Sherly: It says it stretches or flattens the graph.
2047 Mike: Yeah, it stretches the graph,
2048 Sherly: Oh yeah, that makes sense.
2049 Mike: Multiplies it by 3...
2050 Sherly That's where my brain stopped working.
2051 Mike: Something like that.
371
2052 Brian: They are going to have to know so much more, too, like they need to
2053 know about like the C not really having an affect except it moving up and
2054 down and stuff.
2055 Mike: He didn't ask for that.
2056 Brian: True.
2057 Mike: It just says pick a point, all that other stuff comes after that that's why you
2058 know, you write a book about it., the stuff comes from it...
2059 Maher: You want to grab something to eat while Ralph is on the way down?
2060 Sherly: He's here.
2061 Maher: He's here. They want to talk to someone.
2062 Sherly: We don't like this question,
2063 Pantozzi: Would you like another question.
2064 Sherly: No, we.
2065 Brian: We need some...
2066 Sherly: We just want to alter this one
2067 Mike: Our thinking is so...messed up, but.
2068 Sherly: OK, here's a graph...
2069 Mike: No kid is going to understand this.
2070 Pantozzi: Well, the kid's taking calculus, up to., they learned derivatives, they
2071 learned integrals, and now they're in, it's like March or something,
2072 they've been in class for a while so they've learned some stuff.
2073 Brian: They shouldn't be worrying about this then...
2074 Mike: They're in trouble if...
2075 Sherly: Given a graph, and asked to integrate it, and to do that you are taking...
2076 Mike: The answer to the first question is that: given a graph, and a base point C,
2077 there is an antiderivative that's all what it means.
2078 Sherly: Wheat it means.
2079 Pantozzi: OK.
2080 Mike: Assuming you know what an antiderivative is...
2081 Pantozzi: Yeah, he does.
2082 Mike: Kind of say., kind of like why...not really like why.
2083 Sherly: It's used for to make an integral
2084 Mike: Starting at the point C it would be zero and this is where the wording gets
2085 all messed up it's like...
2087 Brian: Things down...
2088 Mike: I didn't go into the whole area explanation, cause like that's not how I
2089 thought about it, and for me to just blurt that out like an explanation, I
2090 couldn't really you know...
2091 Pantozzi Right.
2092 Mike: But I just said from then on draw the slope of the antiderivative, which is
2093 this,
2094 Pantozzi Uh huh.
2095 Mike: Is at a certain point, is the value of that point on that, on the original, on
2096 that graph so given that he has like tools to do that, you can do it, you can
2097 make it... given a graph, you can draw that, you buy that? OK. This is
2098 where all these questions started getting all weird like what is it for, this
2099 theorem...
2100 Pantozzi: I see.
2101 Mike: What do you mean, what is it for? It's not really a.. .something you can
2102 prove
2103 Brian: Its not for one thing... is it for one thing?
2104 Sherly: That's why it's the fundamental theorem, it's so broad
2105 Mike: It's like saying, you give me a number, like I said before, I can draw a
2106 box with that area, like I drew a box, 3 by 2, you know,
2108 Mike: It's saying like what is that for, why is that true, because a box has
2109 properties, the area is a number, you know, it's trivial why its true, you
2110 know, it's like... unless, you know what I mean, if you say...like I give
2111 you graph, and this is the integral why is that true, then you have to
2112 prove...
2113 Pantozzi: Say that again?
2114 Mike: If you give me a definite graph, and you give me another graph that you
2115 say is an integral of it, then you can prove that,
2116 Pantozzi: That's something you need to prove.
2117 Mike: That's different but all we are saying here is that you can create a graph, as
2118 long as the graph doesn't have gaps in it, anything like that, it's a normal,
2119 regular, continuous graph
2120 Pantozzi: So this is something you just start with...
2121 Mike: You start with this, and you can make something.
2122 Pantozzi: OK.
2123 Mike: And then why is that true, because, there's no, you know, there's no...
2124 Sherly: Reason.
2125 Mike: Because you can, you know, cause it's possible to draw a point on the
2126 graph that's one slope, and then change slope... you know, it's possible to
2127 do that,
2128 Pantozzi: Because... It's possible.
2129 Mike: Because it's possible yeah, it sounds all messed up...
2130 Sherly: No, it's...
2131 Mike: It is but you know... it doesn't seem like anything that would really need
2132 proving, it's more like an idea. You know...
2133 Pantozzi: Urn hum...
2134 Mike: That's what the theorem is anyway.
2135 Pantozzi: This one here? Or you said that already?
2136 Mike: Then when we got to the "for" part.. .it felt like we were just repeating
2137 what we said and then when we want to prove it the same thing we're
2138 repeating what we said... like, I mean, what is the kid exactly looking for?
2139 Is it...
2140 Sherly: What it's for more so I think it shows that it can hold those properties.
2141 Pantozzi Well I mean certainly the word understand could mean lots of things.
2142 Mike: If we could speak to him, I mean.
2143 Pantozzi Maybe we could try to recruit somebody... come in here...
373
2144 Sherly: No, we take turns doing it ourselves, that's all.

2145 Pantozzi: That's perfect, that's perfect.
2146 Mike: What we're saying is, we all kind of know, but we find it real hard to be
2147 able to explain that to someone, and like you know, if they ask questions
2148 like that [the ones asked in the prompt]
2149 Pantozzi: Um, You said you were imagining being that student
2150 Brian: I actually was, because I just got it... do... everything
2151 Pantozzi: Instead of these questions, what questions might you have...like suppose
2152 you are the student...
2153 Brian: OK.
2154 Pantozzi: What questions do you have about this instead of the question that was
2155 posed to you...this is your chance to ...I'm not necessarily going to
2156 answer them...
2157 Mike: If we were the student...
2158 Pantozzi: You know, you're the student... because in some sense some way you
2159 said you are...
2160 Mike: Like, what does this graph mean?
2161 Sherly: That seems very abstract I'd want to see...like physical examples, you
2162 know like the word problems.
2163 Mike: What does this...
2164 Sherly: Where it can relate to in the real world situation?
2165 Mike: How come it goes up there, you know,
2166 Pantozzi: OK.
2167 Mike: How come its negative? Stuff like that. And you can say, well you know,
2168 because of that graph and where you picked the point, I could show you.
2169 You know, and then, stuff like that,
2170 Sherly: Right.
2171 Mike: Is that true, I don't know how to explain that.
2172 Sherly: And you know, like little things, what is it, the antiderivative shows the
2173 slope, and like why not maybe from, like the origin like the rays instead
2174 and stuff, you know what I mean, different ways to look at that... the
2175 derivative would be the slope... but like the origin of the graph to the
2176 different points, from the rays instead... I don't know...
2177 Pantozzi From the rays, you said,
2178 Sherly: I don't know... instead of like the slope of this, rays from here to here, or
2179 here to here, You know what I'm saying?
2181 Sherly: Like why not, why is it like...
2183 Sherly: No, go ahead...
2184 Brian: How is this a representation of the total area of this.
2185 Mike: Yeah, that's why we didn't mention area in there
2186 Brian: Yeah...
2188 Brian: If I looked at that, I would not see, I mean if I didn't know it ahead of
2189 time, I do not see how this could possibly represent the total area of that
374
2190 Mike: Well, if you look at it, you're starting from here, you do have a positive
2191 area, which I could say would be that much,
2192 Brian: OK.
2193 Mike: And once you start decreasing from it, you know...
2194 Brian: This will eventually come up...Because you started with point C... You
2195 keep adding on
2196 Mike: You're adding more...Given that the scaling is probably way off, you
2197 know, like you could definitely, it's hard to see, but... if you ask someone
2198 they could tell you know, even without having to draw like triangles I
2199 mean rectangles and stuff.
2200 Brian: I got you. Just from visually, I didn't take into account that C This looks
2201 like a lot more than that.
2202 Mike: This is not part of this... it's this.
2203 Brian: Oh no no, I'm saying...I didn't take account that C.
2204 Mike: Um hum.
2205 Brian: You know what I mean, so forget about it.
2206 Mike: You really can't.
2207 Brian: I didn't forget about the starting point, I was just... at the wrong place...
2208 Mike: That's why the starting point...
2209 Brian: Yeah...
2210 Mike: Is really important that's why when I was reading it everything says base
2211 point, that's why it does mean something.
2212 Brian: That does it for me.
2213 Pantozzi: So did you have um... again, you're sort of in the same position as you
2214 know this student who has a question about it... and you've had these
2215 textbooks, you know, to choose from. Did the... reading this raise any
2216 questions that you weren't able to answer?
2217 Mike: Reading what?
2218 Sherly: The textbooks.
2219 Pantozzi: Reading stuff about the FT raise any questions about...
2220 Mike: All I did was I looked at this page, I looked at all this stuff, I was just like,
2221 you know, but then this is cool, I had that one line, saying basically that's
2222 what it is... and I thought about it... and that's all.. .each one of these, like
2223 all these theorems.. .all the proofs and stuff like that is what it's saying.. .is
2224 this right here, that's why I thought this book was cool, it just basically put
2225 it out there, informal version. For any well behaved function f, at any base
2226 point A, there is an antiderivative of it, that's all it says right there... you
2227 know, and looking at all that you would never... you would never guess
2228 that.. .you would never pick that.. .you'd think there is so much more.
2229 Pantozzi: Hmm.
2230 Mike: But it's so simple the way they put it out in one line... like there's more in
2231 that one line than there is in the whole chapter... pick out...you know
2232 what I mean.. .all these other pages
2233 Sherly: No more informal theorems
2234 Mike: No seriously... that's purely intuitive thinking...
2235 Pantozzi Did anything about what you read stand out?
2236 Brian: Ah, it only helped me a little bit, helped the group. I don t know, I'm
2237 sorry. I don't have anything that really stands out.
2238 Sherly: That's not true.
2239 Brian: I didn't pay attention to anything that wouldn't really... What about the
2240 Riemann sum - what does that do?
2241 Pantozzi: You want to know what that's about?
2242 Brian: How does that come into play with this.
2243 Pantozzi: OK, like I said, I'm not answer necessarily your questions... to answer
2244 that.
2245 Brian: That's a question I have.
2246 Pantozzi: OK. Why is that a question you have? Why did you, why is that a
2247 question?
2248 Brian: Because I don't know what it is
2249 Sherly: That was one of the first things... I mentioned...
2250 Mike: Seem at all like it has anything to do with this... Well there's nothing
2251 mentioned about sums in here, that's why...if you ask that I'd say like...
2252 Sherly: And that was a way to show area.
2253 Mike: And you can tell them... it's a way to...
2254 Sherly: Represent the area.
2255 Mike: Yeah, create that graph: finding the sum, and then plotting it.
2256 Brian: That's it?
2257 Mike: Yeah, that's all it really is.
2258 Sherly: But then you have the left sum, the right sum and you know all that stuff
2259 so...
2260 Mike: And like finding an actual number when you do a Riemann sum, you
2261 have to stop somewhere, you know, that would give you the f of a to b
2262 type thing, it would give you a number.
2263 Brian: OK.
2264 Mike: It's just a way of calculating it, its nothing, really not a proof for it.
2265 Brian: That's why I can't look at anything like this
2266 Sherly: How is that not a proof
2267 Brian: It makes no sense to me.
2268 Mike: The proof is in the fundamental theorem itself; now how do you find that?
2269 since you can't really fill this, or something you can't really measure that,
2270 you don't have some crazy ruler that would do that or something you'd
2271 have to do boxes or something, and that's a way to find it.
2272 Sherly: Right.
2273 Mike: And you're getting closer and closer to that point depending on how you
2274 do it, but like the proof, the reason why, you know that it's... there's like
2275 no... I...
2276 Sherly: That's what I said though...
2277 Mike: No, its not a proof.
2278 Pantozzi Any questions you had Sherly from what you read, that you want to ask.
2279 Sherly: No, I think I asked them... sorry I'm exhausted...
2280 Pantozzi That's all right. OK.
376
2281 Mike: But I know if you were to give this to some kid, they would probably be
2282 confused...
2283 Pantozzi: Why?
2284 Mike: Because it's not, very...detailed, like as a book would be, this explanation,
2285 but if we were to try to get more detail.. .we can., it's hard to get ideas
2286 down on paper you know what I'm saying?
2287 Pantozzi: So if we were to meet again, and talk about this some more, is there
2288 anything that you might want me to bring particularly that you feel would
2289 help you with whatever came up today that you felt you couldn't find
2290 information on besides having me or someone explain the whole thing in
2291 our.. .the way we see it...
2292 Mike: I think the best way to learn something like this is not by reading it... by
2293 seeing it done in front of you, something like that, you know?
2294 Pantozzi: What do you want to see?
2295 Mike: Let's say... see it done in front of you.
2296 Pantozzi: See what done?
2297 Mike: Like you could bring in a video for the student of us doing math
2298 Sherly: Like he was trying to show us how to make the integral, it came out a
2299 little actually making the integral.
2300 Mike: It came out weird but eventually like you know someone could see us...
2301 Sherly: Something more precise, where we had the graph paper and we drew out a
2302 correct.
2303 Brian: Transparencies.
2304 Sherly: Yeah, transparencies so that, cause he was also saying because you start at
2305 the same point...you know...easier that way.
2306 Brian: Put that graph on top of it, and say, this point and then have it done with
2307 graph paper.
2308 Pantozzi OK. I think we can come up with something like that for you.
2309 Mike: Take like 10 transparencies, put them on top of each other, where each one
2310 is the next step and that make a little video like a flip book.
2311 Brian: Flip book.
2312 Mike: Basically what it is the only way to learn this stuff is to see it done.
2313 Sherly: See it done, exactly.
2314 Brian: Add it on, step by step...
2315 Sherly: When you have something just said to you.. .you take it with a grain of salt.
Appendix C: Transcript of Session 2 with Group 1, July 25,2003
1 Pantozzi: Whenever I show this calculus thing to somebody, I'm always like, maybe
2 it doesn't really make any sense, maybe it isn't really right, and maybe no
3 one is ever going to pay attention to it... so all that to say, we've been
4 talking about the fundamental theorem of calculus, and the reason I'm
5 doing this research is because I want to write about what it actually means
6 to understand it, and so, certainly all of the things you said last time
7 indicate that you do have an understanding of the fundamental theorem of
8 calculus
9 Angela: Even me?
10 Pantozzi: Yes.
11 Angela: OK.
12 Pantozzi: Being a researcher and being a teacher is different when I was watching
13 the tape, you know I'd hear you say something, you know, and the other
14 two say something...I'd go, oh oh, oh...as a teacher you'd follow that up
15 with a question but here you have to just, sort of hold back.
16 Angela: Sit back.
17 Pantozzi: Yeah, see what happens when you talk to each other. So there was... I
18 watched it on the plane trip to California, ... I just popped it in my laptop
19 and there I was on the plane... nothing else to do...watched it there,
20 watched it a few more times.. .and suffice it to say I have a lot to write
21 about just from the first session. So what I'm going to try to do in this
22 session is follow it up a little bit, I'm going to try to pose some questions,
23 and I'll leave again sometimes just so, so it's not you talking to me
24 because that changes things, but I will try to be more helpful and at the
25 end hopefully you may feel a little bit better than you did perhaps at the
26 end of the last session.
27 Angela: (Laughs)
28 Pantozzi: We're going to do some things with Sketchpad perhaps depending on
29 what you happen to say. I heard there's been comparison... like did my
30 group do something different than the other group? Do they know more
31 than us?
32 Angela: (waves hand)
33 Pantozzi: Both groups went in different directions... each group looked at a
34 different aspect of the fundamental theorem, which is why I have a lot to
35 write about. You can pick different things to look at and pick different
36 things to discuss.
37 Pantozzi: Of course it's always just fun to, you know, watch you go through papers
38 and, you know, make jokes to each other too.
39 Magda: (inaudible) the simplistic version... like how you went in depth.
40 Angela: (laughs) No Magda, different, different
41 Magda: Well there...
42 Angela: Different, not better.
43 Pantozzi: OK, so this session will be different you know, from the other one. OK,
44 the aspect of the fundamental theorem I saw you guys focus on last time
378
45 was...
46 Angela: We have the evil mac too.
47 Pantozzi: (Types f* f(x)dx = g{b)- g(a)on screen.) .. .and actually the book, I
Ja
48 think the book that you were looking at, I think this was g.
49 Angela: Yeah.
50 Pantozzi: So think what we'll do is start with this and talk about, pose a couple
51 questions based upon what I heard you talk about before and then I'll pose
52 a question and leave., so OK, so I'll start this session by saying that that is
53 one aspect of the fundamental theorem and that's, there would be more
54 written with it in the book but underneath where it says the fundamental
55 theorem of calculus it would say that, OK? 11 would also say that I think
56 it would also say again thinking of the book you were looking at that f is
57 the derivative of g
58 Angela: Yes. Right?
59 Magda: Yes.
60 Pantozzi: So here's, here's how I will start I will pretend to be that student who was
61 in the task last time not for an extensive period... just to ask a question...
62 Magda: OK.
63 Pantozzi: So I'm now going to start talking as the student. Since we talked last time,
64 Since I listened to your help that you gave me last time, I took the session,
65 the class session about the fundamental theorem, and I know that was part
66 of it, and what I learned was, had something to do with this: I want to find
67 the area from a to b and of the function f and I know about Riemann sums
68 you guys helped me with that too you talked about that and I want to find
69 the exact area that's under the graph so the graph might be going like this
70 the area between the graph and the x axis if not going down to infinity or
71 something, I was thinking that at the beginning, just, just the area there
72 and what I learned that the fundamental theorem was, well one thing you
73 could do with the fundamental theorem is use it to figure out the area.
74 Pantozzi: But what you had to do is to figure out the anti... I think they said the anti
75 derivative and I'm not quite sure I get that part but I know that I just said a
76 moment ago I know that if that's the formula then F is the derivative of G
77 so I have to do some sort of formula and then I can get the exact area. I
78 guess what I don't get yet was and I think you guys said this when you're
79 helping me last month like you had an x squared graph you used and an x
80 cubed graph to figure out the area.
81 Angela: Yeah.
82 Pantozzi: So I guess what I want to know now that I took my class on the
83 fundamental theorem and had you guys help me a little bit is how they
84 ever came up with this in the first place I know it works, I did my test and
85 I know what to do but I guess I want to help I want to understand where
86 they came up with this idea in the first place...
87 Angela: The why...
88 Pantozzi Like how would they have known that?
89 Magda: What are you asking like how...
379
90 Angela: Why. (laughs)

91 Pantozzi: I don't know if I am asking, why,
92 Magda: X squared, like in simple terms, if your function is x squared...
93 Pantozzi: I know there is a proof of it, I know that if I'm trying to find the area
94 under x squared...
95 Magda: Like if you have x squared how do know that you are supposed to go up a
96 power is that what you're asking?
97 Pantozzi: Not even specifically that problem, you might help me by using that
98 problem as a specific example but more in general why I have to do this
99 anti derivative thing to figure out area I can't see why, like it's my
100 professor said that, and that's the way to do it and I got my problems right
101 but I am just wondering where you know, where that comes from...
102 Angela: Well...
103 Pantozzi: And that's a tough question.. I mean the professor didn't really explain it,
104 but.
105 Angela: No textbooks today?
106 Pantozzi: I've got a whole bunch of textbooks over there again.
107 Angela: Good.
108 Pantozzi: So I know that if I have x squared I'm supposed to do one third x cubed
109 because the derivative of one the third x cubed is that...
110 Magda: X squared.
111 Pantozzi: One x squared right, but it just seemed to come out of the blue and so what
112 I'd like you to help me with help me see how this is not just out of the
113 blue, because I hope it's not, I like to have math make sense. OK, so...
114 Angela: Well.. .get a book Magda.
115 Pantozzi: Yeah, all the books are over there...use graph paper,
116 Angela: Use black Magda.
117 Magda: I'm sorry.
118 Pantozzi: And also what I'm going to do, if during your discussion, you'd like me,
119 meaning the real me, not the student me,
120 Angela: That was good acting by the way.
121 Pantozzi: Thanks. You'd like me to do something with the computer, I have the
122 sketch pad and you know I've got a program that might do some things
123 that might visualize it you know with pictures and stuff..
124 Angela: Umm.
125 Pantozzi: You don't know what the program does, you might remember that we
126 used the program in class four years ago but even if you imagine
127 something and you think doing something might help doing something on
128 here might help I might be able to do it so I'll be a resource for you so I'll
129 be having multiple personalities.
130 Magda: (Laughs)
131 Angela: Can we write down what we have to do just so I can have a better
132 understanding.
133 Magda: Well I think
134 Angela: Like if we had to come up with a question.
135 Magda: How do you know to find the area under the graph with.
136 Angela: How that works basically.
137 Magda: No he's asking basically I don't know if that's right to find the area under
138 the graph how do you know that you have to take the anti derivative I
139 think that's what he's asking us.
140 Magda: Because he told us so... (laughs)
141 Angela: I'm going to get a book.
142 [Angela leaves the table.]
143 Angela: OK how are we doing this.
144 Magda: I'm going to draw a graph. Hmmm.
145 (silence)
146 Magda: Well my thinking of why it has to go to the higher power is because if
147 you're adding up the area underneath OK so you are going here and are
148 going here and going here you are adding up what is under here and you
149 are stacking like this little thing, like, you know more on top of that, so
150 like at this point like here, you have this area and this area, you know?
151 Angela: That makes sense didn't we say that last time.
152 Magda: But you know what I'm saying that's why it has to be to a higher power.
153 Angela: Yeah.
154 Angela: Does it have to be a higher power or does it just have to be more than... I
155 don't know...
156 Magda: Because its an integral is to a higher power.
157 Angela: OK.
158 Magda: You remember when you're taking a derivative...
159 Angela: Yeah, OK.
160 Magda: It's like you have to, it's going to be x... n=\ over n + 1 going to be n.
161 Angela: I haven't done this in four years.
162 Magda: Right? That's going to be...
163 Angela: That's one? What is that?
164 Magda: That's n.
165 Angela: OK, It's doesn't look like an n, Magda.
166 Magda: You know what I'm saying... that you're always going to a higher power.
167 Angela: OK.
168 Magda: So if that's what he was asking us then that's why.. .isn't that what he's
169 asking us, like how do you know to go to a higher power how do you
170 know to take an anti derivative?
171 Angela: I guess. I don't... I thought we said that last time Mags. I thought you said
172 that last time. You were explaining to Romina like that.
173 Angela: Is that just the question though, like.
174 Magda: And if you go back, this point, like this is, this will tell you the slope of
175 that.
176 Angela: Right.
177 Magda: How does that tie in? (Magda draws a little tangent segment on her
178 steeper graph, and connects a point in the center of it with a point on her
179 graph of y = x2.
181 Magda: This, is one, this is two, this is three...so at four.
381
182 Angela: We have calculators.

183 Magda: At 4 the slope of this, at x equals 4, m would be... the slope on this graph
184 is 16 but why?
185 Angela: (inaudible) oh, OK.
186 Angela: The slope
187 Magda: No the slope...
188 Angela: Here on this graph (pointing to the steeper one) would be 4.
189 Magda: Yes.
190 Angela: I mean 16.
191 Magda: Yes.
192 Angela: Yeah.
193 Magda: But why, 1 don't know, like you know. (Magda has labeled the less steep
194 graph as xA2.)
195 Angela: Because that's what we were told.
196 Magda: The thing I remember...
197 Angela: We need to figure out why this works.
198 Magda: The thing I remember him doing specifically was when he was like
199 teaching us integrals and the way he explained it to us he was doing it on
zuu Sketchpad I don't know if you remember, and he was like dragging it and
201
then adding the area on and then this graph.
202 Angela: I don't remember I have the worst memory.
203 Magda: He was like going like point by point like here and this graph like grew
204 and then.
205 Angela: oh yeah... and here's the next one and it would go up, yeah, OK.
206 Magda: And then this was filling in underneath.
207 Angela: Yeah, I remember that.
208 Magda: But I don't, I know kind of like why it's going to a higher power.
209 Angela: But why it works out that way?
210 Magda: And then if you go in reverse why does it.
211 Angela: Like because like if this ( referring to the steeper graph) is this right
212 (filling in the area under the graph of x squared) it makes sense for this to
213 be the slope of that because that is the rate that that is changing.
214 Magda: Say that again.
215 Angela: Like if this graph is the area under here it makes sense for like you know
216 for 16 to be the slope at 4 because that is the rate at this is changing like
217 that's rate that the area is increasing you know what I'm saying?
218 Magda: Mmm humm.
219 Angela: XA2.1 don't know if that is just like pointing out obvious stuff.
220 Magda: No because that's good because as you go higher
221 Angela: The slope gets steeper
222 Magda: But the area,
223 Angela: Gets larger.
224 Magda: You're adding more area.
225 Angela: It's changing at a steeper pace.
226 Magda: So is that our kind of equation?
227 Angela: I don't know... I guess.
382
228 Magda: Let's see what the book says

229 Angela: Nothing... I don't know I can't read math its too... dry for me.
230 Magda: Go write a novel... (inaudible) I'll read that.
231 Angela: This is the stuff that we were just talking about right no, that's with a
232 negative... I think it would be past this...
233 (They look through the pages in the book.)
234 Magda: Remember this problem when we were doing it in class.
235 Angela: No.
236 Magda: It's if you have two functions and you need to find the area in between you
237 just.
238 Angela: Oh yeah OK OK OK.
239 Magda: Take the integral...
240 Angela: Yeah...
241 Magda: A way to define integrals., oh my god here's the velocity stuff
242 Angela: Where's Romina...
243 Magda: (inaudible)
244 (Silence as they look at the book)
245 Angela: Is this going to help us?
246 Magda: No, this is more like how you divide it into intervals blah blah blah
247 (inaudible)
248 Angela: Simpson's rule. Next chapter already? The reciprocal function... the
249 population growth problem... this is the people problem. Do you
250 remember this? We definitely did this. Can you sit on the same side as me
251 Magda? Sorry we're switching Madga around.
252 Magda: Does this mess you up?
253 Angela: It probably does.
254 (Sergei talks)
255 Magda: We want to switch places so we can read. So she doesn't have to read
256 upside down.
257 Angela: Make my head hurt, (laughs)What the heck is this, Magda?
258 Magda: It's the integral,
259 Angela: What's the C.
260 Magda: Its + C it's where you start your graph.
261 Angela: Oh yeah that's what I thought.
262 Magda: The "Initial condition" (she makes quote signs with her hands.)
263 Angela: I haven't done math in four years, OK?
264 Magda: Yeah but like I'm just saying...
265 Angela: Four years.
266 Magda: Your initial condition. Remember how we always solved for C to see
267 where the graph would start you know.
268 Angela: OK, and then go from there.
269 Angela: Is this...limits and stuff?
270 Magda: No, this is just In.
271 Angela: I don't remember that... In.
272 Magda: It's just a function, it's one of those like e to the x, you know like you
273 have, remember when he was explaining to us like compound rates or
274 something, I don t know, I just know how it looks.
275 Angela: When he taught us about like insurance and stuff... and then he told us
276 about how to be a millionaire, and I still have to do that, invest some
277 money. That's log.
278 Magda: Log is In, In is the natural power...
279 Angela: OK, this made so much more sense to me in 12th grade.
280 Magda: Functions and derivatives... derivatives
281 Angela: We have to be in the anti derivatives.
282 Magda: What?
283 Angela: We need anti derivatives, right?
284 Magda: That's where is...
285 Angela: Yeah, it's just going backwards correct.
286 Magda: What do you mean?
287 Angela: Like.
288 Magda: Yet just like going a power.
289 Angela: Just going backwards. This is exactly what we did the other day though.
290 Magda: I know but he is asking us why.
291 Angela: Why.
292 Magda: We have to go up to the next power that's basically what he wants to know
293 right.
294 Angela: 1 think he means why it works like how it works,
295 Magda: What you mean like why it works when you take it to the...
296 Angela: I don't know, like if you answered one part of it you answer the whole
297 thing no? Why does that equation work? why is that the fundamental
298 theorem of calculus? if we can answer that we can answer everything. I
299 guess.
300 Magda: Well why it works to me basically going back to this thing, is if you have
301 you know from a to b of F of x our f of x will be x squared right.
302 Angela: OK.
303 Magda: So g of b minus g of a
304 Angela: Umm.
305 Magda: So say in our case it would be four to one.
306 Angela: One to four.
307 Magda: Four to one of xA2 and then that would be one-third 4 to the third minus
308 1/3
309 Angela: Minus 1/3 one to the one third
310 Magda: Right so basically what we're doing what we're saying is.
311 Angela: That is 1/3 x cubed, right?
312 Magda: This is xA2 this is one third x cubed right
313 Angela: Um huh.
314 Magda: So what's happening, this is one, and this is four (points to graph)
315 Angela: OK. So that's up at 16.
316 Magda: So basically what you are doing, first you're taking this (she circles 1/3
317 4A3 with her pen in the air) which would be all the area here (she fills in
318 the area under the graph from x = 4 backwards to x = 0)
319 Angela: And subtracting.
320 Magda: And subtracting this piece.
321 Angela: Yeah.
322 Magda: Here and basically what we said before you know you're adding on the
323 area.
324 Angela: Um hum.
325 Magda: So basically you are taking this point right here at four which is this (she
326 draws a point at 4, 16)
327 Angela: You're subtracting the area from the point at one.
328 Magda: You know.
329 Angela: One.
330 Angela: And you're subtracting the area you piled on up until one.
331 Magda: Which is the area your piled on when you're starting ...
332 Angela: Yeah, OK, that makes sense.
333 Magda: That's why, that's why, that's how I would say why that works (she
334 circles 1/3 4A3 - 1/2 1A3 with her pen in the air) I would say how we got
335 this graph by you know piling the area on on on
336 Angela: Right.
337 Magda: And that's how we ended up with this one to the third x cubed graph.
338 Angela: Okay but why does it just happen to be.
339 Magda: 1/3 x cubed.
340 Angela: .. .that though. Like why...
341 Magda: Why does it happen to be...
342 Angela: The integral?
343 Angela: Is that the right word?
344 Magda: Yes.
345 Angela: OK. Why does it happen to be that though? Like I think that's what he's
346 asking us. I think that he gets that it works...
347 Magda: Um hum.
348 Angela: .. .but why does it work, why is it that? Because like we said that all last
349 time.
350 Magda: So why... why... why does it happen to be going up?
351 Angela: Like let's just change these, lets change what f is for, for the sake
352 of...cause we keep like.
353 Magda: Let's use...
354 Angela: I have to make copies of these...
355 Magda: F of x could be what do you want it to be?
356 Angela: I don't know... we have graphing calculators.
357 Magda: 1/x.
358 Angela: Sure. So, OK, g would be.
359 Magda: So g would be, in our case, In x.
360 Angela: Let's pick something else... (laughs) stick with x squared, stick with x
361 squared forget it, I was trying to be creative here. OK, why is this the
362 integral?
363 Magda: Why is this an integral?
364 Angela: Why does it work out that the integral is... where is that other thing... this
365 point here minus this point here is this area here I understand like you are
385
366 adding it but why is it the integral I'm playing teacher... like do you get
367 what I'm saying I know how it works but why?
368 Magda: Because this function happens to be.
369 Angela: Why does it happen to be there's got to be a reason right
370 Magda: Well.
371 Angela: A mathematical reason... think... why is this true maybe...do you know
372 what I'm saying?
373 Magda: Why do you...Say like if I didn't know this...
374 Angela: Right.
375 Magda: .. .and 1 was asked to, you know, draw a graph of the area I would just plot
376 points
377 Angela: Right but you wouldn't have something really accurate because you have
378 to go with super super tiny.
379 Magda: Yeah, so if I didn't know that, if I didn't know that this was one third , if I
380 didn't know that...
381 Angela: Right.
382 Magda: Then basically were going back to the thing of Riemann sums.
383 Angela: Right but what I'm saying is we do know this. All right we do know this,
384 even if we didn't, why is... forget that we don't we know this... why does
385 this just happen to be the graph of the area underneath it's antiderivative...
386 is that the right word? I hate math terms.
387 Magda: Why...
388 Angela: Why is this graph the area under here besides adding up like that why is it
389 the integral because actually now I'm curious (laughs) we should find out.
390 Magda: I'm pretty sure we have the answer to that.
391 Angela: Why wouldn't it.
392 Magda: You're saying if you know this function...
393 Angela: Even if you didn't this is still like conceptually this you know what I'm
394 saying if you didn't know that this was the formula for that.
395 Magda: OK, I'm just saying, if you had this function how would you find the area
396 underneath this?
397 Angela: You have to do a Riemann sum do it in trapezoids, and keep going, or you
398 can use that other way. If the graph was like this, you could do it like that
399 the other way like this, (draws something) I'm wrong I'm just not going to
400 draw pictures any more... (she scratches out what she drew). Do know
401 what I'm saying though
402 Magda: Yeah, I it totally know what you're saying I just don't know
403 Angela: The answer.
404 Magda: Right.
405 Angela: OK neither do I Mags,
406 Angela: Do you know what that I like? Indexes. (Angela looks in the index of the
407 textbook.) What am I looking for, Mags?
408 Magda: So basically our question is why do we do this...
409 Angela: Why use the integral/ Why is it the integral. Why does this equation work?
410 Magda: Well we know why it works but now we need to know why you take the
411 integral
412 Angela: That's part of why it works I think, no.
413 Magda: Yeah, well, no,
414 Angela: In depth. ... What am looking for Mags...
415 Magda: I don't know what you're looking for.
416 Angela: Application of... base e... derivative of that, no, maybe? Exponential
417 function...
418 Magda: Exponential function is where you have x in the exponent.
419 Angela: Oh, OK, I'm thinking of it the wrong way, heh, heh... compare lower
420 number to a function...
421 Magda: Why do you go up a power why why...
422 Angela: (Laughs)
423 Magda: I like my explanation because it definitely has to be higher it definitely has
424 to be steeper.
425 Angela: Yeah that definitely makes like its definitely right that works
426 Magda: The graph has to be steeper, and like how you were saying how you're
427 adding on more area as you go on because this graph is growing.
428 Angela: Um hum.
429 Magda: But then also because we have a growing graph , but say we had
430 something like this (she draws a graph that is increasing and decreasing)
431 Angela: Then it would change to like it would go down and then it would go back
432 up right.
433 Magda: (Starts to draw a new graph.)
434 Magda: Cause then it be adding more area,
435 Angela: No it would keep going up because you're still adding on area It would
436 only go down if it went below the x.
437 Magda: But it's like slows down here., goes up...
438 Angela: The rate is different.
439 Magda: It goes up... it's like.
440 Angela: You're starting at 0.
441 Magda: You can start wherever because that's the whole point of C, what C is.
442 Angela: But if your area is starting at 0 you have to start at 0 don't you?
443 Magda: Yes, OK.
444 Angela: OK, sorry.
445 Magda: So it's like growing growing growing higher then still growing but at a
446 slower pace here. It never like goes down, it's just going at a slower pace,
447 and then it starts picking up again..
448 Angela: Yeah.
449 Magda: So it's one of those, then its concave up, concave down...
450 Angela: Yeah.
451 Magda: ...concave up.
452 Angela: Right. And that's (pointing to the graph below) the slope of that (pointing
453 to the graph above) right?
454 Magda: Yes. my whole thing is you've got to go to a higher power just because
455 this point it has to be some like faster growing graph then what you
456 originally had you know
457 Angela: Right I get that a hundred percent... what I'm saying is why does that
387
458 graph happen to be the integral?

459 Magda: It has to be a faster growing graph, an exponential
460 Angela: Well can't it be... I know it's not... but I'm saying like... why is it the
461 integral I don't even know how to phrase that.
462 Magda: OK say you had.
463 Angela: I get that it has to be a greater growing graph.
464 Magda: A function of one then this would go one to two, to three.
465 Angela: Its just going to keep going, it's just going to be a straight line right?
466 Magda: Yeah.
467 Angela: OK. Yeah.
468 Magda: So what I'm saying is I don't know why exactly it goes up by "one" power
469 but like the reason it has to be it can't be going down it has to be going up
470 a higher power, to a higher power it's because when you think of it you
471 have to keep adding on.
472 Angela: Yeah, I know, that makes sense, that makes perfect sense I'm just curious
473 as to why it's that in particular. I don't expect you to answer me I expect
474 us to find this answer together.
475 Magda: I don't know why technically you do it, you know.
476 (Romina enters the room.)
477 Angela: What's up Ro, Banana Republic shirt.
478 Romina: Nope.
479 Angela: (States another shirt company).
480 Romina: Yep.
481 Angela: We have some thing with the Banana Republic.
482 Romina: Yep. Different color but same shirt as the last time I was on the train.
483 Angela: Your hair is lighter, it looks good.
484 Magda: Basically, I don't really know what we're looking for.
485 Romina: Got really far in a half hour, huh.
486 Angela: Why is that, Mags? I don't know.
487 Magda: Basically I think what he's asking us ...
488 Angela: Yes.
489 Magda: Basically what he's asking us is... he understands that, (points to the
490 board) he knows that the integral is area underneath the graph but why is
491 it that you're taking the integral.
492 Angela: Why is it that?
493 Magda: Is that what you're asking?
494 Angela: Is that what you're asking? That's what we understood it to be.
495 Pantozzi I'll repeat it for Romina since she just started she just got here. It's a
496 month since your guys last helped me, I'm acting as the student.
497 Angela: It's really good acting.
498 Pantozzi And been a month since you helped me and I've taken that course, taken
499 that section of the book and had it taught in class I know that the thing up
500 there (on the board) is the integral from a to b of f of x and that means it's
501 the area between a and b and I know that in order to figure out the area,
502 you're supposed to... g is the function that's, well, f is the derivative of g.
503 Romina's like... I know you just got off the train.
388
504 Romina: Give me a second,/is the derivative of g

505 Magda: Since g is the integral of/
506 Romina: No, I'm just trying to think how we did it last time. OK.
507 Pantozzi: OK, so that means, I don't know if I can't remember if I said it last time
508 so g is the anti derivative of/did I say that last time?
510 Magda: Yes.
511 Pantozzi: Because I think that's what that means if the derivative of g is/then the
512 anti derivative of/is g...
513 Angela: The opposite.
514 Pantozzi: Did I say that right.
515 Romina: It's the opposite.
516 Angela: Yes.
517 Pantozzi: So what I asked them, I was trying to understand... I took the section, I
518 know how to solve problems if you tell me to figure out the integral from
519 1 to 5 of xA2 I know I'm supposed to do 1/3 x cubed and then substitute in
520 one and five and subtract and get the area but what I missed in the lesson
521 that I took in school in my class was where did it come from the anti
522 derivative... like why is it the anti derivative.
523 Magda: Yeah like why are we taking the integral
524 Angela: So I was right... yay I got it right
525 Romina: Why are we taking the integral or why is g the integral of f
526 Angela: Why does it work out that in this equation that.
527 Magda: You have to take.
528 Angela: That's the integral like why... do you know what I'm saying? We'll
529 explain.
530 Romina: Because if you take the integral of a function it's the functions integral.
531 Angela: (laughing) yeah but like why.
532 Magda: I think, are you asking us what an integral is like why.
533 Angela: Basically.
534 Magda: Like you would be go up one higher is that
535 Pantozzi: Sure.
536 Angela: Do want us to explain what we've got to you so far.
537 Pantozzi: Yeah that would be good, that would be good, bring Romina up to.
538 Angela: We came up this funky little thing going on here
539 Magda: Basically what we were saying and I totally remember this from
540 Sketchpad when you were teaching it to us.
541 Pantozzi Urn.
542 Magda: Is that what you were doing, you were taking the function and going at
543 and at one of this is how much area you filled in and like this would grow
544 Angela: The graph.
545 Pantozzi Show Romina too.
546 Romina: I see it. Oh that I can't.
547 Angela: Special powers.
548 Magda: And as you go on this area would be added on and kind of like this graph
549 would show up so what did we say... so basically that's the we're saying
550 and the reason it's a higher power is because you are adding on more area
551 and this graph is always going to be growing faster
552 Pantozzi: OK. What if it's not something with a higher power what if it is some
553 other sort of graph that doesn't have you know, exponents like that in it
554 Angela: Like this.
555 Magda: No that's also.
556 Angela: Kind of does.
557 Magda: Kind of like that too it does because you're going up one thing....
558 Romina: You mean like a whole equation with a whole bunch of different
559 exponents?
560 Pantozzi: Yeah like, if I had something like e to the x, you something without an
561 exponent if I remember correctly from class, all the anti derivative rules
562 don't work that way like they don't always up one power like with
563 everything
564 Magda: Like sine and cosine you don't...
565 Romina: Oh, please.
566 Angela: Wonderful.
567 Magda: Let's explore sine and cosine maybe.
568 Angela: Use a different piece of paper.
569 Pantozzi: I have, you mentioned sketchpad and I have it here so if there's anything
570 you'd like me to make.
571 Romina: This might be, I still don't get the question; is the question why we take
572 the integral?
573 Angela: Yeah.
574 Pantozzi: Well, like, I want you to I have a split personality here I'm me and I'm this
575 student you're talking to also when I watched your video last time you
576 focused on one aspect of the fundamental theorem and clearly you knew
577 what it's about and as I said to your fellow students here.
578 Romina: My colleagues.
579 Pantozzi: Your colleagues. Good answer.
580 Angela: We are colleagues.
581 Romina: (Inaudible)
582 Angela: (Inaudible)
583 Pantozzi: I'm not sure what exactly what it means to understand the fundamental
584 theorem that's why we're talking. We're talking about what different kinds
585 of understanding you could have about it and this is the aspect you seemed
586 to focus on in your talk the last time so going back to being the student
587 again I just want to, I just missed something in that lesson that I took so
588 I'm hoping you guys can fill it in since you've done lots of discussion
589 about this... all right now back to being me again I've got, I have
590 Sketchpad I can fill in the area, like you were talking about, I can show it
591 you and show it happen if that would help any.
592 Magda: Yeah why don't you do that for us.
593 Pantozzi: Is me as the student is my question clear enough, or no?
594 Angela: You want to get how it works.
595 Romina: Can you say something since you're taking the area, something it goes to
390
596 the next power because it's like the cumulative function, you're talking the
597 area at every single point and that's why it has to be bigger.
598 Angela: Yeah, that's what Magda said...
599 Magda: Yeah but with sine and cosine that you're not exactly taking it to the next
600 power.
601 Romina: I know that you're not taking it to the next power but isn't it like steeper in
602 some way?
603 Romina: Is this even e? I haven't done this in a while. Yeah, right (pointing to the
604 graph that she drew.)
605 Angela: Because log is the other way.
606 Romina: Do you remember what the integral of e looks like.
607 Magda: E to the x is its e to the x.
608 Romina: Whispers.
609 Angela: Laughs.
610 Pantozzi: You guys remember quite a lot.
611 Angela: Magda remembers quite a lot. She refreshes our memory.
612 Romina: She's taken all these math courses (inaudible)
613 Magda: But I don't know why though.
614 Angela: The last math class I took was in high school., well real math class.
615 Romina: Infinitely big... infinitely small.
616 Angela: I don't know. I don't remember. I don't want to remember.
617 Magda: No, because... if you take between one...
618 Romina: So is the derivative of log log?
619 Angela: Du du du du.
620 Magda: Integral...
621 Romina: Or is the integral of log log if it has the same integral does it have to have
622 the same derivative?
623 Magda: I learned how to take integrals of logs and stuff
624 Angela: I don't remember.
625 Magda: Integral of In.
626 Romina: Log, In...
627 Magda: No, like that's too hard... the integral of one over x is like In of x.
628 Pantozzi: See you guys talked a lot about this a lot in that last session and again me
629 acting as a student I also heard a lot that I heard about anti derivatives and
630 about how you're supposed to do that...
631 Angela: Um hum.
632 Pantozzi: But what me as the student is missing, like I was, like my mind wandered
633 during that part of the lesson maybe where they said, here's why you take
634 an anti derivative to figure out the area.
635 Magda: What are you doing?
636 Romina: Are you going to show us.
637 Pantozzi: Well I can show you this, I don't know if it will have any use to you
638 Romina: We'll show that here is (inaudible)
639 Angela: You can read that?
640 Romina: Yep. (inaudible)
641 Pantozzi: What this thing does is it fills in the area and that red graph is.
642 Angela: The integral?
643 Pantozzi: I guess, the integral, it tells you how much area you've got so no this is
644 just an estimate because there's actually really trapezoids there but it will
645 tell me how much you've got.
646 Romina: This is really advanced since we saw the first version of this.
647 Angela: You had to type something in then slowly craft...
648 Angela: This is exciting.
649 Magda: I totally remember doing this.
650 Romina: Yeah, me too.
651 Angela: Well I didn't until Magda reminded me.
652 Romina: Doesn't the integral, does the integral measure the slope?
653 Angela: Umm.
654 Magda: No the original graph is the slope of the integral.
655 Angela: Yeah.
656 Romina: So then see how it goes, the integral increases and then decreases.
657 Magda: Because you have negative area That's why.
658 Angela: Down it takes them away.
659 Pantozzi: What's that?
660 Angela: When goes below the x axis it goes down who because you're taking area
661 away
662 Magda: Away, yeah.
663 Angela: And when it hits the x axis again going up like to the positive section.
664 Romina: Point of inflection...
665 Angela: I don't remember what the word is , I don't know.
666 Magda: Concave up concave down.
667 Angela: I don't remember math terms 1 just kind of concept things... why is it the
668 integral.
669 Romina: Why do you take the integral for the area...
670 Angela: Feels like I'm at a laser light show.
671 Romina: I'm (inaudible) So basically we're measuring our area Maybe I'm
672 simplifying this...
673 Angela: You're not, we're thinking the same way.
674 Romina: Yeah if we, let's just say that an integral didn't exist.
675 Angela: Exactly.
676 Romina: Let's say there's no integral if we went and graphed the area underneath
677 the graph, there's another, another.
678 Angela: Even if the integral didn't exist... the concept, like if we didn't know it was
679 the integral, the concept is still the same.
680 Romina: Exactly.
681 Angela: So we have to think of it that way though we have to think of it as being
682 the integral.
683 Romina: Isn't it if I just graphed the area underneath...
684 Angela: Yeah.
685 Romina: .. .this function I get this other line.
686 Angela: Yeah.
687 Romina: ...which essentially would be the integral, it that not like what.
688 Angela: But why is it the integral.
689 Romina: Because someone named it Angela.
690 Angela: No but why did it end up being that I don't remember why and I really
691 want to know now.
692 Romina: Isn't that what the integral is by definition that's what I'm not
693 understanding, is that not what it is, it just happens coincidence that the
694 area under the graph is an integral.
695 Angela: It can't just be coincidence.
696 Romina: I thought an integral is the area under a function...
697 Angela: Come on, this is math it doesn't just happen.
698 Romina: See what I'm seeing... we have to take this next step.
699 Angela: We have to figure out, I don't know where we're taking it, I just know we
700 have to.
701 Pantozzi: I as the student know that the integral is the area I just don't understand
702 why where anti derivatives come in like why you're doing this whole...
703 whole formula thing.
704 Romina: We're saying anti derivatives and integrals are the same thing right?
705 Pantozzi: Are we?
706 Angela: Laughs.
707 Magda: Well the difference between an anti derivative and an integral., no, no...
708 Pantozzi: Well I think.
709 Romina: I use them interchangeably but I keep noticing that they keep saying anti
710 derivative and I keep saying integral so I'm starting to wonder (?)
711 Magda: How I understand it is the anti derivative can start anywhere like you
712 know you can like start drawing it anywhere and you have that like + C
713 thing.
714 Angela: I remember that.
715 Magda: But an integral is just a function OK maybe I'm not understanding this...
716 integral may.
717 Romina: So I could move this whole red line up.
718 Magda: Yes.
719 Romina: But I can't do it with an integral?
720 Magda: What is.
721 Angela: The red line is what.
722 Romina: It's the anti derivative.
723 Angela: OK.
724 Romina: Is this red line the anti derivative?
725 Magda: Yes. I've...
726 Angela: (inaudible)
727 Pantozzi Both as the student and as myself, all I can say about this is is that what
728 this sketchpad thing does is count how much area there is there and plots
729 how much there is.
730 Magda: See there even though you have a positive area between zero and two.
731 Angela: Collectively right.
732 Romina: This is... (gets up to point at the screen)
733 Magda: No, over, zero and two
393
734 Romina: This.

735 Magda: But the line is below but it's still growing it's still going up because the
736 area is positive but the reason it's in the negative because the whole thing
737 is like minus 6 that...that's your initial, your initial condition, which is the
738 C.
739 Angela: Right there...
740 Magda: Which is negative
741 Angela: That makes sense.
742 Romina: Yeah, that makes sense to me. The initial condition is that its 6 where do
743 you see - 6 here I see where that crosses, but I'm saying OK when we start
744 it
745 Pantozzi: You can tell me to do anything with this that you want me to
746 Romina: When you started here, why did you like.
747 Magda: So, OK, can you start drawing the anti derivative from zero.
748 Romina: So OK.
749 Magda: See stop... Can you stop it at 2 see it's six., and.
750 Romina: OK.
751 Angela: OK.
752 Magda: .. .and its kind of like he moved that Ok and can you see that when he
753 started at 2s that whole line got moved down to, got moved down to, like
754 down six. six.
755 Romina: That's not the same graph I saw 2 seconds ago.
756 Magda: Yeah it is.
757 Angela: Yes it is. It's just higher up.
758 Romina: Yeah, OK I say so where did you start from last time?
759 Magda: So hold on (Magda goes to the board.) Before he started drawing it from
760 here (Magda points to x = 2 on the x axis) from right here. 2 so basically
761 this point right here (points to the graph of the integral, and then to the the
762 x axis at x = 2) was down at 0 so this point was moved down 6.
763 Romina: The antiderivative, OK the integral is the anti derivative but the anti
764 derivative doesn't always have to be its integral but can the integral be the
765 same as anti derivative can we write the integral as a function + C.
766 Magda: It definitely has to do with C and where you start drawing the graph that
767 that like.
768 Angela: Wait...
769 Romina: But isn't C just like our error and what not?
770 Angela: Why is it different there?
771 Magda: What, what do you mean, where is it different?
772 Angela: Oh no...
773 Romina: At the, at that end?
774 Magda: It's the same.
775 Angela: It's the same.
776 Magda: Just move it up,
777 Angela: OK, OK.
778 Magda: Because it is growing.
779 Angela: I'm thinking...
780 Romina: Are you trying to find the definition?
781 Magda: No I'm trying to see what the real difference between integral and anti
782 derivative is (She looks through the Foerster book)
783 Angela: They have it it should be because...
784 Magda: They do...
785 Angela: (Angela reading from the text.) g(x) is an anti derivative of f(x) if and
786 only if g'(x) = f(x) an anti derivative is the same as an indefinite integral
787 an indefinite integral...
788 Magda: Is that...an indefinite integral is where you are not defining a and b.
789 Angela: Yeah.
790 Romina: So it is the same
791 Magda: What.
792 Romina: So it is the same. Did we not just read that it is the same it is.
793 Angela: Yeah.
794 Magda: It's the same as an indefinite but its not the same as a definite.
795 Angela: OK.
796 Romina: Last time we were doing indefinite.
797 Magda: No, indefinite just means it's not just defined on that like..
798 Romina: Yeah.
799 Magda: Specific
800 Angela: Atob.
801 Magda: Interval. Definite is a to b
802 Angela: (Angela reading from the text.) Indefinite integral: g(x) is the integral of
803 f(x)dx if and only if g'(x) = f(x)
804 Romina: So if we have a...
805 Angela: So an integral is the same as an anti derivative
806 Romina: If we're finding...
807 Angela: So we can use the integral as a loose term here (laughs)
808 Romina: So if we're doing... take the integral from a to b then there has to have a
809 set integral because you start at that point a.
810 Angela: Yeah, you're going between A and B
811 Romina: So if they asked you can't add a C to that, right?
812 Magda: To where.
813 Romina: If you're taking the integral from a to b there's no place to add a C
814 Angela: There's no spot for it on this thing.
815 Magda: You can't because.
816 Romina: It has to be the same (inaudible)
817 Angela: why is it the integral.. .is there a formula kind of way we can figure it
818 out. indefinite integrals...
819 Romina: Someone has to like throw me in a direction here... take the area under
820 something...
821 Angela: I'm very un directional
822 Magda: (inaudible)
823 Romina: Rectangle...
824 Angela: We did this already this is what we spent the whole time doing last time
825 Romina The area of this, the area of this, and then you plot them
826 Angela: Right. But why, why is it the integral? Why does it end up being the
827 integral.
828 Romina: See I think you're being philosophical and I think I'm sticking to math.
829 Angela: Yeah but I think if we figure that out we figure out how that equation that
830 was up there is true right isn't that what we're trying to explain?
831 Romina: Like that is why do we call water water? That's what you're saying to me
832 right now.
833 Angela: But it's not the same thing., not the same thing.
834 Romina: That's why we're having such a hard time. Because that is why do you
835 add when there's... when you add.
836 Angela: Because you're.
837 Romina: Seel.
838 Angela: Conceptually taking three of something and four of something.
839 Romina: Here I'm conceptually taking the area (laughs) take the integral.
840 Angela: I don't know but why does it... I don't know.
841 Romina: That's where I'm a little... are you seeing it like that?
842 Magda: Yeah no.
843 Angela: Once you get to sine and cosine it's not like ... that's different.
844 Romina: Are you still not taking in the areas?
845 Magda: It's negative positive negative positive that's why it's a flipped thing.
846 Romina: Where do you get that we're not...
847 Angela: I'm thinking more in language ways because that is the way I think and I
848 need to stop doing that in math
849 Romina: You're obviously getting something that I'm not here.
850 Angela: I don't think I am, I don't know.
851 Magda: This is sine.
852 Angela: Ok, sine.
853 Magda: The derivative of the sine would be.
854 Romina: Derivative?
855 Magda: I mean integral.
856 Angela: The indefinite integral.
857 Magda: You start at (Magda is drawing)
858 Romina: (Romina is drawing) I was going to trace if over I think that's wrong So is
859 that the integral of sine? Is the integral of sine sine? Its decreasing.
860 Magda: (Magda is drawing). It's going like this...
861 Angela: Let's see if I can remember how to use this thing... y = sin (using the
862 graphing calculator ) Where's x? (inaudible) on this thing.
863 Romina: What are you trying to do?
864 Angela: A lot of things...
865 Romina: ...plot it?
866 Angela: I'm done, that would be sine. So how do you do...
867 Romina: So what's the integral of sine? (Laughter) Do you remember asking me
868 that?
869 Magda: Cosine...something cosine... negative cosine...
870 Romina: Negative cosine, or.
871 Magda: Positive.
396
872 Romina: You don't add any numbers to it I thought maybe it was negative two
873 cosine.
874 Angela: No, I don't know...
876 Magda: No I think it's sine is negative cosine and cosine is positive sine or it's the
877 other way around I don't know that's why I'm drawing it
878 Angela: I had one of those little devices...
879 Romina: I think sine is cosine.
880 Angela: little things to help you remember it.. I don't remember anymore. I had
881 one of those little things to help you remember
882 Romina: That's the triangle, isn't it?
883 Magda: (Magda is drawing) OK it's actually growing slowly.
884 Angela: And here is where it starts decreasing, and her, increasing.
885 Magda: And this is growing more on this interval.
886 Angela: Right there.
887 Romina: Decline.
888 Angela: That's where it starts going down.
889 Magda: It's still going up.
890 Angela: Yes, but this is where it goes down.. .here is where it stops increasing so
891 much
892 Romina: It's negative cosine isn't it.
893 Magda: So this is where it crosses the zero so this is pi
895 Romina: Oh and she's getting all detailed.
896 Angela: Draw the circle. Draw the circle.
897 Romina: Magda, oh jeez.
898 Angela: I have this on one of those papers last time. I don't remember.
899 Romina: Do we not get notes this time.
900 Pantozzi: I didn't bring notes this time probably because I don't know where they
901 are anymore...
902 Magda: It's negative cosine.
903 Romina: I told you that like how long ago Magda.
904 Magda: I'm sorry.
905 Romina: Cosine sine.
906 Magda: So what are we trying to figure out?
907 Romina: Angela, what are you thinking?
908 Angela: I don't know I 'm done thinking... what makes sense.
909 Romina: Enlighten me here.
910 Angela: That's right?
911 Magda: Yes, It's a flipped cosine. But this doesn't help us.
912 Angela: I thought maybe it would trigger something in Magda's wonderful
913 memory. I'm just saying like...
914 Magda: You want to know why does it happen to be the integral. Or antiderivative.
915 Pantozzi: The integral is area.
916 Magda: OK.
917 Pantozzi: If I'm trying to figure out area I know its an integral, and someone came
397
918 up with that word, called it an integral I have a book that tells me where
919 that is... but what I'm missing in the lesson is why do I use an anti
920 derivative to figure out the area, because that's what the fundamental
921 theorem that you guys, as I understood what you talked about last time ,
922 you know, you were talking about this g and its... the derivative of g was
923 /, so g is the anti derivative of/.
925 Pantozzi: I think in terms of your discussion before... I don't know if I can
926 answer.. .the integral is area and I accept that but it just seems, do anti
927 derivatives come out of the blue to equal area or something like that
928 formula says
929 Romina: When we write to the + C is that ( pointing to the board) on the/function
930 side?
931 Magda: No when you take you wouldn't do it here.
932 Angela: It would be someplace else.
933 Romina: It would be after you take it.
934 Magda: It would be f of x = g(x) + C and that C, what I always understood it it's
935 where you kind of start the graph like this C is like something on the y
936 axis like so C could equal like so negative 2 and this is kind of like where
937 the graph you know meets.
938 Romina: Did we do something like... were... you remember something where we
939 went 2 down from every single point something like that do you remember
940 this?
941 Magda: That something like that?
942 Angela:
943 Magda: As the area between two curves.
944 Angela: That was between.
945 Romina: But this is where like I pushed it down all 2 it's still the same function
946 Angela: Yeah, it just drops.
947 Magda: It's starting lower.
948 Angela: If its 2.. every point...
949 Romina: T would it have the same area like to
950 Magda: Yes, you would have to...
951 Angela: You mean the same area between the graph and the x axis? No it would be
952 different.
953 Romina: Is this area, this is all positive, this goes positive dips into the negatives...
954 Angela: Here, and then here,
955 Magda: Oh, I thought you were talking about the area in between
956 Romina: Even though the graph is the same amount that's like getting into the anti
957 derivative of the anti derivative.
958 Angela: What.
959 Magda: No the whole thing is here that you'd have negative 2 in your function and
960 every time this little area here like here would be 2 less than the area up
961 here you know what I'm saying? you would have this little square like left
962 over because it's moved down you know what I'm saying.
963 Romina: Yeah. (Inaudible)
964 Magda: No, that's like a good point... if this was some function minus 2, say,
965 Romina: When you take the um, you take anything thing if it just falls out doesn't
966 it, right
967 Angela: No that's with the derivative
968 Magda: This will get an x
969 Romina: So let's take the derivative of.
970 Angela: X.
971 Romina: What's like the integral off, is g plus c
972 Angela: Right.
973 Romina: So then this integral of that is g plus c.
974 Magda: Um hum.
975 Romina: then when you take it again it's g + c squared, no ex.
976 Magda: C is a constant.
977 Romina: No, but when you take the integral you have C X.
978 Angela: Doesn't that.
979 Romina: This is a function how does that work.
980 Angela: You need to keep adding some primes or something it's not the same G
981 right.
982 Romina: And the derivative is...
983 Magda: It becomes f of x.
984 Romina: This becomes f of x?
985 Magda: Um hum.
986 Angela: It does?
987 Romina: So the integral of this is that, so the integral of that is that so then you take
988 the derivative of that...
989 Magda: Hold on, you're going up?
990 Angela: Wait, this becomes this again?
991 Romina: No, now, OK, so hold on. I'm going to take the integral of this,
992 Magda: I don't understand, hold on.
993 Romina: If I'm going to take the integral of this, now I'm going to take the integral
994 of this..
995 Magda: Becomes a big g or something.
996 Angela: Like g prime or something,
997 Romina: That was derivative.
998 Magda: No, big G. Plus c of x.
999 Romina: So we just went, when we step down to this and we step back up it's not
1000 the same thing anymore.
1001 Angela: Yeah but you're not stepping back up you're stepping down from here.
1002 Romina: I want to step up I just don't have the right terminology... The integral of
1003 this function equals g.
1004 Angela: Show me.
1005 Romina: How come we don't write it like this?
1006 Magda: Not x, its
1007 Angela: Plus C.
1008 Romina: Give me another piece of paper, (inaudible) Equals g + C because it's
1009 indefinite, right?
399
1010 Magda: Right.

1011 Romina: And when we take the integral of this function to move back to that we get
1012 big G + C x does that make any difference at all.
1013 Magda: You not going back to that function.
1014 Angela: You don't go back to that,
1015 Magda: Wait you're not going backwards.
1016 Angela: this is like the opposite of what you're doing
1017 Romina: I always think of as if I'd take a.
1018 Angela: Like if you have this graph OK, and then you do
1019 Romina: No if I What I was trying to do?
1020 Angela: If you do the integral of tha.
1021 Romina: That's where I was confused, that's what I was asking. Do the integral.
1022 Angela: Well even if you started someplace else if you're taking the integral of this
1023 it's not going to go back to F of x you're taking the integral it's going to be
1024 completely different graph then.
1025 Romina: I don't think it can be a completely different graph?
1026 Magda: What do you mean a different graph?
1027 Angela: If you do this and then you do that, it's going to be x to the.
1028 Romina: Integral derivative if you take the derivative and then go to its integral
1029 shouldn't the integral be what you started with.
1030 Angela: No it would be x to the 4.
1031 Romina: I mean if you take the integral and then you if you take the derivative of
1032 the integral wouldn't it be the function
1033 Magda: Yes.
1034 Romina: that's what I'm trying to do here and I just couldn't write it.
1035 Angela: I don't know what you just said could you.
1036 Romina: Ok, I have the integral of a function is the integral so then the derivative of
1037 this function has to be the original function.
1038 Angela: Right.
1039 Romina: That's all I was trying to do I couldn't write it.
1040 Angela: OK.
1041 Romina: See that... didn't he make us take double integrals. do the integral, and
1042 then the integral of the integral... and then we tried.. am I completely out
1043 of it?
1044 Magda: No no,
1045 Romina: Am I completely out of it?
1046 Magda: If you take an integral of an x function, but still taking the integral, you
1047 know what I'm saying...
1048 Romina: Talk about C now?
1049 Magda: C kind of just moves the function.
1050 Angela: Yeah, I don't think that's
1051 Magda: Yeah because like if you go the other way like from the red graph to the
1052 purple graph you're finding...
1053 Romina Shift left or right.
1054 Magda: What?
1055 Angela: Learned all that stuff. I had one of those things to remember, mnemonic
400
devices is that the word? I had one of those too. Move left or right,
1057 Magda: What do you mean, left or right.
1058 Romina: C moves it down... Shifted to the right or shifted to the left?
1059 Angela: Like if you wanted to move the graph.. .like there.
1060 Magda: Oh, yeah.
1061 Romina: This doesn't really matter,
1062 Angela: It's something.
1063 Romina: I was just curious.
1064 Magda: Inside like the x squared minus 2, or something, that moves to the right.
1065 Romina: How do you remember this stuff?
1066 Angela: She's good, that's why. She's math girl.
1067 Magda: Minus 2.
1068 Angela: She's going to be an accountant.
1069 Magda: Whatever. Moves it to the other side. But what I was saying...
1070 Romina: Could we...
1071 Magda: The red line, if you look at the red line and you take the derivative, so
1072 basically it doesn't matter where the graph is because the slope is going to
1073 be always the same you know what I'm saying.
1074 Angela: They're parallel to each other,
1075 Romina: So I don't...
1076 Angela: Right.
1077 Magda: The C it just moves that up or down.
1078 Angela: I think it just that moves it up or down. (Moves papers). Sorry, I'm big on
1079 organizing today. ... the whole office downstairs.
1080 Romina: I'm not getting the question.
1081 Magda: I'm not getting it either.
1082 Romina: We're not getting the question. Did the other group get the question?
1083 Pantozzi: They had different questions.
1084 Angela: They had different questions.
1085 Pantozzi: Because they talked about different things. The way I was thinking about
1086 it outside was... Did somebody just, maybe it happened this way, who
1087 knows. Someone just sat down one day and say the way to figure out area
1088 is to find the anti derivative.
1089 Romina: So are you talking about the process the steps you take to just write the
1090 equation, you know how you take it up an exponent, or differently if its
1091 sine or cosine or are you taking about that, or theoretically why you take
1092 the anti derivative.
1093 Pantozzi: Me as that student that you're helping feels that antiderivative... doesn't
1094 know where, it just seems the anti derivative just seems to be plucked out
1095 of thin air we were talking about area, we were talking about figuring out
1096 area, and then we said oh, to find the area, do the antiderivative, and then
1097 you'll have the area, and I missed the part about where., why is that...
1098 why is that what you have do... why not take the derivative... why
1099 doesn't that give you the area?
1100 Angela: Why not add two?
1101 Pantozzi Does that help any?
401
1102 Romina: Well if you take the area and we're plotting the area on top of each other
1103 like the amounts, I understand when someone first did this a graph, did
1104 they know what the derivative was at that time I don't know when we
1105 graph that it wasn't the derivative so I just figure they named it
1106 something., like this is where... what do you... this is where I...
1107 Magda: I'm totally... I totally don't know where to go from here.
1108 Angela: See I was thinking about it the other way.
1109 Romina: I thought it was area first and then integral or anti derivative.
1110 Magda: You mean integral and then derivative?
1111 Angela: Anti derivative like it which came first kind of deal.
1112 Magda: Like integral and then derivative is that what you're saying.
1113 Romina: No I thought it was function, slope.
1114 Angela: I don't think it can just be that only because you don't only think about
1115 math like in graphing terms or in visual terms you have to be like...
1116 Romina: I'm sure that when someone drew that other graph they somehow
1117 correlated it to the original function and if I plot that area then I get to this
1118 function I'm going to call it the integral you're saying someone said the
1119 word integral and then they defined it as something
1120 Pantozzi: Well they... I'm sorry.
1121 Angela: I'm sorry... no I'm thinking I don't even know how to describe what I'm
1122 thinking, go talk.
1123 Pantozzi: My question as the student is, I agree with what both of you are saying,
1124 they drew it someone was trying to figure out area in the past and I don't
1125 know, I don't know whether they drew a graph but somewhere along the
1126 line they were looking at something with area and then they said oh anti
1127 derivative.
1128 Romina: So that's what... so we're on the same page about that.
1129 Pantozzi: I think... so where did that anti derivative stuff come in, not historically,
1130 but where, how would you, I'm the student again,
1131 Romina: The opposite of taking the derivative
1132 Pantozzi: What does that have to do with area though
1133 Romina: See if you have a derivative you can graph the area of the derivative...
1134 Pantozzi: Um hum.
1135 Romina: ...you get its integral.
1136 Angela: But why is it like that graph like that specific why is it like this.
1137 Romina: Oh, now I understand the question,
1138 Angela: Wait.
1139 Romina: I thought you were asking why is it the anti derivative.
1140 Magda: This is your original function and then at some point your slope is 2...
1141 Pantozzi Well I was thinking this is one question I was thinking of asking but go
1142 ahead with what you're going to say.
1143 Magda: If you have a function
1144 Romina: If you have your function.
1145 Magda: Yeah, if you have your function.
1146 Romina: Really, can we recap here... function... the derivative is the slope function.
1147 Magda: Can you go back to the graph?
402
1148 Angela: Here you should use this paper, because that doesn't have our names on it.
1149 Romina: The derivative is the slopes of the function, the slope of the function.
1150 Magda: The derivative, yeah.
1151 Romina: Derivative is slope function.
1152 Magda: OK say the function is the red thing (referring to the red graph on the
1153 board)
1154 Romina: OK.
1155 Angela: Which red thing?
1157 Angela: I know, but which
1158 Magda: And so you take derivative of that is going to be the purple thing.
1159 Romina: Yeah, right.
1160 Magda: So basically that is going to tell you the slope.
1161 Romina: So the red thing is the anti derivative.
1162 Pantozzi: OK wait, I am the student that's the part I don't get I don't get that. She
1163 just said that., didn't you just say that if I take the derivative of the red
1164 graph I get the purple graph.
1166 Pantozzi: I don't get that. I thought that red graph was a graph of the area.
1167 Romina: But they're obviously correlated because you had one to draw the other.
1168 Pantozzi: Had what to draw the other.
1169 Pantozzi: 1 started with the purple graph, that was my function.
1170 Romina: And when we drew, we graphed the area
1171 Magda: You got the red graph
1172 Pantozzi: You got the red graph, OK. I'm fine with that
1173 Romina: So they have to be tied together somehow.
1174 Pantozzi: OK.
1175 Angela: We're figuring out why they're tied together.
1176 Magda: So when you have that red graph,
1177 Pantozzi: Yeah...
1178 Magda: .. .and you take the derivative of the red graph.
1179 Pantozzi: Um hum...
1180 Magda: ...you're going to get the purple graph.
1181 Pantozzi: O.K. I don't know why that's true.
1182 Romina: Because when you plot the slope of the red graph like we the way that.
1183 Angela: That's the rate that it's changing.
1184 Romina: When we did okay because when we were graphing the red one we were
1185 taking amount of... amount of area underneath.
1186 Pantozzi That was me...I'm sorry.
1187 Romina: Because when we did that... the area... because the slope is changing at a
1188 rate.
1189 Magda: Yes.
1190 Romina: When we take the derivative of the red one we're actually graphing the
1191 initial slope that we had to figure out the area., you see there (pointing to
1192 the projected graph) it's going faster and then it peaks and then it's
1193 slowing down and your graph is going like the slope hits zero and then the
403
1194 slope goes up again.

1195 Pantozzi: OK say what you said again you are saying again and I need you to say the
1196 red graph the purple graph or something to help me out.
1197 Romina: When we took the area of the purple graph.
1198 Pantozzi: OK.
1199 Romina: We accumulated the area underneath the purple graph.
1200 Pantozzi: OK.
1201 Romina: The way the area is formed like you have a lot of area and then the area
gets smaller is because of the rate, the way the purple slope is changing
izvz which is the way in the purple line is changing which is the slope the area
1203
1204 is caused by the changes in the slope like more area less area so the
1205 inflection points on your red one is caused by when your slope goes down
1206 because you're gaining area at less speed and when your going from
1207 negatives you're gaining more negative faster and then you're losing
1208 negatives... yeah., and then when you take some so then we take the slope
1209 of the red graph we're essentially getting the purple graph again because
1210 that's the slope... do you want to add? I know that sounds really
1211 confusing but.
1212 Angela: It's like the rate that you're accumulating area or losing area as you go
1213 along the x axis that's what slope is.
1214 Romina: We should have known that was the question a long time ago.
1215 Magda: We did we saw that at the very beginning.
1216 Angela: We said that, but I thought it was more complicated than that, I don't
1217 know.
1218 Romina: Articulate that. Do you see what I'm saying?
1219 Angela: Give that girl a point.
1220 Romina: Do you see what I'm saying.
1221 Pantozzi Well I do of course.
1222 Romina: Well I know you do but as the student.
1223 Pantozzi As the student? Um...Well let me go back to myself again, when I say I
1224 do when I say I do, I mean I know what I'm thinking in my head I can't be
1225 sure what you're thinking in your head other than what you said, you know
1226 what I'm saying.
1227 Romina: And obviously it sounds like mumbling to you.
1228 Pantozzi Well, when I listen to you, whenever you listen to somebody else you read
1229 into what they're saying from what you yourself believe so you may say
1230 something and I'll go, oh yeah that's what she means but you might not
1231 actually mean that I might be thinking what I mean... so I guess as the
1232 student again here is what I understand... here is what I think you said... I
1233 build up the area... and stop me at any point if what I'm saying doesn't
1234 sound like what you said. You said I build up the area you build up the
1235 area and the area sometimes increases
1236 Romina: Well at each point because of the way this slope of the purple graph is
1237 going say you had an area I don't know if you could assign at like 5 units
1238 of some sort, the area of at point a would be 5 units at some point.
1239 Pantozzi 5 total units?
404
1240 Romina: Yeah just at that point I don't think that's like.
1241 Pantozzi: Let me make something that does that.
1242 Romina: Is that permissible can you take a point.
1243 Angela: Have like a perfect.
1244 Romina: Yeah, say like a.
1245 Pantozzi: That's 2 1/2.
1246 Romina: Yeah that's what I mean
1247 Pantozzi: And this would be...
1248 Romina: That's going to obviously be like more because your slope is increasing.
1249 Pantozzi: What's going to be more?
1250 Romina: Your area under from point... I could count... your point at 2 is. is less
1251 than your point at... OK your point at 4 has more area underneath than
1252 your point at 2 because your slope is increasing you are allowing more
1253 area.
1254 Pantozzi: The slope of what is increasing
1255 Romina: The slope of the line is increasing.
1256 Angela: The slope of the purple function is increasing
1257 Romina: So if you take a look at the red line.
1258 Magda: No no no the slope of your function is not increasing.
1259 Angela: It's staying the same but it's going higher up.
1260 Romina: The slope, yeah.
1261 Magda: The whole thing is you're adding on more area.
1262 Pantozzi: I'm listening, go ahead.
1263 Magda: As you go, you know,
1264 Romina: See your area is not going to be as much wait, is that the same.
1265 Pantozzi: I changed it from x to one half x I can change it to anything you want.
1266 Romina: Can you keep this and do 1 x
1267 Pantozzi: Good question.
1268 Romina: Can you keep this whole thing on and then do a function as 1 x.
1269 Romina: If you can't I understand...
1270 Pantozzi: Oh, I can do this. I'm here to grant your wishes today.
1271 Romina: You act like you designed this or something.
1272 Pantozzi: I give a lot of credit to the people who actually did design it... all right so
1273 I need to... we were on page 9 of the other one.
1274 Romina: (inaudible)
1275 Angela: Transparence,
1276 Romina: I'm impressed, Tozzi.
1277 Pantozzi OK, so this one is .5 x, and you want me to change this one to like x like it
1278 was before.
1279 Romina: Yeah: see that one has a steeper slope, it doesn't really have a.
1280 Angela: it's twice as big
1281 Romina: You're right, it doesn't...that slope thing is messing me up.
1282 Angela: The slope is not changing its actually increasing at the same rate right, no
1283 that's the slope... well no its not.
1284 Romina: Like if you're going for at the same speed, you're always going to be
1285 covering, you're covering the same amount of distance per minute but
405
you're always going to be increasing your distance unless you're going

1287 forwards and backwards in which case your slope would change from
1288 negative to positive across zero so it's not more slope... because you're
1289 increasing your area...
1290 Angela: More accumulation.
1291 Romina: .. .and then when you take the derivative of the red one.
1292 Magda: No but, if you look at the red graph and at x = 6 of the red graph.
1293 Romina: Which.
1294 Magda: The one to the right. The slope of the red graph...
1295 Angela: That's 8?
1296 Magda: It's 6. At x = 6 look at the red graph
1297 Angela: No I meant...
1298 Magda: The slope of that graph at 6 would be 3 and then but
1299 Angela: Oh, OK.
1300 Magda: If you move up if you are accumulating more area the slope is going to be
1301 bigger because.
1302 Romina: The slope is...
1303 Angela: It's getting bigger there is more area like per interval.
1304 Romina: If you take the derivative of the red line.
1305 Magda: It's getting greater because you're adding more area it's getting more...
1306 Romina: The rates going to stay the same but.
1307 Magda: No it's not it's going to get greater its going higher up.
1308 Romina: The rate of the rate is getting greater.
1309 Angela: the distance between the original function and the x axis is increasing.
1310 Magda: If you think about it.
1311 Romina: OK let's say this is going to go up... this rate is increasing at a particular
1312 rate a constant rate
1314 Angela: Forget about the line and look at the area, you kno what I'm saying, like
1315 Magda: Here it's like 2 1/2, the slope would be 2 and 1/2 and but here, you move
1316 one over, over here, you move only one over and hold on I can't find...
1317 the slope already is I can't see
1318 Angela: Magda's blocking the projector our chance to see.
1319 Pantozzi Three is this is three.
1320 Magda: Oh this is three.
1321 Romina: ( pointing to the red parabola) the rate of this one is increasing at a
1322 constant rate of 0.5
1323 Romina: What I'm saying is the rate of this one (pointing again to the red parabola)
1324 is increasing at a constant rate of 0.5 I don't know, maybe I'm wrong
1325 Angela: the slope of that line yes, but not the area underneath, right?
1326 Romina: I'm not talking about the area underneath the red one.
1327 Angela: I'm not even talking about the red line.
1328 Romina: I'm talking about the rate of the red line because if when if you take the
1329 derivative of the red line to have to get the purple line and this is the slope
1330 is increasing for the red line so it can't be that so obviously we know it's
1331 the red line not the purple line because the purple has a constant slope but
1332 the way we get from the red line to the purple line is taking the rate of the
1333 rate is that making any sense.
1334 Magda: I don't.
1335 Magda: I don't understand what you are saying, the rate of the rate.
1336 Romina: Push me there Magda, I'm almost there
1337 Magda: Well what are you saying the rate of the rate I don't understand the
1338 wording.
1339 Romina: The red one is not constant it has, it's growing.
1340 Angela: It's a curve.
1341 Romina: But at the rate at which the curve is growing is a constant so it doesn't like
1342 it's not like growing at 25% at one point, then it increases, not even grows,
1343 then it increases at 25%, then it increases at 50% it's not like that it
1344 increases at a steady pace
1345 Angela: Does it do that for every kind of graph though?
1346 Romina: Just this one.
1347 Angela: Because it's a straight line
1348 Romina: Increases as .5.
1349 Magda: It doesn't increase by point 5.
1350 Romina: Then how do we get the slope here to be .5 Magda?
1351 Angela: This line is.
1352 Magda: That lines' slope is .5.
1353 Angela: The purple line is .5.
1354 Romina: This line's slope, this line somehow the derivative of this has to equal that
1355 slope, no?
1356 Magda: Yes, I understand that.
1357 Romina: I'm obviously not saying this right...
1358 Romina: If this grew, if this was one slope is... here one slope, here's another
1359 slope, this slope is...
1360 Magda: This slope is 0.5 times at whatever point you are.
1361 Romina: The rate at which the rates... the rates at which the slope of the red line is
1362 growing increasing in this case is.
1363 Magda: Point 5.
1364 Romina: 0.5 which is the derivative that's what I mean.
1365 Magda: OK that makes sense but like say you have cosine.
1366 Romina: You know what it is I really don't think about cosine very often.
1367 Angela: Who needs cosine!
1368 Romina: Cosine has to be the same thing.
1369 Angela: Circles stink.
1370 Romina: Cosine is like a lot of little parabolas., the word parabola... so., if there
1371 were parabolas... it depends like though I don't know how the slope here
1372 goes.
1373 Angela: There you go, have a graph, (hands Romina a graphing calculator)
1374 Romina: Is this the integral for this?
1375 Angela: The integral for what? Cosine? Oh yeah, yes, I didn't know if you were
1376 trying...
1377 Romina This.
407
1378 Angela: 1/3 xA3 for xA2 I graphed that wrong last time I only graphed x A 3, not 1/3
1379 x cubed.
1380 Magda: That's right.
1381 Romina: So this, the area. Cause this is all, like I'm trying to think how the rate of
1382 the rate would work, yeah it would because this is like...
1383 Angela: Yeah like on this one the slope is changing all the time
1384 Romina: And this time it's decreasing well but is this is a perfect x squared the then
1385 wouldn't this be decreasing at the same rate.
1386 Magda: Well of this is decreasing and the slope is negative obviously (referring to
1387 the x squared graph that Romina drew)
1388 Romina: Yeah so this is increasing and the so its positive but then if you like so if
1389 you have a cosine.
1390 Magda: This function is always increasing, (referring back to the cubic graph that
1391 Romina drew)
1392 Romina: Yes but what I'm saying is that when I look at these I think of a bunch of
1393 like these So this would have to be going du du... like this, you know, but
1394 this goes negative.
1395 Magda: Well but it doesn't because this goes into the negatives.
1396 Angela: So it goes down
1397 Romina: Yeah, um.
1398 Angela: So it doesn't keep increasing it goes down like this
1399 Romina: This is how I think about it... as separate entities., that's just how I think
1400 about it what about e to the x?
1401 Angela: What are you doing?
1402 Romina: She was the one who asked me... I was happy with my explanation
1403 before. Have we reached the level of
1404 Pantozzi: Me as student I listen to you guys talk, I say wow. They're talking about
1405 derivatives, they're talking about integrals, When you ay, that purple
1406 graph, what did you say? the purple graph, how is that related to the red
1407 graph?
1408 Magda: It's the area... no, it's the...
1409 Angela: (inaudible)
1411 Magda: The purple graph is the derivative of the red graph
1412 Pantozzi: I don't see how you know that.
1413 Romina: Because if i...
1414 Pantozzi I'm not saying that its wrong, I'm just saying I don't know how you know
1415 that. You guys just seem to say that, here I am as the student... I was
1416 talking about area, and all of a sudden, bang you're talking about
1417 derivatives. Whoa I learned that two months ago, that was chapter one.
1418 Magda: That's old news, right?
1419 Romina: The derivative is the slope, right.
1420 Pantozzi OK.
1421 Romina: You know that.
1422 Pantozzi I know that.
1423 Romina: When we look at that we take the slope of the red line which is the purple
1424 line.
1425 Pantozzi: How do you know it's that purple line and not some other purple line?
1426 Romina: Because...
1427 Pantozzi: Do you understand what I'm saying?
1428 Romina: Yeah.
1429 Angela:
1430 Pantozzi: How about some other purple line with some other slope.
1431 Angela: The rate on which the slope of that is changing.
1432 Romina: See I don't necessarily...I don't know this is kind of hard to say., the
1433 derivative of x squared is 2 x is that easier for you to visualize are we not
1434 ready for that? This is harder for me to think about conceptually because
1435 it's not...
1436 Magda: The way I think about it if you take the rate at seven, right, at x = 7 on the
1437 red line that would equal around 11 right?
1438 Angela: (laughs) Yeah, 11.
1439 Pantozzi: 7, yeah.
1440 Magda: That would equal around 11. and then you want to find the slope between
1441 six and seven of the red line, right.
1442 Romina: When you do that Magda isn't like the slope of that there that (Romina
1443 traces her hand from the x axis at (7,0) to the graph of 1/2 x over to the y
1444 axis at 3.5.
1445 Magda: Yeah but, you're trying to find the slope of that (the red one) line at well
1446 basically what you were doing you're goingl 1 - 9, no 8.
1447 Pantozzi: 8.
1448 Magda: 11- 8 is 3, divided by the change which is one.
1449 Angela: So the slope is 3.
1450 Magda: Yes.
1451 Angela: Approximately
1452 Pantozzi: So that's 3, right, I understand that, the slope is 3, the slope from here to
1453 here is 3.
1454 Magda: Yeah so when you go down and look at 6 on the other graph you get 3.
1455 Romina: That's exactly my reasoning.
1456 Pantozzi: Is that what you were saying?
1457 Romina: And obviously I didn't articulate it well... and then when you... and then
1458 that has a slope of 0.5 because it, I mean it shows you how the slope
1459 increases on the red line but it's increasing at a steady rate making a
1460 steady rate of
1461 Magda: A rate of 0.5.
1462 Romina: Good job Magda.
1463 Romina: Really good explanation.
1464 Pantozzi I need to think about what you said.
1465 Angela: That's the rate that that line's slope is changing.
1466 Romina: The purple line just plots the slopes at certain points on the red line; plots
1467 if the slope is 3, it plots three, if the slope is 3.1, it plots at 3.1
1468 Pantozzi Say that again.
1469 Romina: It just plots the actual numerical value, the slope's numerical value then
409
when you take the slopes of the graphing... the points of the slope of the
1471 red line, why do I even bother to try, its...
1472 Magda: Basically.
1473 Romina: Point 5.
1474 Magda: It's growing at 0.5 the slope is increasing at .5 because if you look at that,
1475 you're every time OK between five and six you added up like 2.75 of
1476 area and between six and seven you added 3.25 of area which is 0.5 more
1477 so your slope is increasing by 0.5.
1478 Pantozzi: So here I added on 2.75 I see that and here added on 3.25 of area I
1479 understand as the student that means that this graph went up 3.25 and I
1480 guess that means from also from here to here.
1481 Magda: Um hum.
1482 Pantozzi: It went up how much? (pointing with the mouse to the red parabola)
1483 Magda: 2.75.
1484 Pantozzi: 2.75 so by going up by 2.75 that makes the slope of this 2.75 is that what
1485 you're saying.
1486 Magda: No.
1487 Angela: Yeah doesn't it because you're going over 1, and up 2.75.
1488 Magda: Yeah that what I'm saying.
1489 Pantozzi: Hmmm... I'm doing my double identity again... this particular thing, the
1490 fundamental theorem is something I've thought a lot about and I keep
1491 thinking about... which is why we're having this conversation today about
1492 it... so tell me if what I'm saying, if what I'm saying matches what you
1493 think you're saying.
1494 Pantozzi: So I do the area, the red graph plots how much area I have got
1495 Magda: Uh huh.
1496 Pantozzi And it goes up by certain amounts it goes up by amounts equal to the area
1497 under here.
1498 Magda: Uh huh.
1499 Pantozzi And then because of that? what when I take the slope of this I get the slope
1500 like this slope here is 3.25.
1501 Magda: Um hum.
1502 Pantozzi And this area right here is 3.25 so the slope of this equals that whole area?
1503 Magda: Yes.
1504 Angela: It doesn't equal the area it equals the point on the line right? Am I wrong?
1505 Wait? I don't think it equals the area.
1506 Romina: The area equals
1507 Angela: The area equals where it is on the line, not the slope, the slope... the slope
1508 doesn't equal the area...
1509 Romina: The way I see it this part 3.5 whatever, (pointing to the area under the
1510 graph) equals the slope there.
1511 Angela: Oh, OK OK.
1512 Romina: these got stacked on top of each other you may be thinking of the area
1513 under there...
1514 Angela: No, I was just, I wasn't, I was straightening things out in my head.
1515 Magda: Yes that's what we're saying.
410
1516 Pantozzi: OK so
1517 Romina: A unanimous yes.
1518 Pantozzi: So does that help me make sense of what this says then can you relate
1519 what you said to that? (Referring to the statement
eb
1520 f(x)dx - g{b) - g(a).) Maybe it doesn't, I don't know. I understand as
Ja
1521
the student and I think as myself what you said.
1522 Romina:
Integral of the purple function (pointing to the statement) isn't that
1523 exactly, isn't that exactly what we just said.
1524 Pantozzi: Take it apart for me bit by bit.
1525 Romina: the integral from here to here a to b equals.
1526 Angela: The slope.
1527 Romina: This kind of like got stacked up there so it equals the slope the slope tells
1528 you the area no yes.. .that's why I keep.
1529 Pantozzi: What does this...
1530 Angela: That means like it.
1531 Romina: One.
1532 Angela: The red line is the integral no.
1533 Romina: Yeah, We're taking the integral of the purple line isn't that what the first
1534 part is saying, integral of the purple line.
1535 Angela: Isn't that just talking about the area I'm confused
1536 Romina: Coming from me that's right. You know the purple line.
1537 Angela: Hum.
1538 Romina: Integral of which
1539 Angela: the integral of the purple line is the red line, right.
1540 Romina: Yeah but I mean that part of it would be the integral of the purple line
1541 from a to b would be 3.5
1542 Angela: G.
1543 Romina: Equals the area under just that point, so it's telling you, kind of like you
1544 are sectioning off that particular area on the red line
1545 Angela: From a to b
1546 Romina: on the red line that particular area, that particular spot... to take the slope
1547 of.
1548 (silence for about a minute)
1549 Magda: Yeah because.
1550 Romina: This is hard because...
1551 Magda: Like if you take g of b right,
1553 Magda: Say b is in our case seven whatever we say in our example b is 7, and the
1554 a would be the six, right.
1555 Angela: Yeah.
1556 Magda: So if you think about it that gives you the change,
1557 Romina: Slope is change.
1558 Magda: That gives you the slope of that.
1559 Romina: Magda, you're being very articulate person today... happens every day.
1560 Magda: But then if say if like if it's not one, don't, wouldn't you have to divide it
411
1561 by interval.
1562 Romina: Are you saying you want to see x squared? This is messing me up because
1563 they are so similar. 1 work better with something
1564 Magda: Can you give us a different... like it harder graph.
1565 Pantozzi: A harder graph?
1566 Magda: like an x squared or something.
1567 Pantozzi: Which graph you want me to make x squared?
1568 Magda: F(x)
1569 Pantozzi: So make this x squared?
1570 Magda: Yeah.
1571 Romina: Can you stop it from the next point over from, yeah. The area underneath
1572 that part is about 1.25 so the slope is about 1.25 of that line
1573 Magda: No it's like 5 6 7.
1574 Romina: Oh, I didn't see..
1575 Magda: Uh huh.
1576 Romina: Can you draw that line on a different point
1577 Pantozzi: How do you mean,
1578 Romina: Starting like at five going to is, the red line.
1579 Pantozzi: You want to see, like this over here.
1580 Romina: I want to see just this portion,
1581 Pantozzi: Just this portion, not that.
1582 Romina: Yeah. Or anywhere, you can start it at three.
1583 Pantozzi: Is that what you meant?
1584 Romina: Yeah, so the area, see the area from 5 to 6 is like 12 3 4 5.
1585 Magda: Like 6.
1586 Romina: 6 units.
1587 Pantozzi: These are 10... 5 each this way right now.
1588 Romina: So it's about 30.
1589 Magda: Um hum.
1590 Romina: The slope from five to six of the red line is 30 over 1. Thirty. Saying
1591 exactly what that was saying.
1592 Pantozzi So that's what that says?
1593 Romina: Maybe we should take it over a bigger span so we do over all the areas,
1594 because the slope could be changing from b to a when you take a
1595 Angela: May be like from 3 to 7.
1596 Magda: Yeah but then you'd have to divide it by the interval that you're taking the
1597 thing over.
1598 Angela: But it's less accurate if it's a bigger... right.
1599 Magda: No, it would be very accurate.
1600 Romina: That's how I think about with area when I take a big span,
1601 Magda: Um hum.
1602 Romina: Then you subtract...
1603 Magda: Can you like go...
1604 Romina: Can you start like over there (to the left) increasing, increasing ... zero...
1605 actually can you move the graph down... our purple graph down to like x
1606 squared 3,1 mean minus 5.
412
1607 Romina: When the slope is decreasing when have negative area and it like cancels
1608 itself out negative area of like a half no yeah, a half.
1609 Magda: So say you go from 1 2, 3, 4, at 4.
1610 Romina: Negative 4.
1611 Magda: Negative 4. From like negative four and negative 2, you want find that
1612 slope.
1613 Romina: The slope changes... you can't find it, it doesn't have one slope
1614 Angela: Lots of.
1615 Romina: Because the slope increases and then decreases because it's a positive area
1616 and a negative area.
1617 Angela: That just shows how the rate changes.
1618 Magda: Hold on...
1619 Romina: Even if you take from two things to the left of b... no, you don't have to
1620 move it.. .it's just like, if you start two points behind that, and we go to b,
1621 that area, that slope right there went from, you know, well it's pretty
1622 similar at the beginning, then slope is always changing... flattens out, then
1623 negative, ... negative... so you can't think of it like that.. .and the slope of
1624 the red one is changing at a rate of the purple one.
1625 Angela: The rate of the rate.
1626 Pantozzi: As the student I have a question and I'd like to use just a very simple
1627 example (Pantozzi changes the graph to f(x) = 3) Can you recap what you
1628 said with this example right now.
1630 Romina: Our purple graph at each unit that it moves requires three units of area and
1631 our red graph is growing at no it's not growing it has a rate of 3 because
1632 that's how much our purple one is growing by like the accumulated area.
1633 Angela: The area under the purple.
1634 Pantozzi: The area under the purple is doing what?
1635 Romina: It's increasing at a rate of three
1636 Angela: Constant.
1637 Romina: Per point per unit.
1638 Pantozzi So how about if I only went like halfway there like this.
1639 Romina: You increase half of 3
1640 Magda: Which is one half which gives you the s...
1641 Romina: That's the slope of the red line is 1.5.
1642 Pantozzi The slope of the red line is...
1643 Angela: No... that's where the red line goes up to.
1644 Romina: Oh hold on the slope of the red line.
1645 Magda: The slope is still three... the slope is still three.
1646 Romina: Oh, right, sorry.
1647 Magda: Because you took only half of the block before you were increasing by
1648 threes but now you only increase by before you're taking going over on the
1649 x's by ones but now you are going on the x's by no you went over by 0.5
1650 only 0.5 so you got to multiply so you've got to one times three it was
1651 growing by three so now it's 0.5 times three is 1.5
1652 Pantozzi So this area right here right now in purple is 1.5
1653 Magda: 1.5.
1654 Angela: 1.5.
1655 Pantozzi: But this doesn't make the slope of that to 1.5.
1656 Magda: No.
1657 Angela: No.
1658 Romina: If you move it it still makes it three. I don't... because your slope from,
1659 from point 4 to 5 the slope of the red line is still three because it's a
1660 constant it's constant.
1661 Magda: It's less, it made less of a jump between the things.
1662 Angela: The interval that you're going from is smaller; so I mean like, the slope's
1663 is going to be the same... where the lines ends up where the line stops...
1664 Romina: Can you take the slope from 4 to 4.5 is 1.5 and you cut everything down
1665 like that then the slope of the line would be 1.5 when.
1666 Angela: ?
1667 Magda: So you're dividing by 0.5 so basically you're kind of multiplying by that
1668 you know what I'm saying so here you're going like
1670 Magda: 4.5 minus the four and then dividing it over 0.5.
1671 Romina: Point 5.
1672 Magda: Which is you know like multiplying.
1673 Romina: Ohhh. I'll be quite honest with you...
1674 Angela: .. .not even one little bit.
1675 Pantozzi: Don't worry... ignore that... that's just a graph that's up there now. Do
1676 you have any comments about the slope of the red graph or what you've
1677 been talking about, the slope again.
1678 Angela: At the cusps...is that what you call it?
1679 Magda: The derivative is undefined at the cusps
1680 Angela: That I remember.
1681 Pantozzi: Like there's, would you, there's the red graph and it got some... I don't
1682 even know how much area it is exactly here, but say I get to here,
1683 Magda: OK.
1684 Pantozzi: Can you tell me what the slope of the red graph is just by looking at it like
1685 this.
1686 Romina: A little bit over one.
1687 Magda: Well take that's whatever... negative 0.5 minus.
1688 Angela: What points are you using it takes two points to make a slope It doesn't
1689 have one slope.
1690 Magda: No it is...
1691 Angela: Here where... I'm just saying the slope from where.
1692 Magda: (inaudible) graph.. .like., negative .5 over...
1693 Romina: Can't you look directly at the graph? from seven to eight it's a little bit
1694 over one, the slope because the area is a little bit over one unit and then
1695 over there from 4 to 5 its negative a little but over one because the area is
1696 a little bit below one just by looking at it...
1697 Angela: It's not, there.. Where that one point is it's like the slope of that on the
1698 purple.
414
1699 Magda: At what points are you taking?

1700 Romina: At any point, at any one point
1701 Angela: You're looking at the end, right...
1702 Romina: What, oh oh, looking at the end, at any one point the slope equals the area
1703 whether it is positive or negative area that's the way I always think about
1704 under its negative area over positive area so like from 4 to 5 the slope is
1705 negative 1.15
1706 Magda: OK.
1707 Romina: ?
1708 Angela: But you can't look at the whole thing at that little pokey spot it changes.
1709 Romina: It's still negative just less negative or its still positive just less positive so
1710 your slope decreases because it is less positive you're still accumulating
1711 positive area just accumulating less amounts of it.
1712 Angela: Right and so... and that those spots its undefined.
1713 Pantozzi: Let me ask you a question as the student maybe as me too... let's suppose
1714 the area under here is exactly two if that area is 2 I don't know how I
1715 know that let's just suppose it is... I made it with water and poured it out
1716 or something. If this area is 2, what does that tell me about the red
1717 graph... anything?
1718 Magda: That.
1719 Angela: In that section that's how much it's going to increase right, from like that
1720 point to that point, it will go up to.
1721 Magda: It will go up two.
1722 Angela: No no wrong.
1723 Magda: But you've got to divide it by the interval that you are going over the
1724 slope, the slope is gonna... no the line is going to grow, it's going to
1725 increase so that it has a slope of 2 over that interval like so that interval
1726 looks like three.
1727 Pantozzi: From here to here you're talking about so that interval is about three.
1728 Magda: Say three. So it's two divided by three... your slope would be like two-
1729 thirds.
1730 Pantozzi: The slope of what is 2/3.
1731 Magda: The slope of the red line.
1732 Pantozzi: Where?
1733 Romina: You lost me at two thirds.
1734 Pantozzi: This area is 2, and Magda said from here to here let's say it's three.
1735 Romina: OK, So the slope you're saying is ... but you can't say that...
1736 Angela: But that's not the slope because it is a curve like if that were straight line
1737 that would be the slope but it's not because that's not just
1738 Romina: The way I think about it as if you're driving a car from point A to point B
1739 like you could drive really fast and then really slow and then really fast or
1740 really fast and then really slow to get 3 mi. or.. 3 miles... so the area that
1741 you'd cover would be kind of does that mean the average rate that you are
1742 going... I'm so wrong...
1743 Pantozzi Well continue what you were going to say.
1744 Romina: I don't want to be more wrong....
415
1745 Pantozzi: Remember the more you talk to the better this is for other people... for
1746 humanity...
1747 Romina: Like, this is the cat.
1748 Angela: No pressure.
1749 Pantozzi: Now, not that kind of pressure.
1750 Romina: You can't you're constantly well not constantly you're changing your
1751 slope on the red line yeah if you're changing, well almost constantly.
1752 Angela: It is isn't it like you could keep going smaller and smaller and smaller with
1753 your intervals.
1754 Romina: You're changing your slope constantly but from point A to point B you're
1755 covering x amount of area
1756 Angela: Two.
1757 Pantozzi: Two.
1758 Romina: So the average rate at which your red line is the slopes of your red line you
1759 know what I'm
1760 Magda: Increasing or decreasing...
1761 Romina: Are an average of your slopes... the average is the slope of., no...
1762 Angela: If it is just that chunk then it is two thirds
1763 Magda: That's what I'm saying it's the average...
1764 Romina: I was just thinking, when you said 2/3.
1765 Angela: That's just like so... That's just like so taking the graph and being like...
1766 Magda: But that's not the average because you're no going by one interval
1767 Romina: ... numbers...
1768 Angela: That's why we're good as a team...
1769 Pantozzi: Were about to run out of tape,
1770 Magda: That's like taking the average between because you're going like one
1771 interval...
1772 Pantozzi: We're close to running out of tape so can you look back at that... you were
1773 talking about something being 2 and were talking about something being 3
1774 and let say this is 6.2 and this is 9.2. Can you put those numbers in here?
1775 Angela: So b is 9.2.
1776 Pantozzi: So what what's what?
1777 Angela: So B is 9.2 and a is 6.2.
1778 Pantozzi: F is the purple function.
1779 Romina: F of 3 equals 2.
1780 Pantozzi: So What equals 2?
1781 Romina: No, that doesn't equal 2, wait.
1782 Magda: Thatg(b)-g(a) = 2.
1783 Romina: A.
1784 Pantozzi That whole thing equals 2.
1785 Romina: Yeah.
1786 Pantozzi Thank you.
1787 Romina: Do you not agree?
1788 Pantozzi I'm saying thank you.
1789 Angela: You're welcome.
416
Appendix D: Transcript of Session 2 with Group 2, July 24,2003.
1 Pantozzi: Whether someone can be said to understand the fundamental theorem ...
2 is, you know, I don't have any understanding meter that I put up to you
3 and it ticks faster if I put it up to one person and slow when its up to the
4 next.. .for myself it's something I can say that I've needed to think about
5 over many years to really get what it's for, what it means, and then why
6 it's true - and I keep looking at it - if you ask me on a certain day, I might
7 give you an answer I wouldn't feel entirely confident about... and
8 particularly, when I go and present this, to, I was presenting this to urn..
9 someone at Columbia University and was the chairperson of the math
10 department... and it was...
11 Brian: Big deal.
12 Pantozzi: Yeah, big deal... math guy and I was like... mmmm....
13 Sherly: [laughs]
14 Pantozzi: Will it look like I don't know what I'm talking about... that's a big
15 question for researchers in math education., we're interested in how do
16 people think about certain things... and that's why we're here again today.
17 I thought we might start, One of the things you asked for at the end of the
18 session last time was a specific question to answer, OK, and so that's what
19 we're going to start with.. .and then we'll go into using some of this. OK,
20 you need to get some graph paper.
21 Brian: Graph paper.
22 Pantozzi: [draws graph below on the screen]
23 Sherly: Thanks.
24 Robert: Thanks.
25 Sherly: Do we have to draw.. .the derivative... the integral.. .1 thought we had to
26 draw the integral.
27 Brian: Augh...what is that again?
28 Sherly: Look at it...
29 Brian: Graph of the area...
30 Sherly: Underneath the graph...
31 Brian: Graph of the slope
32 Sherly: Well the graph of the slope is the derivative
33 Robert: The integral is like total area or something., smaller intervals.
34 Sherly: (Laughs)
35 Pantozzi: OK, here we go.. .That's a graph of that's f of x if you want to draw that
36 on your graph paper you can if you don't want to, you don't have to.. .but
37 it will stay up there...
38 Robert: Problem with the ant...
39 Sherly: The ant?
40 Brian: That's f(x)?
41 Pantozzi: That's f(x)
42 Sherly: Oh wow.
43 Pantozzi: Cool stuff.
44 Brian: Mac OS ten.
417
45 Pantozzi: Ummhum. We'll go to Mac OS 9 for this part of it.

46 Robert: It's not compatible?
47 Pantozzi: What's that?
48 Robert: Doesn't work on ten?
49 Pantozzi: Yeah this program isn't hasn't been updated to version 10 yet. They said
50 September.
51 Brian: Oh yeah?
52 Robert: We could have asked them at the Mac Expo, but uh, our tickets got lost.
53 Pantozzi: Oh, I asked them at the math conference. They had screen shots of it so
54 they might have been faking it.
55 Brian: (Laughs)
56 Pantozzi: But they had screen shots of this program in OS ten version.
57 Brian: What the...
59 Brian: Geometer's Sketchpad really got intense, huh?
60 Sherly: I know!
61 Robert: It really took off...
62 Brian: .. .you're doing some good work on this program...
63 Pantozzi: They have been doing quite a lot of work on it actually.
64 Robert: It wasn't this complex back in like 6th grade was it?
65 Brian: No.
66 Pantozzi: No, I don't think it was.
67 Brian: You can do like anything on this...
68 Robert: (whispers)
69 Sherly: Is it? It is?
70 Robert: No, it's...
71 Sherly: It really bothers me... does it?
72 Robert: No.
73 Pantozzi: OK, this graph that you're looking at is the graph of f(x) and the first
74 question, and this question is like ones that you encountered in AP
75 Calculus back4years ago now...
76 Brian: Whoa...
77 Pantozzi: The first question is, um, draw a graph of function g of x if that's what
78 g(x) equals (the integral from 0 to x of f of t dt has been typed up on the
79 screen as the definition of g(x))
80 Sherly: You want an integral?
81 Pantozzi: Yeah, it says the integral from 0 to x of f of t dt.
82 Sherly: Integral.
83 Brian: Straightedge.
84 Sherly: Yeah. You want the other side. I can cut it in half.
85 Brian: Are you talking to me?
86 Sherly: Yeah. Bobby said no already.
87 Brian: I'll go with the squiggly lines.
88 Sherly: Help... I don't get it... where you start, do you start right... Brian do you
89 know how to draw an integral?
90 Brian: You talking to me?
418
91 Sherly: Yeah, if you start at 3, and then., to five from there? Like when you go
92 down?
93 Brian: Hold on, let me draw the graph.
94 Sherly: Bobby,
95 Robert: Huh?
96 Sherly: How do you draw an integral?
97 Robert: I don't know... remember...
98 Sherly: When does it go down? when it goes to the axis?
99 Robert: When it's below
100 Sherly: But if...
101 Robert: The x axis when it's negative it's like negative area, you know.
102 Sherly: What, it's negative area so it goes down? But up where it's like.
103 Robert: Like I think anything above the x axis is positive and anything below it's
104 negative...
105 Sherly: OK...But see where it's flat does it go up more or does it go up more this
106 way or would it go up.
107 Robert: It starts at zero, anyways...
108 Brian: Yeah...
109 Robert: And then you ignore anything over here
110 Sherly: Why?
111 Robert: Because the integral's from 0 to x.
112 Robert: So start at three.
113 Sherly: Three? And then you add two more?
114 Robert: That's what I think...
115 Sherly: Ehh...
116 Robert: I think you start at zero.
117 Sherly: Oh, oops.
118 Robert: I'm not sure. I'm not sure.
119 Sherly: That's all right.
120 Robert: I think it would. Or it doesn't matter where you start, I don't know.
121 Brian: (inaudible)
122 Sherly: Do you go down or...across.
123 Robert: Starting at two,
124 Sherly: Yeah.
125 Robert: Then it's definitely down...going down.
126 Sherly: But then there's oh, so it goes down, wait, I don't like that... sorry.
127 Brian: It's the area under the graph, right?
128 Sherly: But then it goes...
129 Brian: Is that one right? (pointing to the graph of the integral Robert is drawing)
130 Robert: I think so, I think it's going to end up being like at the end... Because it's
131 going to be zero right here...shift it over a little, you know what I mean?
132 Brian: Where it crosses zero what does that do... it changes the direction?
133 Robert: The direction, yeah, because it starts going down it's decreasing.
134 Sherly: But then...my graph's off a little bit here...hold on.
135 Brian: This is just an approximation, right,
136 Robert: Yeah, that's what I think...
419
137 Brian: Half the boxes and stuff...

138 Brian: Like minus 4, that's plus one half, this is plus three halves...
139 Sherly: How come yours goes down into there?
140 Robert: What does?
141 Sherly: Oh, this is negative. Is it this one or this one.
142 Robert: It's this thing.
143 Sherly: The dark one?
144 Robert: Yeah.
145 Sherly: Oh. I think I'm wrong.
146 Robert: I don't know.
147 Brian: Yours goes down below, right?
148 Robert: Yeah it goes down below.
149 Brian: Half a box (Brian's graph is to the right)
150 Robert: Yeah...
151 Sherly: Why?
152 Robert: Because it's more negative...
153 Brian: The area negative is.
154 Robert: More than the positive and at the end it's positive.
155 Sherly: OK., but...
156 Brian: Because figure from zero to two there's.
157 Sherly: Three...
158 Brian: Three and half boxes.
159 Sherly: OK.
160 Brian: And then from 2 to 6 there'd be about.
161 Sherly: No, but don't you.
162 Brian: Negative 4 boxes.
163 Sherly: Oh.
164 Brian: Alright, so zero to one, right, you're at two and a half.
165 Sherly: Wouldn't you start at, OK, at zero, you would have three, right,
166 Brian: From zero you have zero, because right, because at zero you have no area
167 because.
168 Robert: That's where you start, yeah.
169 Sherly: Oh, OK.
170 Brian: And from 0 to 1 there is two and half boxes
171 Robert: Right, so you go up to 2 and a half.
172 Brian: OK then between one and two of there's one box.
173 Sherly: You have one half
174 Brian: I say about one, the triangle.
175 Sherly: From one to two?
176 Brian: Yeah.
177 Sherly: Why one and ... oh, cause it's not...
178 Brian: Yeah, I mean look at the area below that line, that little triangle, it looks
179 like you could flip it. Some geometry on you there.
180 Sherly: All righty.
181 Brian: So then there's that's an extra one, so you have three and a half.
182 Sherly: But then it goes down.
420
183 Brian: And from 2 to 3, -1/2 it's negative at 3,

185 Brian: The next one you go down 1/2 more and then you go down another 1 and
186 a half and then half and then you go up a half and just continue it, it
187 guess..
189 Brian: If that line says consistent then, that line would just be parallel to it right
190 Robert: Yeah it goes up constant but we don't know if it's ... where do you have it
191 crossing zero yeah same place right right like there...
192 Brian: Five?
193 Robert: Yeah.
194 Sherly: Mine is a little shifted.
195 Robert: Yeah, I screwed...
196 Sherly: Lost it...
197 Robert: Go for broke.
198 Brian: Double check.
199 Sherly: (Laughs) I don't like the... understand...
200 Robert: It's cut off...
201 Brian: Well this is it this is it.
202 Robert: Yeah. I did key points, you seen that where it starts, where it crosses zero.
203 Sherly: Yeah.
204 Robert: That's a key point you know that's going to be the top of so I just kind of
205 put a dot there, and then just drew like, kind of just kind of...
206 Sherly: Oh I see what you are saying.
207 Robert: You know what I mean?
208 Sherly: And then you like...
209 Robert: And then like I looked where it is going to be cross zero again, I put you
210 know, a dot there... no, I mean, like the way I do it, I put the dot there
211 and I put the dot here (He draws) because that is where it is zero, a dot
212 here... and I just kind of went like this (showing how he connects his dots
213 with a smooth curve)
214 Sherly: How did you know that was zero?
215 Robert: Well I looked at...
216 Pantozzi: When you get done with that your next question is going to be, draw the
217 derivative of the graph you just drew.
218 Robert: OK.
219 Sherly: OK.
220 Brian: Is the derivative a graph of the slopes?
221 Robert: Yeah.
222 Pantozzi: Draw the derivative of g.
223 Sherly: OK.
224 Robert: So you know the key points, and I knew it was increasing between here
225 and here and I knew it was decreasing between here and here you know
226 what I mean?
227 Sherly: Yeah I do but...
228 Robert: Derivative...
421

230 Robert: The next one...
231 Brian: How do we find the slopes of this?
232 Brian: At 0 it is 0.
233 Robert: Why can't I even draw a straight line on the graph I drew a straight line in
234 the middle of two boxes.
235 Sherly: Here...
236 Robert: No, I mean like I drew a straight line down the middle.
237 Sherly: Instead of.
238 Robert: Like on the line.
239 Brian: One would still be two and a half right.
240 Sherly: We drawing the derivative of g of x?
241 Robert: Yeah, the derivative of that.
242 Sherly: The derivative of this? (pointing to the graph she has just drawn on her
243 paper) isn't that the same thing as that (pointing to the board)
244 Robert: Well no... I guess it would be I don't know.
245 Robert: Because this is
246 Sherly: The integral
247 Robert: This is f x that's the whole thing and this is only from 0 to.
248 Sherly: Oh but if you are taking it from zero isn't it the same thing.
250 Sherly: I still managed to do it wrong.
251 Robert: It's OK.
252 Sherly: Why does it cross at five I still don't understand.
253 Robert: Cause like well look at the original graph right say that there's 2 whole
254 squares...
255 Sherly: Yeah.
256 Robert: And then there's a half see a half, there's a triangle that's one it's two by
257 one that's 2 and 1/2 times two,
258 Sherly: OK.
259 Robert: You know like, count the squares, then it's 3 and the half and the bottom
260 is 4.
261 Sherly: Where is three and a half there's 4 total squares underneath, right?
262 Robert: No above.
263 Sherly: Oh above.
264 Robert: Before you start going...
265 Sherly: Oh, OK.
266 Robert: Between one ... zero and 2.
267 Sherly: OK.
268 Robert: I.
269 Sherly: Three and a half.
270 Sherly: Yes.
271 Robert: And underneath there's four. But at five there is three and a half. So 3 and
272 1/2 + three plus negative three and a half is like 0.
273 Brian: (sighs)
274 Sherly: You all right Brian?
422
275 Brian: Yep.

276 Sherly: How did you get the integral?
277 Robert: That's right.
278 Sherly: Is it... it's not crossing at five.
279 Robert: Move it over.
280 Sherly: (Laughs)
281 Robert: Your shape it is right it's not drawn to scale.
282 Sherly: That work?
283 Robert: OK.
284 Sherly: Works for me...
285 Robert: So from 0 to one the slope is 2, right?
286 Sherly: Two, right, and then from...it's one.
287 Robert: Yeah It's one... It's like negative a half.
288 Brian: Yeah.
289 Sherly: Well, that's why I'm screwing up, cause...
290 Brian: ... one and a half.
291 Robert: So wait, do you go like, do you put it at -1/2 or do you put it at zero? Like
292 where do you put it?
293 Brian: I have zero at 2.
294 Robert: That's where right? All right, that's what I thought.
295 Sherly: Yeah.
296 Brian: That's right, right? that's the slope right there.
297 Robert: That's where it changes like.
298 Sherly: Direct...
299 Robert: Direction.
300 Sherly: Direction...negative slope.
301 Robert: You got it crossing the axis two times right.
302 Sherly: Why two times because it only goes up a little bit right.
303 Robert: Yeah but if it crosses three times it's um x to the third or something so the
304 derivative would be x squared.
305 Sherly: I think I screwed up., doesn't it go up first?
306 Brian: Two... six.
307 Robert: Yeah.
308 Sherly: Bobby I have a question...
309 Robert: OK.
310 Sherly: I screwed up... here it's two, right since you start at two., but here it's one,
311 so do you go down or do you go up because this is constant right now
312 going up ... right...
313 Robert: I think that like since the slope is one you put point one since.
314 Sherly: One but then that means it's going
315 Robert: But it is still positive.
316 Sherly: Yeah, that's true.
317 Brian: Something that looks like that
318 Robert: Yeah that's what it looks like I think so.
319 Sherly: Mine doesn't look like that mine... mine looks like that... goes down.
423
320 Brian: Ok, there's at 0 there's 0 right and that 1 there's' 2 1/2 slope at 2 there's no
321 slope and at three there's negative 1/2 slope... at 4 there is negative one
322 half of a slope at 5 there is negative one half of a slope six there's zero
323 seven there's positive 1/2 slope
324 Sherly: Ah, OK.
325 Brian: And from there on it's just a slope of one.
326 Sherly: I don't like my picture.
327 Brian: [groans]
328 Sherly: You all right?
329 Brian: Start my doodle.
330 Sherly: I like my scale... integral... where'd he go... oh, there he is.
331 Brian: I think, yeah. Straight edge.
332 Sherly: Somebody's talking about you...
333 Robert: ... you know...
334 Sherly: You know...
338 Sherly: [inaudiblel
341 Pantozzi: Could you give a summary of what you've said so far you can direct it
342 towards each other, you don't have to be looking at me.
343 Robert: I got it right...
344 Brian: The first one, the g of x, well what do you want to say... we graphed the
345 area underneath the graph and anything above between the axis and the
346 graph so we got that one graph and then uh, what was that the derivative?
347 Sherly: The first one?
348 Brian: The second one?
349 Sherly: The second one was the derivative.
350 Brian: We took the derivative of that and just graphed the slopes at each point
351 Pantozzi: OK.
352 Brian: I think...
353 Pantozzi: What I'd like you to do is... take one of, are there dry erase markers
354 here...pull the shade up draw this right on top of that.
355 Brian: I think there may be dry erase markers...
356 Robert: I don't if those...
357 Sherly: It's going to stay., will come give me support...
360 Pantozzi: You can still imagine today that there is still this student that you are
361 going to talk to about these questions.
362 Robert: Can you move the projector down maybe a little bit? Or like the graph...
363 Pantozzi: Yeah, I can do that.
364 Sherly: Got it.
365 Robert: Yeah, Sherly. Yes.
424
366 Sherly: Laughs.

367 Brian: For the first one let me draw the graph first to show you what we did
368 Pantozzi: Hold on, Brian, I'm going to move it.
372 Brian: Does that green show up well? Does that green show up well? Am I
373 getting ahead of myself? [Brian lots points at (1, 2.5), (2,3.5), (3, 3) (4,
374 1.5) (5,-.5) (6,0) (7,1) and (8,2) and then connects them with a curve.]
375 Sherly: Left handed now.
376 Robert: Not bad.
377 Sherly: I think yours is better.
378 Robert: We just drew it further on...
379 Sherly: Well, that was this one...
380 Robert: Yeah.
381 Brian: Can you see? OK, at one, the area here was 2 and 1/2 blocks, so went to a
382 point at 1, 2 and a half, and at two, we added just on another 1, estimated,
383 right.
384 Robert: Yeah you just uh... that's fine...
385 Brian: On the graph, one... uh...crosses zero, so it's gotta be like of a change in
386 direction, so you know it, down a half, down the area minus half right
387 there, minus 1 and a half, and then just keeps going down, I don't know
388 what else there is say,
390 Brian: We just kept adding on the areas, it got negative at one point, and this is
391 going to continue back up, if that's a solid x line stays with slope of one.
392 Brian: What's that?
393 Robert: We didn't know what x was so we didn't know where to stop...
394 Brian: To go off.. .hey...do you think he wants us to do the other one too?
395 Mike's here.
396 Robert: Sure go for it
397 Sherly: You missed all the fun stuff.
398 Pantozzi: Now you get to tell him this instead of.
399 Sherly: I learned how to draw an integral finally.
400 Brian: I'm up at the board, doing stuff.
401 Sherly: How are you?
402 Mike: I'm pretty good.
403 Brian: What was that the antiderivative we just drew?
404 Sherly: Yes.
405 Brian: We just drew the antiderivative of this graph. Right now.
406 Mike: OK.
407 Brian: Got it?
408 Mike: Yeah. I got it.
409 Sherly: Use different color.
410 Sherly: He asked us to draw the integral from zero or he asked us to draw, that is,
411 g(x) and Brian is blocking g of x and then we did that
412 Mike: I see.
413 Sherly: He asked us to draw the derivative of that graph that we just drew.
414 Brian: This is this... [Brian starts to draw on the board]
415 Mike: ... do I have to say something?
416 Sherly: Eventually.
417 Mike: OK that's the derivative of what graph?
418 Sherly: The graph he just drew
419 Mike: The green one?
420 Sherly: Yeah.
421 Brian: Where I am I at?
422 Sherly: Why is this at 3 (to R)
423 Robert: 2, yeah.
424 Sherly: It goes up 2 and a half and then it goes down one
425 Robert: No that's where he starts getting negative it's a totally different thing.
426 Brian: Where am I at?
427 Robert: This is a graph of the change, where the change is two, where it changes
428 from one.
429 Sherly: From one so it goes down one.
430 Robert: Yeah but this is a point at zero and it starts it starts going negative here.
431 Sherly: Oh, it's a zero slope.
432 Brian: (at the board) That's wrong.
433 Robert: So it's going to go to like.
434 Sherly: It starts here then.
435 Robert: Yeah. That's what we think
436 Sherly: Yeah, you're right.
437 Mike: The red one is the derivative of the green one?
438 Robert: Yeah it's blue.
439 Brian: Was that right?
440 Robert: Yeah, the green is the integral of the blue.
441 Brian: So what's up Mike, how have you been?
443 Mike: Ah, pretty good.
444 Mike: When you called today I was like oh...shit.
445 Sherly: [laughs] What re you doing?
446 Mike: My bad.
447 Sherly: [laughs] We were all a little surprised
448 Mike: You just drew the anti derivative of the purple one.
449 Sherly: Yes.
450 Mike: And now you're drawing the derivative of the green one, which is the
451 purple one.
452 Sherly: That's what I thought.
453 Robert: No because the purple one goes from -3.
454 Brian: This is just a rough graph right there.
455 Robert: To 6 or something then the other one goes from 0 to x.
456 Mike: Well I know but.
457 Robert: So it's going to be different. Isn't it? It would be the same...
426
458 Mike: The derivative doesn't matter where it starts so like if you think about it.
459 Robert: It's going to be shifted, right.
460 Mike: No, no not the derivative.
461 Brian: this is what we got.. .now Mike's coming in and I'm hearing some talk I
462 don't know if that is right.
463 Sherly: Is there a derivative
464 Robert: I don't think that it goes down that far because there's never a change of
465 negative 3. you know what I mean? I think it starts going back up after at
466 5 it starts going back up like it's negative but it's less negative... you
467 know I mean.
468 Sherly: But doesn't it...
469 Brian: Oh you mean between here and here.
470 Sherly: I don't think it goes all way down to negative three because you are like
471 adding the derivatives there is never a change of - 3 anywhere the highest
472 change is negative one-and-a-half.
473 Brian: That's true.
474 Robert: You know what I mean.
475 Brian: Yeah but once it goes zero here you just stop adding, like that's half, that's
476 one and half
477 Robert: No, because we didn't start adding for the other ones, you know, because
478 why wouldn't it go up to positive three then.
479 Mike: Why does it turn there why is there that little bump that upside down
480 camel... why right there at 5.
481 Robert: Upside down camel...
482 Mike: Yeah, right there.
483 Robert: I'll don't know what it is but here...
484 Sherly: Nah! I can't draw...do you know how to draw derivatives?
485 Robert: I'll draw what I think it is.
486 Mike: Does it have to be exact?
487 Brian: That's what I did, I added it.
488 Robert: I think it's like.
489 Mike: Stuff like that.
490 Robert goes up to the board, replacing Brian, who has sat down.
491 Sherly: It goes down.
492 Robert: It's negative one and a half again... positive a half, that's what I think it is.
493 Mike: Basically the only thing I don't know about is that little first up and down
494 thing.
495 Robert: Yeah.
496 Mike: Saying but basically you're drawing the purple graph because that's what
497 the anti derivative is, I mean anti...
498 Brian: Just shifted to the right.
499 Mike: No, not even shifted it's like right you know see where like I guess that
500 number where like where x = 6 it's like zero the green line that should
501 go... That red one should go all the way up to zero right there should be
502 up there it's not really shifted it's all there right here where it changes like
427
503 you know what ever that is called where it changes like from concave, it's
504 zero.
505 Robert: Point of inflection.
506 Mike: So what I'm saying is it should look the same, kind of curved cause um,
507 you know.
508 Brian: OK.
509 Sherly: Do you want to go up there and fix it?
510 Mike: No!
511 Sherly: [laughsj
512 Magda: But like, I don't know if it's like exactly what's measuring slopes, and
513 stuff like that but you know what I'm saying if you drew it off of that, you
514 drew the antiderivative and then the derivative would be the same thing I
515 don't know I just got here so you guys...
516 Robert: It makes sense but like it must be some kind of trick.
517 Mike: Naw...
518 Robert: It's like too easy.
519 Mike: No...
520 Brian: Just drawing the derivative.
521 Robert: Yeah.
522 Mike: Of course it's not going to look exactly like the purple one the purple it's
523 got a what is that called.
524 Sherly: (inaudible)
525 Mike: It's like not continuous but it's not what's the word...
526 Sherly: Curved...
527 Mike: Yeah, Well it's not curved.
528 Robert: Our anti derivative is not that accurate it's just like a raw sketch.
529 Mike: Yeah, so I mean...
530 Robert: So our derivative is a rough sketch of a rough sketch.
531 Mike: Like see that whole first thing looks kind of likr.
532 Brian: Yeah.
533 Mike: Parabolic this isn't really like a straight line.
534 Robert: ... it should be straight...
535 Mike: it is kind of hard to draw it like you know... but pretty much...
536 Robert: It should start up there too because like it crosses the x axis three
537 times.. .so does the antiderivative... cross the same amount of times...
538 Mike: ...not supposed to...
539 Robert: Yeah, so... start up higher.
540 Mike: This isn't like this thing it should be basically the same thing this thing
541 goes like at a curve so (pointing to the screen) this should have a higher
542 slope and this have a lower slope...
543 Robert: So it should be up at 2
544 Mike: This isn't zero right here (pointing to the graph of g(x)) this happens
545 when you get that you know but um.. so that should be it should be like
546 basically the purple graph but only maybe more curvy
547 Robert: ...I'll fix it.
428
549 Pantozzi: I'll set that so that it doesn't do that any more.
550 [Robert goes to fix the graph on the board)
551 Sherly: Good thing you came in...
552 Mike: That whole line was wrong...
553 Sherly: Like last time.
554 Robert: You still working at the deli...
555 Mike: Yeah, I would have been here earlier.
556 Sherly:
557 Mike: But I don't really have a car. My car died yesterday... I mean my old
558 sister's car. My other car I smashed.
559 Brian: [laughsl
560 Mike: The white one I smashed that thing already.
561 Brian: Aw.
562 Mike: So I had to borrow my dad's car to get here.
563 Sherly: Angela was home...
564 Robert: I would have given you a ride...
565 Mike: No, I was like, I left work at 2:30. Anyway.
566 Brian: All right. Is that it?
567 Sherly: Where is Pantozzi?
568 Sherly: I told you... last time...
569 Pantozzi: Do you feel happy with what you said.
570 Brian: I feel happy.
571 Sherly: [laughs] it's summer...
572 Brian: It looks good it crosses zero where it needs to.
573 Pantozzi: OK.
574 Brian: And has the basic shape that we think that would fit that pattern.
575 Pantozzi: OK.
576 Robert: It makes sense.
577 Pantozzi: Let's make a new page then
578 Robert: Should we leave that thing, or erase?
579 Pantozzi: Yeah, we'll erase that.
580 Mike: Leave that up there to confuse us.
581 Brian: We've got a ton of different color markers...
582 Pantozzi: We've got it recorded for posterity now.
583 Mike: I was wondering why the red dots wouldn't come off, but that's because
584 it's on the screen.
587 Mike: Something nice in there.
589 Brian:
590 Pantozzi Did you like that?
591 Robert: That was pretty cool.
592 Pantozzi There's all this new stuff in the new version of Sketchpad.
593 Brian: I'm going to have to get me one of these.
594 Sherly: When are you going to use it, huh?
429
595 Brian: Just play around with it.

596 Robert: ... make some copies.. .yeah.
598 Brian: Get sued.
599 Sherly: Can you picture you and Pantozzi in court together?
600 [I make a new graph on the board].
601 Pantozzi: I'd like you to draw me the derivative of that graph
602 Sherly: Graph paper?
603 Brian: Absolutely.
604 Pantozzi: And then I'll tell you the second question right away this time I'm gonna
605 ask you to draw the derivative of this graph, and then I'm gonna ask you
606 to draw the integral of the graph you make.
607 Sherly: Straightedge...
611 Pantozzi: So just to add letters to it this is the graph of f(x) and you are going to
612 draw the derivative f prime of x and then you are going to do the integral
613 from zero to x of f prime of x.
614 Brian: Got you. Pretty easy to understand. Easy to do, I'm not saying that.
615 Brian: Play connect the dots here...
616 Robert: How did you smash up the Civic?
617 Mike: Smacked into another car.
618 Robert: Really?
619 Sherly: [laughsj
620 Mike: ... I wasn't really looking...
621 Sherly: How do you do that though?
626 Brian: [inaudible |
628 Mike: It was a couple of months ago. So I'm driving my sister's piece of junk for
629 a bit. Up until it died yesterday.
630 Sherly: Where do you start? Negative... where do you start at?
631 Robert: I started at - 2 and a half and 0. It's not zero here.
632 Sherly: Why do you start?
633 Robert: Because that's where it is. I'm drawing the original graph.
634 Sherly: No no but to draw the derivative you start from there right? He wants the
635 whole thing graph right?
636 Mike: It doesn't matter... it doesn't matter.
637 Sherly: It doesn't matter where you start?
638 Mike: Just a graph of the slopes, you can start it anywhere,
639 [silence as students draw graphs]
640 Sherly: I think I'm drawing the same graph over.
430
641 Robert: I've got something that looks like this.

642 Sherly: Hold on.
643 Brian: You did it.
644 Robert: I don't know if that's right... (inaudible)
645 Brian: What?
646 Sherly: I think I screwed up.
647 Mike: No, that's bad.
648 Brian: Come on. Why?
649 Sherly: I think I.
650 Brian: We are graphing the slopes right?
651 Brian: Yeah, so negative one,
652 Sherly: Right.
653 Brian: Negative two,
654 Sherly: I did that but it looks like that...
655 Brian: Negative three.
656 Sherly: I think I did the same graph over.
657 Brian: Now the point you start at right, that could be considered zero right? Like
658 start at Negative five
659 Sherly: Right.
660 Brian: Start at zero...
661 Sherly: Yeah, start at zero, that's what's Mike said. Can you help me out? Tell me
662 the first...
663 Mike: You've got to draw the first one first
664 Sherly: How...oh you do?
665 Mike: I mean that's easier.
666 Robert: Did you get a lot of straight... plateaus.
667 Sherly: Wait you guys have to help me out.
669 Mike: You know here it's at negative one...
670 Sherly: Right, so here to here is negative one,
672 Sherly: And here to here is...negative one.
673 Mike: I just put a dot right there...
674 Sherly: Oh, all right.
675 Mike: And then I connect those dots there ... and the next block is like.
676 Sherly: Two.
677 Mike: Negative two,
678 Sherly: So down two., those blocks...
679 Mike: No no in middle it's zero you know because...
680 Sherly: Why negative? Oh, from here to here.
681 Mike: Yeah.
682 Sherly: So it's here.
683 Mike: Right.
684 Brian: The area for this one...
685 Mike: Doesn't have to be two because I'm taking the average
686 Sherly: OK so it's two.
687 Robert: Yeah.
688 Mike: So the next one is negative three, so just...
689 Sherly: Why negative three? Oh, from here to here.
690 Mike: So from here to here.
691 Sherly: So it's here, right in the middle. (Sherly: Puts a point at -2.5, -3)
692 Mike: And the next one
693 Sherly: One... negative one.. .go back up?
694 Mike: Negative one, two, it goes back up and then in the middle it's zero,
695 Sherly: Because here...
696 Mike: You know because that's where...
697 Sherly: It's going.
698 Mike: And this one's half, the next two are half, so it's a straight line
699 Sherly: Oh, Wait why.
700 Mike: The next one is a half positive a half.
701 Sherly: Why doesn't it go up.
702 Mike: Right here,
703 Sherly: Oh, OK.
704 Mike: Then it's half.
705 Sherly: From here to here it's one.
706 Mike: The next three blocks is one, so it's one, one, one.
707 Sherly: From here to here, here to here.
708 Mike: Yeah, it's the same slope here to here it's zero.
709 Sherly: Then you have negative one,
710 Mike: And the last one is.
711 Sherly: Negative two.
712 Mike: Negative two I think... connect that, it looks like.
713 Sherly: Thanks, Mike.
714 Mike: You just look at it one piece at a time.
715 Sherly: Let's do it the other way around...drawing the same graph.
716 Mike: What was the second one we had to do?
717 Robert: Then we have to draw the integral of the derivative it's going to be
718 different isn't it?
719 Mike: (Shakes head)
720 Robert: You don't think so?
721 Sherly: From zero?
722 Mike: No it's the same thing, but like...
723 Sherly: From zero to...
724 Brian: Does this one have to start at zero? Aw, screw it.
725 Sherly: Right, did he say from 0?
726 Mike: Oh, yeah, the integral of the derivative...
727 Robert: This is going to be different.
728 Mike: It's going to be different...Yeah, it's shifted... that's all.
729 Robert: Oh yeah, it's shifted, it's supposed to be different.
730 Mike: Oh, yeah, the integral.
731 Mike: From anywhere.
732 Robert: The same shape.
733 Mike: It's using the same shape... if you start it at like.. .instead of right there, it
734 will look the same but you won't have this piece at the end you know. If
735 you start it... if you start it here it will look the same.
736 Robert: If you start it at zero
737 Mike: If you start it at zero.
738 Robert: It's going to be shifted down 4.
739 Mike: No, up 4, it would be up, no down, What am I talking about?
740 Robert: It would be down, 4, right?
741 Sherly: Why down 4?
742 Mike: It will be down something I don't now how much... no would be shifted
743 because if you start at 0.
744 Sherly: It's a half, right?
745 Mike: It shifts this until that becomes zero all the way up there... and this
746 little...like that.
747 Robert: Oh really?
748 Mike: That's where it starts, so where you start it at zero it's got to be.
749 Brian: So where you start it?
750 Robert: At.. .wherever you want... I was going to start at negative 5.
751 Brian: Yeah...
752 Robert: ...put that as zero.
753 Mike: That would be the same thing... no that would be shifted down.
754 Robert: Yeah, that's what I was doing...
755 Mike: I was going to say...he said zero...
756 Robert: Oh, OK.
757 Mike: Be the beginning...
759 Mike: Then that makes sense.
760 [silencej
761 Sherly: I did it.
762 Mike: It's the same...thing.
763 Robert: I think were you start though affects the answer, doesn't it?
764 Mike: It won't change shape, just shift it
765 Robert: Yeah, but I mean like... yeah.
766 Mike: Like I started it at zero. So I moved... up.
767 Robert: ...start...
768 Brian: Something like that?
769 Robert: It's the original graph.
770 Sherly: It's shifted.
771 Brian: I'm not worried
772 Mike: Wait... hold on...This is the one you drew?
773 Brian: Yeah.
774 Mike: Yeah, it's the original graph.
775 Brian: Right, whatever.
776 Robert: How do you know where to start.
777 Mike: You pick a spot.
778 Robert: It doesn't matter
433
779 Mike: Yeah, usually they tell you... they should tell you...
780 Robert: Yeah yeah yeah...
781 Mike: Because these are continuous functions they go on forever....
782 Robert: Yeah yeah yeah.
783 Sherly: Why are these continuous functions?
784 Mike: I don't know, I'm just...
785 Sherly: Cause you probably had more math...
786 Mike: This is like easy... Trust me, I had calc 2 and I wanted to bail out, I had
787 calc 3, calc 4,1 heard bad stories about.
788 Robert Yeah.
789 Sherly: But you wanted to take classes together...
790 Robert: Once you get past the calc stuff, though, it's easy once you get past the
791 calc stuff.
792 Mike: I don't know, they were talking about numbers that didn't exist and stuff.
793 Robert: I like that stuff more...
794 Mike: I was like, I'll pass on that.
795 Robert: I took linear algebra... that was mad easy...
796 Mike: I hated that. It was all matrices and stuff... I had the most... I hated it
797 because of my teacher. He was some guy...
798 Robert: You should have stuck with my class.
799 Mike: Huh?
800 Robert: Remember you were in my class and then you dropped it?
801 Mike: Was I in your class?
802 Robert: Yeah. The MatLab section
803 Mike: You but I couldn't because. It was time schedule...
804 Robert: Yeah, it was a weird time or something. In the afternoon.
805 Mike: And the lady was weird.
806 Robert: Yeah she gave everybody A's.
807 Mike: Yeah, I got a B.
808 Sherly: Get Mr. Pantozzi...
809 Robert: She quit, that's why...that was her last semester.
810 Mike: Well you guys had to do that stuff on computers... we did it all on paper.
811 Robert: That was all extra credit.
812 Mike: That was all extra credit? I did all this matrix things on paper.. .there was a
813 lots of formulas.
814 Robert: It was 150 points and you could get 200 points so like it was 50 points
815 extra credit. 500...
816 Mike: I just didn't like it.
817 Robert: It everybody ended up... it was so easy.
818 Mike: I thought it was hard though..
819 Robert: Oh..
820 Mike: It wasn't hard... a lot of memorization.. .it wasn't the hardest class I've
821 taken...
822 Robert: Formula...
823 Mike: Yeah, I didn't like it..
824 Robert: You just do this this this this this there wasn t like no thinking involved.
825 [The students talk off-topic for 3 minutes and 30 seconds]
826 Pantozzi: Can you tell me what Sherly is drawing?
827 Sherly: Drawing the derivative.
828 Mike: She's drawing...
829 Pantozzi: Can you tell me how you thought about it?
830 Sherly: Has Mike explained to you how to do it?
831 Pantozzi: We're all working together here.
832 Sherly: It from here to here the slope is negative one, so you draw the point in the
833 middle of the box.
834 Pantozzi: Why is that?
835 Mike: It's like an average, I mean...you don't have to draw it in the middle, but.
836 Sherly: From here to here it's 2, so 2.
837 Mike: Cause I don't know...could be...you could draw lines... you know, but it
838 won't look like a graph.
839 Robert: The next one at positive a half...
840 Pantozzi: What's the alternative, Mike? You could draw..
841 Mike: You could draw like line segments
842 Robert: No, you...
843 Mike: Last time...
844 Sherly: In the middle...
845 Mike: Line segments, but it's not like a real graph. In reality of the slope at the
846 beginning of that line and if it was a curved path.
847 Robert: Slope in the middle...
848 Mike: It would be like more continuous.
849 Robert: Plus one.
850 Sherly: Two, right.
851 Robert: No, Then it's three ones in a row...
852 Pantozzi: Just, show me what you mean by line segment.
853 Robert: Zero.
854 Pantozzi: Go up there... for just a second.
855 Mike: Yeah, like.
856 Brian: Draw in the middle...
857 Sherly: oh sorry.
858 Robert: Negative one, negative two.
859 Mike: Like um...l.
860 Sherly: Here, use this...
861 Mike: Like the slope of this whole line is one, so you'd kind of do just like that
862 [He traces a horizontal segment at y = -l.J Steps.
863 Pantozzi Steps. OK, I just wanted to make sure of that.
864 Mike: Yeah that's what I meant...and then three, two, you know what I mean
865 like that, ... all the way up a graph...steps...
866 Pantozzi Steps...
867 Mike: This kind of looks better. That's all.
868 Robert: .. .a step function I've seen those before.. .draw a step...
869 Mike: Yeah, you see them in the book all the time...
435
870 Robert: Yeah.

871 Pantozzi: Did you get to draw the integral of that graph, then?
872 Brian: Yep.
873 Robert: Yeah.
874 Mike: Starting at any particular point?
875 Sherly: No, at zero.
876 Pantozzi: I think I said zero.
877 Sherly: [inaudible] Start from here then, right? Start with a half.
878 Mike: Start from half. No, no, hold on,
879 Sherly: No, you start at a half, but at zero.
880 Mike: No, no, start at zero and add a half.
881 Sherly: That's...at here?
882 Mike: Yeah, and then go up one
883 Sherly: Add one?
884 Mike: Yeah.
885 Pantozzi: Can you tell me why you added 1/2 there.
886 Sherly: Because the area of this box is.. .sorry.
887 Mike: Because at um... the of the derivative is that line is a half so the slope of
888 that line is one half so trying to draw a line... Any way the area of from
889 this box is one half...
890 Pantozzi: The area of what box?
891 Brian: You've got to think of it as shifted over.
892 Mike: Yeah, the area of that box is 1/2. Like in...
893 Brian: From the x axis to the line...
894 Mike: Yeah.
895 Brian: The area between two is 1/2.
896 Pantozzi: OK.
897 Mike: If you think of it as like a slope, here's half, here's half, here you're at one
898 so you go up one is basically the same thing, you know. Wait wait, what
899 was that?
900 Sherly: Why not it's a half.
901 Mike: No no.
902 Sherly: Or..
903 Robert: All together or something...
904 Sherly: It's one.
905 Mike: You go one three times, so you go...
906 Sherly: One more, then It's a half.
907 Robert: Then it's zero.
908 Mike: Zero.
909 Sherly: Isn't it a half?
910 Robert: No zero.
911 Mike: Wait wait, go one three times. What line am I looking at? Oh yeah... It's
912 zero it's flat.
913 Sherly: Where are you going? Across?
914 Mike: Yeah.
915 Sherly: It's the same.
436
916 Mike: And that's where you're going down one because it's negative.
917 Robert: Down two.
918 Mike: So it's down 2.
919 Pantozzi: Why did you go down 2?
920 Sherly: Over here?
921 Robert: Because the slope... the point is at negative two there so the slopes going
922 to be negative two...because it's losing two area.
923 Mike: Well you could also say., that's true... you could also say the area of that
924 box underneath is negative 2 either way..
925 Pantozzi: You agree with what Mike's saying, Bobby?
926 Robert: Yeah,
927 Mike: It's a box...little trapezoid... is negative two.
928 Pantozzi: Is there any thing to the left of zero for the green graph?
929 Mike: If you start at 0, no.
930 Pantozzi: OK, what if we started, what if I told you to start at negative 5 then?
931 Mike: Then there would be more it would be in a different spot.
932 Robert: Yeah.
933 Pantozzi: It... it meaning?
935 Mike: It would look the same shape but it'll be shifted down.
936 Robert: All that negative...that negative four zero left of zero is going to push it
937 down a lot because it's negative see how the graph is all negative...below
938 it or left of it I mean...so it's going to push it down.
939 Pantozzi: Could you draw that one for me then, the graph, the integral starting at - 5.
940 Robert: [steps to board] Started at zero.
941 Pantozzi: Do it in green, just for it's another integral.. Just for clarity.
942 Sherly: Orange.
943 Robert: Orange. You have green up there too. [Robert begins to draw] This is
944 supposed to be straight. [Pointing to the right side of his graph.)
945 Pantozzi: OK, Any comments about this?
946 Mike: No , it Looks very nice.
947 Pantozzi: The specific question is, I guess, is I've given you two tasks so far, do you
948 have any comment about those two tasks - what... what was the first task?
949 Robert: The fundamental theorem of calculus. Or today?
950 Pantozzi: Yeah, today, this first thing today, what was the first thing I asked you to
951 do today?
952 Brian: Derivative.
953 Sherly: The first thing...
954 Pantozzi The first thing...
955 Sherly: The integral.
956 Pantozzi Draw the integral and then.
957 Robert: Derivative.
958 Pantozzi Draw derivative of the integral and here I asked you.
959 Sherly: Draw the derivative and then the integral.
437
960 Pantozzi: Draw the derivatives and then draw the integral of the derivative., so do
961 you have any comments about these now in relation to the fundamental
962 theorem of calculus.
963 Robert: They're all the same thing.
964 Brian: It's all the same thing.
965 Mike: It's all the same thing...
966 Pantozzi: What you mean by that.
967 Robert: Proportional.
968 Brian: You get the same graph no matter which way you do it...same exact thing
969 just said a different way pretty much.
970 Robert: Shows the relation between them, you know....
971 Mike: You get to one point by doing one thing one way...integral first then the
972 derivative, or the other way around... it doesn't really matter how you do
973 it.
974 Pantozzi Let me ask this and then I'm going to leave...would you use either of
975 these two tasks to help that student we talked about a month ago... can
976 you believe, it was a month ago.
977 Robert: Yeah.
978 Pantozzi Yeah, so just you can answer that question might take 2 seconds to answer
979 or 5 minutes to answer... anyway is fine... would you use either of these
980 two tasks, or both to talk to the student we talked about in the last session.
981 Brian: It's related to the fundamental theorem?
983 Mike: .. .try to pick a sequence of which one to do first, to teach...
984 Sherly: Yeah.
985 Mike: Which one would be easier.
986 Sherly: Easier to understand.
987 Mike: Or more intuitive to teach the student...which would be...
988 Robert: I think the second one...
989 Sherly: Draw the derivative first and then the integral?
991 Sherly: Which is how we were taught.
992 Mike: What was the first one?
993 Robert: The first one was integral and then the derivative.
994 Sherly: You weren't here for the first one, the first one we did integral first and
995 then derivative.
996 Robert: With the second... the first we only drew the derivative of part of it...
997 Sherly: Right and this one you can see that it's shifted...
998 Robert: You can see that it is shifted easier.
999 Mike: What did he ask you to do first... draw the.
1000 Sherly: Integral...
1001 Mike: Integral?
1002 Robert: Yeah, and then the derivative.
1003 Mike: Well by drawing the derivative first you realize that it doesn't really matter
1004 where you start and then when you start drawing the integral, you start
1005 noticing, oh, it'll shift.
438
1006 Robert: Yeah, yeah.

1007 Mike: You can get there from the other way around anyway.
1008 Sherly: What does it matter where you start with the derivative?
1009 Mike: Well, you're.. .it doesn't matter when you start with the derivative
1010 Sherly: It does or doesn't...
1011 Mike: It doesn't.. .you just have a graph of the slope at that point.
1012 Sherly: Oh, oh.
1013 Mike: The integral is an accumulation of area under the graph so if you start at a
1014 one point
1015 Sherly: The integral would shift.
1016 Mike: It depends.
1018 Mike: Um, I mean, does this one seem easier? I wasn't there for the first one so.
1019 Robert: This seemed easier.
1020 Brian: Is that just because we did one already.
1021 Sherly: This one is easier because you can see that the integral is shifting and not
1022 like how he explained it
1023 Mike: But they didn't really ask to try from a different point he said just to draw
1024 it and we picked our own point...you know....
1025 Robert: I don't know which one seemed easier.
1026 Sherly: The same.
1027 Mike: Cause you're doing the same thing in both of them just in a different order
1028 it's just the same amount of work; just because it doesn't mean because
1029 you drew one first and the second one, easier, I don't it doesn't mean...
1030 Brian: We should do them both to show that they can be switched like that and
1031 still get the same thing
1032 Mike: Because drawing integrals is harder.
1033 Robert: That's what I was thinking, say you do the derivative and then you do a
1034 little bit of the integral and then you see that it's the same thing you know
1035 what I mean.
1036 Mike: Yeah.
1037 Robert: And then you'd be like, yeah, OK. The other one you could draw the
1038 integral all you want and not know that...
1039 Mike: You draw an integral from like nothing, you don't know where it's from
1040 before so you don't...
1042 Mike: I like that...
1043 Sherly: That's how we're taught though.
1044 Robert: Derivatives first.
1045 Sherly: Yeah.
1046 Mike: It is easier to do derivatives,
1047 Robert: Yeah... yeah.
1048 Mike: Just look at the slope.
1049 Robert: Because if you don't have the graph paper like this you can't count squares
1050 to do the integral.
1051 Sherly: Add them... (laughs) What do we do now?
1052 Brian: Time to go home?
1053 Robert: I don't know., what...
1055 Brian: How we relate this to the fundamental theorem.
1056 Sherly: F of b minus f of a
1057 Mike: What was it again?
1058 Sherly: F of b minus f of a
1059 Mike: No no, not the...
1060 Sherly: The simple, you remember the simple like you know...
1061 Sherly: Oh, the question?
1062 Mike: No, you know how you remember like it was...
1063 Sherly: The purpose of the thing?
1064 Mike: No, you remember like...
1065 Sherly: Can you spit it out?
1066 Mike: Like we we, when he asked us last month or something, you guys
1067 wrote f of b f of a,
1068 Sherly: Yeah.
1069 Mike: There was that one thing in that book that was one simple...
1070 Sherly: The properties of it? Oh, the informal one.
1071 Mike: Yeah, what did it say? ...
1072 Sherly: It shows the rate..
1073 Mike: It's in my head... For any...
1074 Sherly: For any continuous...
1075 Mike: There's any graph there is an integral for it...
1076 Sherly: An antiderivative for it, that's what it said...
1077 Mike: So... that basically is the fundamental theorem
1078 Robert: You can go both ways.
1079 Mike: Yeah.
1080 Robert: It shows the relationship...
1081 Sherly: Either...
1082 Robert: Connection between derivatives and integrals.
1083 Mike: I have it...
1084 Sherly: It's the only one... next to you...
1085 Robert: Cheated...
1086 Sherly: We didn't cheat...
1087 Robert: We're allowed to look at books?
1088 Sherly: We are.
1089 Mike: No, this isn't it.
1090 Sherly: I'm sure there's the same thing in it.
1091 Robert: I think it would come after the mean value theorem.
1092 Mike: Oh, yeah, everything...
1093 Sherly: Yeah, that's it.
1094 Mike: Yeah.
1095 Sherly: Yeah.
1096 Mike: This is like... no no.
1097 Sherly: Is there any way to prove there is not an antiderivative?
440
1098 Mike: No there isn't, but like...

1099 Robert: What if it's not continuous? in.
1100 Mike: This [pointing to the boardjis useful in clarifying to the kid that I'll show
1101 you how you can make it anywhere... for any point for any graph.
1102 Brian: Beautiful
1104 [The students talk off topic for 1 minute and 50 seconds]
1105 Mike: What was the question?
1106 Pantozzi: The question I just asked?
1107 Mike: Yeah. Which...
1108 Pantozzi Would you use any of these tasks I just gave you to talk to a student about
1109 the fundamental theorem...
1110 Mike: We said yeah...
1111 Sherly: We liked the second one.
1112 Mike: Which one.
1113 Sherly: Where we did the derivative first.
1114 Mike: Yeah.
1115 Robert: Because it's easier.
1116 Pantozzi How so?
1117 Brian: Because once you do a little bit you can see it's the same graph.
1118 Pantozzi What's the same graph?
1119 Robert: The integral?
1120 Brian: Yeah...
1121 Mike: And the um...
1122 Brian: The original.
1123 Mike: Because first you draw start with the graph and then you'll draw the
1124 derivative graph which is fairly a lot easier to do than the anti derivative
1125 cause you're looking at slopes, you know., it just flows much more... and
1126 when you're doing the um the.
1127 Sherly: Anti...
1128 Mike: Anti derivative of that graph you start to realize that it is the same graph so
1129 you really don't... you don't have to pay attention too much about
1130 counting boxes and stuff, you know...
1131 Robert: Trace...
1132 Mike: And then you start realizing that it would start somewhere else if you pick
1133 it at this point and then but kind of you lose some of the...
1134 Sherly: Because the first one we did we started from 0 and we just did the integral
1135 and then we did the derivative and the second one we did the integral and
1136 then started from a different point so we saw how it shifted if we with the
1137 other way around where we started at two different points, you'd probably
1138 see it probably see a shift of but you won't realize.
1139 Mike: Even after you do it you'll see that it shifted because the original graph and
1140 the anti derivative will be in a different spot most likely they won't be
1141 same point...
1142 Sherly: Yeah.
441
1143 Mike: You'll see how it kind of shifts you'll kind of see like...you know... you'll
1144 kind of understand why you have to start at base point and stuff like that.
1145 Pantozzi: I have a question for everybody, so I'd like you to comment too .. .I'd like
1146 everyone to comment on it I'd like everybody to comment on it even
1147 though... I think only Mike has said it but maybe if other guys may said it
1148 and I wasn't in here to hear it I hear him saying the word antiderivative.
1149 Robert: Antiderivative...
1151 Pantozzi: And that isn't a word I think I've mentioned yet like in the tasks today...
1152 why is he mentioning that word?
1153 Robert: Same thing as...
1154 Sherly: That's what we were using last time.
1155 Robert: It's another word for it.
1156 Brian: When you say it like that you realize there's a really tight correlation
1157 between the two almost...
1158 Pantozzi: Between what two things.
1159 Mike: The integral and the anti derivative is the same thing.
1160 Robert: Anti derivative, not derivative
1161 Mike: It depends on how you make your antiderivative... integral... you know if
1162 you make it as an anti derivative which you just can like ... we I did it
1163 with like slopes and stuff so it's like anti derivative... you do backwards
1164 what you did with the derivative... you do it with counting boxes it sounds
1165 like you're doing an integral ...it's the same thing though
1166 Brian: What is, there are two things you can do with a slope with a graph like that
1167 you can find the area and find the slope, right?
1168 Mike: Yeah, it's the same thing.
1169 Pantozzi: OK, um next question.
1170 Mike: But it.
1171 Pantozzi: No, go ahead.
1172 Mike: No, it's...I don't know what I was going to say anyway.
1173 Pantozzi: I know that feeling.
1175 Pantozzi: I'm going to be that the student for the moment and say, let's see I know...
1176 this is what I know...OK, and then I'll leave again and you can work off
1177 what just what I'm about to say... I learned about derivatives, so I know
1178 that the derivative is a graph of the rate of change or slope of the graph
1179 you gave me. I know that the anti derivative is the sort of the opposite of
1180 that like if you give me a graph, I'm going to draw a graph... the anti
1181 derivative is a graph whose derivative is the graph you gave me.
1182 Mike: Yeah.
1183 Pantozzi You follow what I said?
1184 Sherly: Yes.
1185 Pantozzi That's what I think of antiderivatives. I'm the student now. I know what
1186 an antiderivative is, I have that graph.
1187 Mike: That's what I was trying to say before.. .like you said you think of it as an
1188 opposite when you make the anti derivative you would just graph a graph
442
1189 that resemble the slopes that... the derivative tells you to you know... and
1190 if you say integral it sounds more like something you do with counting
1191 area and stuff like that.
1192 Pantozzi OK. That's., this is my exact question, guys. Thank you for helping me out
1193 last month with this. What I'm trying to figure out is how is it that an
1194 antiderivative and an integral can be related how can they be...
1195 Mike: Oh, so you're saying they're different... but why are they the same thing
1196 Pantozzi I'm not sure what I'm saying...
1198 Mike: I'm getting...
1199 Pantozzi I'm looking to you guys to help me understand the fundamental
1200 theorem...
1201 Mike: I never thought of it like that.
1202 Pantozzi When I learned it in class I know they said something about
1203 antiderivatives, they said something about integral, and I think they said
1204 something about them being related, and I hear you guys saying something
1205 about that too.. .so figure out something to say back to me when I return.
1206 Sherly: OK.
1207 Robert: It's like an integral with bounds like you know how they take the integral
1208 from 0 to 2 that can be antiderivative, say like that just the
1209 indefinite.. .What is it when it you don't have bounds definite or
1210 indefinite.. I think it's definite.
1211 Mike: I don't know...
1212 Sherly: ...think we...
1213 Brian: I'm over my head on this problem.
1214 Mike: I kind of get what he's trying to say.
1215 Sherly: Aren't they the same thing.
1216 Mike: They're the same... OK, think about the anti derivatives and integral as
1217 processes, right?
1218 Sherly: OK.
1219 Brian: Gotta...
1220 Mike: Anti derivative means you do this one way and the other way you do ...
1221 and you end up with the same graph why.
1222 Sherly: And you think the integral is a process.
1223 Mike: ... and he wants to know why it's the same graph.
1224 Sherly: What is the process when you take the anti derivatives.
1225 Mike: Anti derivative you kind of like you look at that derivative and you draw a
1226 line with that slope over there.
1227 Sherly: So for there the slope is.
1228 Mike: Yeah
1229 Sherly: But like over here the slope is... oh.
1230 Mike: Just slope it doesn't matter where you start it's a different thing...
1231 Sherly: Oh, I see.
1232 Mike: Just slope that's at zero...so draw a line with...
1233 Sherly: As opposed to counting boxes.
443
1234 Mike: Yeah, and when you do the um antiderivative...I mean, no integral you
1235 count boxes and such like that.
1236 Sherly: Area...
1237 Mike: And he wants to know why.
1238 Robert: Can you, you can take a integral of non continuous functions but can you
1239 take the antiderivative? You know what I mean, cause like...
1240 Mike: Um.
1241 Robert: You can't really draw it because then goes up to infinity you know what I
1242 mean and
1243 Sherly: Like breaks...
1244 Robert: Then you have that gap that goes right down.
1245 Mike: Yeah, but you're talking about stuff with gaps.
1247 Mike: If you have a gap then there's no...
1248 Robert: Like 1/x like the integral is In x, right? But.
1249 Mike: I don't know...I think so.
1250 Sherly: Bring you down a notch here.
1251 Robert: I think it is, I'm not sure.
1252 Mike: You can't take the integral of that right there something it goes up to
1253 infinity, you don't know, well... I'm sure... there's probably a limit or
1254 something.
1255 Robert: In theory you can.
1256 Mike: There's probably like a limit that the area is.
1257 Robert: I don't know,
1258 Mike: Never mind, I don't know, whatever.
1259 Robert: I don't know. All I know is it's related.
1260 Mike: But why? I don't know...
1261 Sherly: It's the same thing, right, the slope there is one and the area is one.
1262 Mike: Yeah, but hold on, Let me think about this. Say it?
1263 Sherly: Like over there where it's like flat and how you were saying slope is one
1264 consistently for the three boxes.
1265 Mike: Put your shadow ... right where.. .so I can't.
1266 Sherly: Right here, right the slope is one for these three boxes and that's the same
1267 as the area.
1268 Mike: OK.
1269 Sherly: Right, which is the same as.
1270 Mike: Well, the, the, the.
1271 Mike: The slope of this line is zero but it's at one so that means this slope is one.
1272 Sherly: Wait, the slope at, no no. The slope...
1273 Mike: Green... that's zero...the slope but.
1274 Sherly: This is.
1275 Mike: The value of it is one.
1276 Sherly: Rate of change is one.
1277 Mike: Of this graph yes.
1278 Sherly: So that makes this these are the slopes of this..
1279 Mike: Yeah.
444
1280 Sherly: And these slopes are one.

1281 Mike: This means that this graph has to have a slope of one slope of one here... a
1 OS') slope of zero but why does it like come out to be the same graph?
IZoZ
1283 Sherly: But the slope over here...[laughs]
1284 Brian: What is this line here?
1285 Sherly: What is that line?
1286 Robert: It's the original function.
1287 Brian: What about this one...
1288 Robert: That's the partial integral...
1289 Brian: Bringing it back to the days. Think it, all right.
1290 Robert: Yes.
1291 Sherly: Yes what?
1292 Robert: Of integrals.
1293 Brian: Yes is always good to hear yes can never a bad answer.
1294 Robert: You've got a 50/50 chance though.
1295 Brian: I'd rather hear yes than no.
1296 Robert: Yeah.
1297 Sherly: How about maybe.
1298 Robert: Maybe.
1299 Sherly: Maybe works.
1300 Robert: Sometimes, that could be wrong you could be right. I don't know.
1301 Brian: All right, so um have you guys found something yet?
1302 Mike: Not yet.
1303 Robert: Just keep staring.
1304 Brian: What are we trying to figure out?
1305 Sherly: Why...
1306 Mike: How about this.
1307 Sherly: Why taking the anti derivatives when you're looking at the slopes of the
1308 derivative to draw the integral, and taking the integral of counting boxes...
1309 Mike: All right.
1310 Sherly: .. .result in the same graph... you follow here?
1311 Robert: He wasn't here.
1312 Sherly: Yes he was.
1313 Robert: No he left.
1314 Sherly: When we heard the question he was here.
1315 Brian: Nope,
1316 Robert: He left.
1317 Brian: I was already gone in mind. My body just wasn't there yet. ...
1318 Robert: When he was talking about integral stuff he's like screw you, I'm
1319 outahere, his body just falls...
1320 Pantozzi Still thinking about it?
1321 Sherly: We didn't get very far. We got to a...
1322 Robert: We just started saying random stuff.
1323 Pantozzi Well you never know about random stuff.
1324 Brian: [inaudible]... Is it all right if I just say yes now?
1325 Robert: Yeah, you can't take an anti derivative.
1326 Sherly: I like counting boxes.
1327 Robert: If you don't have bounds if you have bounds its all like.
1328 Mike: Well think about it you're starting from zero here.
1329 Sherly: Yes.
1330 Mike: Alright, and this is
1331 Sherly: A half.
1332 Mike: This a half.
1333 Sherly: So there's a...
1334 Mike: If you just drew something, like, here's half,
1335 Sherly: Uh huh.
1336 Mike: You're adding a half plus zero you'll come up with a line that's a slope of
1337 1/2 because this is the boxes are one unit
1338 Sherly: From where you're starting to to where you're changing to
1339 Mike: You know what I'm saying The box is just by one so it would be a half by
1340 one, and that would be like the slope, the next one is one, so you're, say
1341 add one to that so you end up with, you're actually at one and a half
1342 here...
1343 Sherly: Right.
1344 Mike: But the slope like, the slope is one because this box... you can't really...
1345 see it - this box
1346 Sherly: You're blurry.
1347 Mike: Ah...his is better. This box right here...got a slope of one I don't know I
1348 can't say it but like...
1349 Robert: The anti derivative seems more like ah... what's is called when you draw
1350 stuff out not analytical.
1351 Mike: Hum?
1352 Robert: You know like, when you draw stuff that seems like something you do
1353 when you more when you draw and the integral seems more like where
1354 you do computation, like you know what I mean... you got a function...
1355 compute the integral... anti derivatives just seem like something you draw
1356 to me I don't know. You know what I mean?
1357 Mike: Not really.
1359 Sherly: Explain yourself.
1360 Robert: No...
1361 Sherly: Come on, you started to...
1362 Brian: You can draw both.
1363 Robert: Yet but I mean this seems more like a graph.
1364 Mike: Integrals sounds more like you draw.
1365 Robert: Really, I don't know, to me it seems more computational.
1366 Sherly: How is it computational?
1367 Robert: Cause...
1368 Brian: Are you just going by the sounding of the words right now?
1369 Robert: I don't know. Um...yeah sounds like the integral.
1370 Sherly: They're both...
1371 Brian: You need to come out now:
1373 Brian: I don't know.
1374 Mike: All right, hold on, here, take this one for example, you add one.
1375 Sherly: Add one.
1376 Mike: You're adding one to it, so you end up with a line that has like a slope...
1377 Since you started like half here and then you're one and a half here, plus
1378 one is one and a half, whatever, you end up with a box that has a slope of.
1379 Sherly: One.
1380 Mike: One of over one because each unit, each one of these boxes is one,
1381 whatever you add is going to be the slope.
1382 Sherly: Right.
1383 Mike: So that's kind of why you know what I mean?
1386 Brian: A lot easier.
1387 Mike: Whatever you add becomes the slope so that's why it's the same thing.
1388 Sherly: Does that work for you?
1389 Pantozzi: I'm ready to hear it.
1390 Brian: I'm ready.
1392 Mike: Should I go up there and do it, I don't know. It's probably easier than the
1393 marker,
1394 Pantozzi: Sure.
1395 Mike: What was your exact question? Why the two are like the same graph?
1396 Brian: Or why are they different?
1397 Pantozzi: I'm remembering from class, when I learned this, integrals and
1398 antiderivatives were supposed to be the same thing but not quite, I mean I
1399 heard something like that.. .and then I heard you guys talking to me you
1400 know, and I heard you use the word anti derivative when you're talking
1401 about integrals and that's one of my issues I'm trying to understand
1402 Brian: You being the student
1403 Pantozzi: Yeah me being the student that is.
1404 Mike: We may be were just throwing of the word around without thinking about.
1405 Pantozzi: Believe me, believe me I, as a teacher too, it's something I try to think
1406 about a lot too.
1407 Robert: So it's like, can we use it interchangeably, is that what you're asking?
1408 Pantozzi: I'm...not... at...
1409 Sherly: He wants us to explain it.
1410 Pantozzi: If... I'm not sure how to answer your question. I'm not asking if you can
1411 use it interchangeably but if you want to tell me about interchange-ability,
1412 I'd be glad to hear about it.
1413 Robert: That's.. I thought you say... about can we use either one wherever or are
1414 there are all these special cases is that what you're asking?
1415 Pantozzi I'm not asking anything... I'm just asking... if that's something on your
1416 mind I'd like to hear about what you have to say about that issue.
1417 Robert: It's not.
1418 Sherly: (Laughs) Well, you were talking about boundaries or something right
1419 before.
1420 Robert: Oh, yeah, I always saw them as different, but, OK.
1421 Sherly: He wants to hear it now, that's the whole thing. He wasn't here.
1422 Robert: No, I was just wondering, I always thought that anti derivatives was like,
1423 where you had boundaries and like integrals were kind of like, you were
1424 just saying, in general, you know,
1425 Pantozzi: OK.
1426 Robert: Like you know, not like on a bound, you know like from negative infinity
1427 to infinity.
1428 Mike: Well, isn't integrals, they're going to say, take the integral, this sort of
1429 thing, (he writes something on the board - think integral from 2 to 3
1430 Robert: Yeah.
1431 Mike: So this is what you have to have you know what I mean. Antiderivatives
1432 seem like something like this where it's the whole entire you know.
1433 CAMERA (Can you stand on the other side.)
1434 Mike: Anti derivatives are the whole entire thing it's not really like at a certain
1435 point it starts... I don't know.
1436 Sherly: Explain the boxes.
1437 Mike: Well I don't know if he asked us different question but you were saying
1438 say sometimes different but they actually are the same graph, right, and
1439 like why.. .all right, Take this spot for example if you think of it as an
1440 integral you're going add one
1441 Pantozzi: The green graph I'm looking at now?
1442 Mike: No, the red one.
1443 Mike: No, the red one.
1444 Pantozzi: I'm looking at the red one?
1445 Mike: The red one is telling you to the green graph you're here, you're not there,
1446 you're right here... so from here you're adding one
1447 Pantozzi: One what?
1448 Mike: If you do an integral. One unit, whatever...
1449 Robert: Interval.
1450 Mike: So, yeah, so you would, go, this is one, so that's if you did your integral
1451 like that... but since you're like going in units of one whenever you go up
1452 is going to be your slope of the line So if you thought about the other
1453 way... I need a slope of one you'd return to the same point...
1454 Sherly:
1455 Mike: So either way you do it it's the same, so this, now let's say I'm thinking
1456 about an anti derivative - this is one, so I want to do a slope of 1, same
1457 thing if I said, add one because since you're doing units of one I really
1458 don't think it matters if you look at a graph, you're going in units of one,
1459 whatever you go up is going to be your slope also.
1460 Pantozzi: Brian, I'm not your teacher anymore,
1461 Brian: OK.
1462 Pantozzi: I'm not asking you this to check your knowledge,
1463 Mike: I hate standing up there.
448
1464 Pantozzi: What do you think about what he said?

1465 Brian: I'm a... I'm a little lost.
1466 Pantozzi: OK, talk to him, then.
1467 Mike: Urn.
1468 Sherly: You know how to do slope, right, rise over run.
1470 Sherly: So when he's moving over, that's the run, because the rise is one, in each
1471 increment, so the run is essentially what he is moving up the slope.
1472 Brian: OK.
1473 Mike: Think of the rise is always the piece that you're adding on.. .the integral
1474 you're adding on... and the run is always one
1475 Sherly: Oh the rise...
1476 Brian: Is going to be one.
1477 Mike: Then the slope is always going to be the rise...
1478 Brian: Whatever the rise is
1479 Mike: So it's like the integral is the same as the antiderivative.
1480 Robert: Do you think the integral is like one specific graph and like.
1481 Mike: Yeah don't know if the anti derivative
1482 Robert: And the integral is like a family.
1483 Mike: Has to begin at a certain point.
1484 Robert: Yeah.
1485 Mike: I don't know the actual technical definition of it.
1486 Robert: And the integral would be the family because it has the + C at the end so
1487 it's like a family of antiderivatives, like a group of them whatever...
1488 Mike: Do you have to like specify.. .if a book tells you show me the anti
1489 derivative does it have to start a specific point or, no.
1490 Pantozzi: When you talk about... Well I'll turn the question around...
1491 Mike: When you have a graph that's not continuous.. .if something like that...it
1492 just go like that.
1493 Robert: Is the anti derivative like contained in an integral
1494 Mike: Does it tell you to start at a point?
1495 Robert: Yeah, you know what I mean? the antiderivative is a smaller version and
1496 the integral is the whole big thing?
1497 [Pantozzi starts to work on the computer screen. ]
1498 Mike: You want me to erase that?
1500 Pantozzi: Um... yeah, you can erase that...
1506 Pantozzi You asked a question and I'm going to try to answer it, answer with a
1507 question... you were asking me about antiderivatives, right?
1508 Robert: Yet is it like one part and an integral is a whole bunch of graphs that could
1509 be plus C?
449
1510 Pantozzi: I'll turn the question around... tell me about the anti derivative of that
1511 graph.
1512 Robert: What graph... oh, the straight line.
1513 Pantozzi: Sorry about that...
1514 Sherly: [laughs] oh that graph.
1515 Brian: Is there any?
1516 Robert: 01 think... 0 isn't it.
1517 Sherly: Wait, wait, antiderivative, it's a constant with the slope of three.
1518 Mike: A slope of three... but I'm thinking to myself like where is it, you know?
1520 Mike: Is it at, uh, I would think...
1521 Robert: Does it start at 1, 2, 3, - 1?
1522 Pantozzi: So you're like... you're saying the antiderivative is... give me something
1523 you think is the antiderivative.
1524 Sherly: 3x...
1525 Mike: 3x.. .1 would say three x, 3 x + 3 looks nice, no wait no.
1526 Sherly: Why + 3 .
1527 Brian: So the zero...
1528 Mike: So it would cross right there nice.
1529 Sherly: Yeah, but that's the whole thing...
1530 Mike: But it doesn't really, but you don't know like where.
1531 Robert: So are you saying...
1532 Sherly: So if you added + 3, it doesn't help our...
1533 Robert: 3x + 3 is an anti derivatives and like 3 x + C is like an integral.
1534 Sherly: Did I say 4? We wanted three though.
1535 Pantozzi: Three.
1536 Mike: But I don't think the plus three matters it just looks nice.
1537 Sherly: That just... (laughs)
1538 Robert: Yeah,
1539 Mike: I think I could just be a plain 3 x.
1540 Robert: Yeah, that would be the anti derivative 3 x.
1541 Sherly: Can you put the three x in? Can you put them both in?
1542 Pantozzi Yeah.
1543 Mike: Like the three x + 3 would be the integral starting at negative one and the
1544 three x might be the anti derivative...so I mean...
1546 Mike: They are different graphs but they're like they're the same thing.
1547 Pantozzi What's the derivative of the first graph? What is the derivative of 3x + 3?
1548 Robert: 3.
1549 Pantozzi What is the derivative of the second graph.
1550 Mike: They're the same.
1551 Robert: 3. Yeah.
1552 Sherly: It's the slope...
1553 Robert: And so they both have the same derivative.
1554 Sherly: It's constant, right?
450
1555 Pantozzi: I'm not going to answer this question but I'm going to ask it...Does that
1556 have any bearing upon your question about anti derivatives... that the
1557 derivative of both those red graphs is the...
1558 Robert: Uh, yeah... no because like when you take the integral or the anti
1559 derivative it's going be the same answer in the end when you take the
derivative... but so...you don't know which one... so it doesn't matter
1561 which one you use just for this sake...I don't know. I'm sure in other
1562 problems it matters but like when you have the initial value., or
1563 something with that... but I don't think it matters.
1564 Mike: When they say anti derivative can they say start at a certain point or no?
1566 Mike: So do you have to put + C on it or something or is that only when they say
1567 integrals?
1568 Robert: I never.
1569 Mike: I never...
1571 Pantozzi: That question. Let's ask that.
1572 Mike: I've seen...
1573 Pantozzi: I think I might be able to answer this one.
1574 Mike: I was looking at a textbook and they said find the anti derivative of this
1575 graph - would they just give me the name of graph.
1576 Sherly: Look at...
1577 Mike: I'm not gonna...I'm sure its all.
1578 Mike: Would it say just give the graph would they say starting at some point or
1579 do they usually specify that?
1580 Pantozzi: If this student were well if I were answering that question... if I were asked
1581 what was the anti derivative of f of x and f of x where 3 I'd say that both
1582 those graphs were the anti derivative.
1583 Brian: You could put it anywhere right?
1584 Mike: And both are the integral.
1585 Pantozzi: Well...we're not talking about that yet...
1586 Mike: One of the integrals.
1587 Pantozzi: I would say 3 x + 8 is an anti derivative of that also, or 3 x - 10.
1588 Robert: Would you say that is an integral too or would you not, like would you say.
1589 Pantozzi: That I don't want to comment on.
1590 Sherly: Why not why couldn't you call that the integral.
1591 Robert: Is that one of the integrals..
1592 Sherly: As opposed to the exact one, OK.
1593 Robert: Because the integral is + C and we really don't know what C is unless, you
1594 know.
1595 Mike: Would this really be the integral? Technically the integral of this graph
1596 could not be negative you know, so.
1598 Pantozzi does a construction on the screen.
1599 Pantozzi This is one of the tools I have in Sketchpad for this...
1600 Brian: Pretty handy.
451
1601 Robert: This is in the book?

1602 Pantozzi: What you think I'm... what do you think this tool is doing.
1603 Mike: You're making an integral.
1604 Robert: It gives you like line segments, whatever...
1605 Brian: Did you use this one in class?
1606 Robert: Yeah, I think so.
1607 Mike: It's making an integral of this graph from that to that.
1608 Sherly: You remember?
1609 Mike: So an integral has all these restrictions on it.
1610 Pantozzi: What if I did the integral from here backwards to there.
1611 Mike: Oh.
1612 Brian: Let's test it.
1613 Mike: That would be negative, wouldn't it.
1614 Robert: Isn't it still going to give you the same thing?
1615 Brian: It's the same line.
1616 Robert: It's just going to connect down there.
1617 Mike: No. Same thing.
1618 Brian: Area is no different it's still 3.
1619 Pantozzi: I'm going to do this one again and watch what happens.
1620 Brian: What does that give you a linking point,
1621 Pantozzi: It gives the linking point.
1622 Brian: Give you a positive link and a negative link like when you go backwards
1623 is the top part the red part? does that mean you have to bring it down low?
1624 Pantozzi: That's what this tool does OK but I don't know if that makes any sense to
1625 you or not. But that's what this tool does, when I do it this way it gives me
1626 the red point in that direction and when I do it this way it links in the other
1627 direction.
1628 Robert: You have to link red and blue
1629 Pantozzi: You have to, the point you get to use to link is the red one.
1630 Brian: That's not a hint or anything though is, it,
1631 Mike: Well...
1632 Brian: Because it just means you are going to the left so obviously you are going
1633 to the negative so it will put it at the bottom part of the graph, right,
1634 Pantozzi When you said hint you meant, um.
1635 Robert: The answer to that rhetorical question.
1636 Brian: Not a hint, but just overall... I mean it's telling you its going negative
1637 pretty much right? If they're giving you that linking point you've got to
1638 link it to the bottom of the graph right now.
1639 Pantozzi Yeah, I see what you're saying.
1640 Brian: What happens when you cross the y axis.
1641 Sherly: Is the anti derivative a particular integral.
1642 Brian: ... same thing... nothing new happens?
1643 Robert: That's what I thought.
1644 Sherly: Like there are several...
1645 Mike: I don't know... I'm confused now...
1646 Sherly: You're saying there's a family of integrals but an anti derivative.
452
1647 Robert: Is one of those...

1648 Sherly: Is one particular one of those.
1649 Robert: Yet that's what I thought it was that's what I think.
1650 Brian: Then...
1651 Robert: I'm just saying stuff.
1652 Brian: Won't do anything different will it.
1653 Pantozzi: Now got all these things constructed so what I'm gonna do through the
1654 next bit of the session is show you them and just see what comments you
1655 make and any questions that it might bring up.
1656 Brian: Very cool.
1657 Sherly: I like that.
1658 Pantozzi: Besides it being cool... does it have any meaning to you...What do you
1659 think it's doing?
1660 Robert: (Inaudible)
1661 Brian: Is it just that?
1662 Pantozzi: Is it?
1663 Robert: Showing you the integral and the graph together? area under the graph or
1664 something?
1665 Mike: It's counting the area.
1666 Robert: Yeah,
1667 Mike: And then, you know.
1668 Robert: Drawing the line.
1669 Sherly: Adding.
1670 Pantozzi: I can, I can, change this thing here so that it starts the integral at a different
1671 number you pick.
1672 Robert: 0.
1673 Sherly: No... point5.
1674 Brian: Negative.
1675 Mike: 6.9.
1676 Brian: You always...
1678 Pantozzi: Somebody pick.
1679 Brian: Go Zero.
1680 Pantozzi: Zero?
1681 Brian: See what happens.
1682 Sherly: |laughs] ...table...
1683 Robert: It's higher up.
1684 Mike: It's the same exact graph.
1685 Robert: Yeah, the same exact graph.
1686 Mike: Just offset a bit.
1687 Robert: It's up 5 or whatever number that is.
1688 Pantozzi: So I'll use my tool here to do this. I should probably make all the colors
1689 match, but.
1690 Robert: It's OK.
1691 Pantozzi: So what am I actually creating here right now according to in your mind.
1692 Robert: The anti derivative.
453
1693 Mike: I don't...

1694 Sherly: Yeah, the antiderivative
1695 Mike: He's doing the integral right now because you're taking... those little
1696 triangles are areas and you're taking the area and drawing a line that
1697 that's long and adding it on to the next line.
1698 Robert: I think it's that's the anti derivative and if you rotate the up and down on
1699 the y axis and that's the integral to pull it up and down.
1700 Pantozzi: What would you like me to pull up and down.
1701 Robert: THe integral...the anti derivative.
1702 Sherly: Pick one!!
1703 Pantozzi Physically on the screen is there anything I can do to illustrate what you're
1704 saying.
1705 Sherly: Start at a different point.
1706 Robert: You can start at a different point.
1707 Pantozzi Start with this tool at a different point?
1709 Pantozzi I'll start at 0 like Brian suggested.
1710 Robert: And that's the anti derivative at 0, or, you know what I mean?
1711 Mike: Little mistake in there.
1712 Pantozzi In Sketchpad there is undo...
1713 Robert: Macs don't have right click...
1714 Sherly: How come that doesn't look like it's shifted.
1715 Mike: No, It's.
1716 Sherly: ...it's more...
1717 Mike: No it's it's shifted.
1718 Sherly: Is it?
1719 Mike: Don't even look at those two long segments in front.
1720 Sherly: Oh.
1721 Robert: Just look at one point and then go straight up
1722 Sherly: Yeah, that's true...
1723 Robert: Yeah, it's.
1724 Pantozzi OK I started at a different point... now I've started at the integrals adding
1725 the areas at 2 and the other one at 0, what thoughts do you have about this
1726 if any.
1727 Robert: Nothing, I think the bigger one is the anti derivative at 0 and the other one
1728 is the anti derivative at 2 and they're both part of the integral, like, they
1729 take in the integral which is all the graphs at every point the graph exists.
1730 Mike: I think it's the other way around
1731 Robert: The other way around?
1732 Mike: I think it's the integral at 0.
1733 Robert: And then all of them... I don't know...
1734 Mike: And like the anti derivative of that would be continuing throughout all the
1735 whole entire thing... you know what I mean.
1736 Robert: Yeah Yeah yeah. So you're saying the family.
1737 Mike: It's just a portion of the ... that one graph
1738 Robert: So it's one of them.
1739 Mike: Yeha like that integral is a piece of that anti derivative that would go
1740 through that point you know.
1741 Sherly: Isn't that what he said... integrals...
1742 Robert: I said it the other way around.
1743 Sherly: You did?
1744 Robert: Yeah, I said it the other way around.
1745 Mike: You know, he said the anti derivative was those lines
1746 Robert: A line at a certain point.
1747 Mike: But it doesn't matter where it started if it did start somewhere then there
1748 wouldn't be any negatives.. .but here it's different, there was, you know.
1749 Robert: But we agree that that one is a certain graph and one is like a family,
1750 bunch of graphs you know what I mean, we're just talking about which
1751 ones which.
1752 Mike: I wouldn't say a family what you mean.
1753 Robert: Like a group, any.
1754 Mike: Yeah, cause you can say that all the graphs that are anti derivatives of that
1755 they're all anti derivatives of that... doesn't matter, but these are specific
1756 intervals.
1757 Pantozzi: Um, whenever I'm doing research, I'll watch the tape later, and I'll regret
1758 saying something, because, the idea is.. .you're talking...
1759 Mike: Yeah yeah.
1760 Pantozzi: So I may regret saying this later, but I'll record this now that I've said this,
1761 but I'll say it anyway, we'll see what happens. Let's go back to this other
1762 page and do this... here's the graph...I'm going to get... let's make this
1763 make this original graph y = 2x. If I just gave you this graph and said,
1764 what's the integral from two to three... what would you say?
1765 Mike: It would be...
1766 Robert: 2?
1767 Mike: What would we say? Or what would we do?
1768 Pantozzi Yeah, what answer would you give?
1769 Mike: Would be a piece of a x squared that started right there
1770 Robert: Six minus 4, right?
1771 Mike: It would just be a piece though it wouldn' t be a whole graph...
1772 Robert: Yeah yeah
1773 Mike: That little window right there it wouldn't be anything above or under...
1774 what is that?
1775 Robert: The reason I think its the other way around whenever you hear the term
1776 like anti derivatives you hear integral, you know so...
1777 Sherly: Yes, but in all those books they're the same.
1778 Brian: I always thought you could switch it...
1779 Mike: I always wondered how they typed it on exams and stuff. I always
1780 wondered...
1781 Sherly: How they get the symbols.
1782 Mike: Yeah they like print type it out and stuff.
1783 Robert: How they use x type or something...
1784 Mike: Go something... goes to you or something...
1785 Pantozzi: OK so if I just... if I put that, where this is the f(x) graph, [types symbol
1786 for definite integral from 2 to 3 of f of x] what would you say, the same
1787 answer as before?
1788 Mike: Yeah it would be that from two to three it would be that that little piece of
1789 like the x squared graph.
1790 Brian: Yes.
1791 Mike: Just from 2 to 3 but it starts at 0 it wouldn't be like up high as if it were a
17QT regular x squared... I don't know... is it like x squared?
1793 Sherly: Yeah.
1794 Mike: It would be like x squared minus 1 but just that one piece from 2 to 3
1795 wouldn't be anything else.
1796 Pantozzi: Is that what everyone else thinks.
1798 Sherly: Why is it down?
1799 Mike: Yeah, because it brings it down. A parabola like...
1800 Brian: Why do you start from zero though?
1801 Mike: You don't start...
1802 Brian: Didn' t you just say...
1803 Mike: You start at 2.
1804 Brian: 2is0.
1805 Mike: 2 is zero.
1806 Robert: 2.
1807 Mike: Then it goes up to two actually yes two but not in a straight line though,
1808 kind of a curve...
1809 Brian: Curve.
1810 Mike: That's at all it is just a tiny little curve
1811 Robert: From (2,0) to (3,2)
1812 Mike: But I guess... I...that's what the integral is.
1813 Sherly: But don't you have to draw the whole thing out.
1814 Mike: No if that's what it is you just have to draw that little piece.
1815 Brian: Yes.
1816 Robert: Yeah.
1817 Pantozzi: I'm thinking about what my next question is.
1819 Pantozzi: All right, this is the question I want to ask. I'll write this on the board. I
1820 know in one book that I have it says, it says this... it says fundamental
1821 theorem of calculus it has a big title on it... and it says.
1822 CAMERA Can you move to that side.
1823 Pantozzi: That side?
1824 CAMERA I'm so sorry.
1825 Pantozzi: I understand.
1826 CAMERA Thank you.
1827 Pantozzi: Here is good?
1828 CAMERA Yes, perfect.
1829 Pantozzi: The theorem says, this is exactly what it says... , now this means
1830 derivative, it says derivative, then it has a big parentheses,.. .and then it
1831 says all of that, and then it says... yeah... can you break this apart, I m
1832 that student again, can you break this apart for me at all. I know this
1833 means derivative,
1834 Sherly: Yeah.
1835 Pantozzi: I know this means integral graph, this is what I know as the student.
1836 Mike: But I don't even know, is that even true? If you have the integral in the
1837 middle, from zero to x, you're only getting half of it half of the full f of t,
1838 then you do the derivative of that, there's no.. .from zero there's no left
1839 part of to, you know to...
1840 Pantozzi: Well, let me I'm going to draw a graph up here...
1841 Mike: But x could be negative does it matter?
1842 Pantozzi: X could be negative 1, for instance it could be negative one,
1843 Mike: Then it would only be.
1844 Pantozzi: So then it would be area from...
1845 Robert: Area from negative one to zero.
1846 Pantozzi: If this said, x could be any number here, it could be 1,2,3,4,5,6... it
1847 could be negative one, - 2 , - 3 , - 5 . so if I have a graph and my starting
1848 point as you have called it is zero then the integral from zero to one is that
1849 and as I think that you have been saying and please correct me if I'm
1850 wrong because I'm not trying to teach anything here I'm trying to speak
1851 back with you that you would have drawn that (Pantozzi draws the area
1852 under a constant function from zero to one and then draw a segment to
1853 illustrate the graph of the area) Do you agree with that?
1854 Brian: Yes.
1855 Pantozzi: Then if it was from 0 to negative one then it would be this (I draw in
1856 another rectangle)
1857 Mike: Then you would have drawn that.
1858 Pantozzi: I would have drawn that... so I do want to answer your question I may
1859 regret it later.
1860 Mike: Is it that is it saying that right there is F of x not the whole f of x but just
1861 part of it?
1862 Pantozzi When you draw this... you guys drew only from 0 to the positives but it's
1863 also possible to draw it the other way.
1864 Mike: But in this example, x can only be one number, you know what I mean?
1865 Pantozzi In this example?
1866 Mike: In that, x is one number.
1867 Pantozzi This means the same thing as if... it means here.
1868 Brian: So it can be anything pretty much.
1869 Pantozzi It can be any number.
1870 Mike: All right, yeah.
1871 Pantozzi So is it a whole function? yeah it is a whole function.
1872 Mike: Yeah.
1873 Pantozzi This thing goes that way and it can also be drawn this way. So I answered
1874 that, I've answered that question, this is a whole function,
1875 Mike: I got that.
1876 Pantozzi: So my question is, I'm that student still, when I draw this I do what you
1877 did today I do that I've understood what you've said to me that you draw
1878 this and I understand how you draw it I think this says the derivative of
1879 this is the function you started with.
1880 Mike: Yeah.
1881 Pantozzi: OK. I guess my question me as the student you've been helping is why,
1882 why is that true and, this is believe me this is a tough question it's not
1883 something I expect you to answer in the next 30 seconds but that's one of
1884 the things I'm interested in as that student I read this I get what you've told
1885 me over the last four hours over two months of course but I get you know
1886 what you've told me... I think I'm at the stage where I want to... to know
1887 why that's true.
1888 Robert: It's kind of saying like multiplication and division, you multiplied by
1889 something in and divide by something it's kind of the same thing.
1890 Mike: It's not quite like inverse functions, one's accumulation and you know...
1891 they're two totally different things.
1892 Robert: Maybe they are inverses.
1893 Sherly: They're not totally different things they're the same thing but shifted so the
1894 slopes are still same.
1895 Mike: One way you're adding things and the other way you're just finding slopes
1896 and how would those two things that you know someone you know, they
1897 come out to be the same thing.
1898 Sherly: Right.
1899 Mike: Someone who probably never seen it before would say oh that's got to be
1900 something different has to be, you know, that doesn't make sense, but
1901 when they see it all you know likely.
1902 Robert: The change of area being inversely related like multiplication and division
1903 Mike: Like what I said with the boxes whatever you go up is going to be the
1904 slope.
1906 Mike: So there's your relation - slope and area, you know, so you mean...
1907 Robert: Day.
1908 Sherly: How come you don't get multiple derivatives well because it's the slope.
1909 Mike: Basically what that's saying is that it starts at 0 but goes both ways.
1910 Brian: D over d is 1.
1912 Brian: So at zero, what's f of t boom you get f of x.
1913 Robert: Pretty smart. But what if didn't contain at t...
1914 Brian: Who cares...it doesn' t matter... bring on some algebra.
1915 Sherly: (inaudible) Brian.
1916 Pantozzi OK. I think I want to stop.
1917 Sherly: Stay with us Brian.
1918 Mike: ...calculus...
1919 Robert: Sorry., let you down. .. .no really, don't write in the corner, because when
1920 you photocopy, it's hard.
1921 Sherly: Really. OK, is that good enough?
458
1922 Brian: Don't make our job any harder.

1923 Sherly: Photocopy?
1924 Brian: We got special instructions today.
1925 Sherly: To photocopy? Just minimize it then.
1927 Brian: Just look at the back of the sheet.
1933 Brian: Just in case we miss something.
1934 Sherly: He's getting it too.
1935 Pantozzi: Oh, I guess I do have one more question.
1936 Mike: Shoot.
1937 Brian: What are we doing tonight?
1939 Pantozzi: I'm drawing the integral from 2 to x.
1940 Mike: I like that.
1941 Pantozzi: Don't worry about it going back it leaves...
1942 Mike: A little bug...
1943 Pantozzi: No, I'm just...
1944 Brian: (sighs)
1945 Pantozzi: I just want to leave a trace of the whole thing. No that graph... here's what
1946 I've programmed the computer to do. After this I'll explain.
1947 Brian: That's cool.
1948 Pantozzi: It deleted the part down there but what do you think it would do?
1949 Brian: Curve up.
1950 Pantozzi: Here's what... the computer to do. I told it make a little trapezoid... and
1951 there's lots of little trapezoids there.. .and I said, take the area of that
1952 trapezoid and go up a little on the graph and rather than, remember how
1953 we were talking a little bit before about being one, going over one...and
1954 counting the area... the computer is doing it by .01.
1955 Brian: So it's like exact... as exact as need be...
1956 Robert: Well, it's as exact as... it's as exact as .01.
1957 Robert: Yeah, exact as...
1958 Pantozzi Yeah, it's plotting how much area is under there, and its approximating it
1959 of course, with trapezoids. Now, why does it go down now? Why does the
1960 graph in red go down?
1961 Brian: Negative area?
1962 Pantozzi Negative area? OK. Now why is the graph...
1963 Mike: Going down...
1964 Pantozzi Going down even though the area is up here.
1965 Brian: (makes sound)
1966 Pantozzi You may not know the answer to this I just thought I'd ask about that part.
1967 Robert: Cause it's got to compensate for all the negative area before it?
1968 Mike: Just think of it as, whatever you programmed it, why is it it you draw a
1969 trapezoid in the other direction, is it negative?
1970 Robert: Aw...
1971 Mike: You know what I mean?
1972 Robert: Yeah.
1973 Brian: Maybe it gets less negative as it keeps going, though.
1974 Pantozzi: Well, notice once it goes back into the negatives the.. .area is negative
1975 here again in the negatives... this I mean down here. Then the graph starts
1976 to go back up again.
1977 Robert: You multiply by the interval and the interval is negative one instead of
1978 positive one?
1979 Pantozzi: Right, that's one way to look at it.
1980 Robert: And...
1981 Pantozzi: I'm not... I'm not delving into that question. The question I really have
1982 about this though is... there is the graph I just drew in red, OK?
1983 Brian: Yeah.
1984 Pantozzi: How would you convince somebody that the derivative of that red graph is
1985 the purple graph or is it... put it this way.. .is the derivative of that right
1986 graph the purple graph or something close to it or something shifted or.
1987 Robert: Key points...
1988 Brian: Key points where the slope is 0.
1989 Robert: Where it changes direction yeah.
1990 Brian: The slope right there is 0 and the original graph crosses zero there.
1991 Pantozzi: OK.
1992 Mike: Same over there too.
1993 Robert: Yeah where it crosses zero...
1994 Brian: That wouldn' t convince me totally?
1995 Robert: No?
1996 Brian: But maybe...
1997 Robert: I guess you could show them...
1998 Brian: A little bit more.
1999 Robert: Yeah, two intervals and you can say what's happening...look and kinda
2000 see how it's decreasing so it's negative in between the two...
2001 Pantozzi Yeah.
2002 Robert: Between fourish and eight?
2003 Brian: Yeah.
2004 Robert: See how it's decreasing and it's negative in between.
2005 Pantozzi So between...
2006 Robert: 4 it's zero and like 8... 6 , 7 , 8,
2007 Pantozzi Right.
2008 Robert: The area is negative and the graph's decreasing. You know what I mean
2009 and after it's increasing and positive.
2010 Pantozzi All right. Thanks!
2011 Robert: Thank you...
2012 Pantozzi You feel any better about the fundamental theorem of calculus at this
2013 point?
460
2014 Sherly: We do, but you still don't.

901 ^ [inaudible]
2016 [inaudible]
2017 Pantozzi What does better mean?
2018 Sherly: Because you've had more experience with it. We haven't thought about it
2019 since... 4 years ago. But you continually use it so like what you think
2020 about what questions you arise would be different from like what...
2021 Pantozzi I see.
2022 Brian: Cause you can see what we're thinking. You know what I mean like?
2023 Sherly: When you ask a teacher a question randomly, they've been using all that
2024 like they know but for us we don't know like it's not in our grasp.
2025 Pantozzi Hmm.
2026 Robert: I think you know more than most teachers though because they just ask us
2027 to give you the formula but you're trying to actually like understand it.
461
Appendix E: Class notes from AP Calculus in 1999
In our discussions on days 22-24, the following question arose out our previous
investigations:
Is the graph of the integral as a function,
\f(t) dt, really just the graph of the antiderivative of

a
Our investigations and examples from earlier in

the course seemed to indicate that this was so. Remember
X
that the expression J f(t) dt is a function - the amount of

a
area between the graph and the x-axis, starting at point a,
as function of x.
The diagram to the right shows the graph of f{x)
and jf(t)dt.
a
x
To make the graph of J f(t) dt, we found the areas of individual rectangles and then
a
plotted these areas on a new graph, accumulating as we went.
Our previous investigations involved calculating the value of an integral from a

2
particular number to another number, J f(x) dx, for instance. To do this, we used
0
rectangles (or trapezoids,) found their areas, and added up. We found that we could get as
close as we wanted to the "actual" value of the area by making more rectangles.
4
But what is the "actual" area? What
number does finding the area using more
rectangles actually find? We explored this
theoretically: ^ _ J l i ^
We agreed that there was one rectangle lillll

that could be used to find the area between the Silll
graph and the x-axis. Bill
The area of this rectangle would be lillll
/(c)[M- Illl
But so what?
-2 2
462
Well, if we plot this area (just this one rectangle) - graph the integral, in other
words, we would get a graph like this. Its slope would be . Or just / ( c ) .
b—a
But now, this is not the graph of

the integral - this is total area. But we can
see that the slope of this segment is / ( c ) . f(c)[b-a]
But this is not the graph of the
antiderivative, either.
But the fact that it's slope is
/(c) is suggests a connection between the
integral and the antiderivative. (Why?)
To ground this theoretical discussion in 4 *
something for our experience, however, I

suggested that we imagine that the graph under
discussion was a graph of an object's speed.
Although the object's speed varies, when it is
done moving, (or when we stop measuring) it has
moved a certain distance during a certain amount
of time. Thus, it has an average speed. This
average speed is the height of the rectangle we
used above.
Now, the graph of the distance traveled
by this object is the antiderivative of the
graph of the speed. (Why?)
To find the total distance traveled,
we should just subtract the final value
from the initial value: F{b)- F{a). To
find the average speed traveled over this
time period from a to b, calculate
F(b)- F(a) „ r ,. .
. Of course, this is a slope, so
b-a
there is a point c on the derivative graph
with this value - / ( c ) . This point could
also be called F\c), since the derivative
of F i s / as we have set it up in this
problem.
F(b)-F(a)
So f(c)= This
b-a
statement says that there is some time, c,
where the speed at that moment is equal
to the average speed for the whole trip.
(This made sense - if you end up
traveling 60 miles in 1 hour, you either
traveled 60 miles per hour the whole trip,
or went slower and 60 for some of the
time, and faster than 60 for some of the
time. But at some point, this means you
must have traveled 60 miles per hour.)
But rewritten,
f(c)[b -a] = F(b)- F(a). The right side
of this equation is the area under the
graph of f(x).
So the point x = c is the point

which can be used to find the actual area
under the graph. We know the point
exists because of the preceding
discussion.
OK, maybe this is all seems like it would have to be true.

464
But now, we have another connection between the graph of the integral - area -
and the antiderivative - slope.
So, is the graph of the integral of a function f(x) the same as the antiderivative of
/(*)?
The true graph would be continuous - we have approximated it by making

segments. But, using the above, we can prove that each of the segments has a slope that is
equal to the value of the graph we began with f(x) - making f(x) the derivative of this
new graph. But that means that the graph we made is the antiderivative of f{x).
Journal assignment: write out the argument of why the graph of the integral is the same as
the graph of the antiderivative.
In this assignment, you must use words and symbols to show that when one
constructs the graph of the integral one segment at a time, each segment has a slope equal
to the value of f(x). The key to this argument is the fact that a point c can always be
found for every rectangle to make its area equal to the actual area under the graph. (To
answer Mike's question, in order to make the graph, we want to use lots of small
rectangles, not one big one.)
Now, why is the statement J/(*) dx = F(b)- F(a) (where F(x)= f(x)) true?
a
\ f{x) dx is found by taking the areas of rectangles, making the number rectangles
a
large, and finding the limit as the number of rectangles grows to infinity. Can we be sure
that this process leads to a certain answer? Can we find this answer with a
straightforward formula?
Yes - by choosing a value of c on every interval we use so that the area of the
rectangle is equal to the actual area under the graph. We know we can do this.
The area of this rectangle is / ( q ) ^ - x 0 ] . If

this is our first rectangle, then this value will be plotted ^-""^ ~~"~~
at the point xv(/(c^jiq - JC0]J . Or, since we are plotting f(c>o
a new function, just call it J C ^ F ^ ) . (Remember that the
first point plotted would be x 0 ,0, or just xo,F(x0).
We know that this graph is going to be the graph

of the antiderivative (if we make it continuous.)
We know that the sum of all the rectangle will be
the true area.
465
So the first segment will go from 0 to /(c,)[x{ -x0]. Its height on the
F(x ) - F(x )
antiderivative graph is F(x{)- F(x0). (It's slope, of course, is —, which is just
X j — X0
/(q).
But the important part here is, as you continue to make this graph of the integral,
is that the "next" rectangle will have an area of f(c2)[x2 - JCJ . But when you plot this ,
you'll start at F(x,) and go up to a new point, which you can call F(x2). This point is
f(c2 )[x2 - xl ] higher than the last one. The height of the segment will be F(x2)- F(x1).
Is you continue this process to the end of the whole interval for which you're
trying to find the area, you have found the exact total area by adding up all the areas of
the rectangles. But on this graph that you've made, the total area,
f{cx )[x, - x0 ] + f(c2 )[x2 - xx ] + f(c3)[x3 - x2 ] + • • • + f(cnA )[x„_x - xn_2 ] + f(c0 )[xn - xn_, ]
is the same as
[F(Xl)~ F(x0)]+[F(x2)- F(Xl)]+[F(x3y F(x 2 )]+--+[F(x n . 1 )- F(xn_2)]+[F(xJ- F(xnA)]
but if you notice, that whole line just equals F(xn)- F(x0) - the "final" point of
the antiderivative minus the initial point.
b
So , using a and b as our initial and final points on the x-axis, \f{x) dx = F(b)- F(a).
References
Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education,
32(2-3), 131-152.
Alcock, L., & Simpson, A. (2002). Definitions: Dealing with Categories Mathematically.
For the Learning of Mathematics, 22(2), 28-34.
Alcock, L., & Simpson, A. (2004). Convergence of sequences and series: Interactions
between visual reasoning and the learner's beliefs about their own role.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57, 1-32.
Alcock, L., & Simpson, A. (2005). Convergence of sequences and series 2: Interactions
between nonvisual reasoning and the learner's beliefs about their own role.
Arcavi, A. (2003). The Role of Visual Representations in Learning Mathematics.
Artigue, M. (1991). Analysis. In D. O. Tall (Ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp.
177-199). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Asiala, M., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., & Schwingendorf, K. E. (1997). The Development
of Students' Graphical Understanding of the Derivative. Journal of Mathematical
Behavior, 16(A), 339-432.
Bartkovich, K. G., Goebel, J. A., Graves, J. L., & Teague, D. J. (1996). Contemporary
Calculus Through Applications. Dedham, Massachusetts: Janson Publications Inc.
Berger, M. (2004). The Functional Use of a Mathematical Sign. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 55, 81-102.
Berger, M. (2005). Vygotsky's Theory of Concept Formation and Mathematics
Education. In H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th
Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics
Education (Vol. 2). Melbourne, Australia: International Group for the Psychology
of Mathematics Education.
Berry, J. S., & Nyman, M. A. (2003). Promoting students' graphical understanding of the
calculus. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(4), 497-495.
Beth, A., & Piaget, J. (1966). Mathematical Epistemology and Psychology. Dordrecht,
The Netherlands: Reidel.
Bezuidenhout, J. (1998). First-year university students' understanding of rate of change.
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology,
29(3), 389-399.
Bezuidenhout, J. (2001). Limits and continuity: some conceptions of first-year students.
International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology,
32(4), 487-500.
Bezuidenhout, J., & Olivier, A. (2000). Students' Conceptions of the Integral. In
Proceedings of the 24th Conference for the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 73-80). Hiroshima, Japan.
Bloch, I. (2003). Teaching functions in a graphical milieu: what forms of knowledge
enable students to conjecture and prove? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52,
3-28.
Blum, W., & Kirsch, A. (1991). Preformal Proving: Examples and Reflections.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1-2), 127-150.
Borasi, R. (1992). Learning mathematics through inquiry. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
467
Boyer, C. B. (1949). The Concepts of the Calculus, A Critical and Historical Discussion
of the Derivative and the Integral. New York: Hafner Publishing Company.
Bressoud, D. M. (1992). How Should We Introduce Integration? The College
Mathematics Journal, 23(4), 296-298.
Bressoud, D. M. (2005). The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Paper presented at the
AP National Conference, Houston.
Brownell, W. A. (1935). Psychological Considerations in the Learning and Teaching of
Arithmetic. In The Teaching of Arithmetic: The Tenth Yearbook of the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics (pp. 1-31). New York: Teachers' College
Bureau of Publications.
Byers, V., & Erlwanger, S. (1984). Content and Form in Mathematics. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 15, 259-275.
Carlson, M. P. (1998). A Cross-Sectional Investigation of the Development of the
Function Concept. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.),
Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. Ill (Vol. 7, pp. 114-162).
Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
Carlson, M. P., Jacobs, S., Coe, E., Larsen, S., & Hsu, E. (2002). Applying Covariational
Reasoning While Modeling Dynamic Events: A Framework and a Study. Journal
for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(5), 352-378.
Carlson, M. P., Smith, N., & Persson, J. (2003). Developing and Connecting Calculus
Students' Notions of Rate-of-change and Accumulation: The Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus. In N. Pateman, B. Dougherty & J. Zilliox (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 165-172). Honolulu, Hawaii.
Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Clements, C , Pantozzi, R., & Sketetee, S. (2001). Exploring Calculus with the
Geometer's Sketchpad. Emeryville, CA: Key Curriculum Press.
Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1993). Discourse, Mathematical Thinking, and
Classroom Practice. In E. Forman, N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for
Learning: Sociocultural Dynamics in Children's Development. New York, NY:
Oxford University Press.
Cobb, P., Wood, T., Yackel, E., Nicholls, G., Wheatley, G., Trigatti, B., et al. (1991).
Assessment of a problem-centered second-grade mathematics project. Journal for
Research in Mathematics Education, 22(1), 3-29.
Corbett, D., & Wilson, B. (1995). Make a Difference With, Not For, Students: A Plea to
Researchers and Reformers. Educational Researcher, 24(5), 12-17.
Cornu, B. (1991). Limits. In D. O. Tall (Ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 153-
166). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Nichols, D., Schwingendorf, K. E., Thomas, K., & Vidakovic,
D. (1996). Understanding the Limit Concept: Beginning with a Coordinated
Process Scheme. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(2), 167-192.
Courant, R., & Robbins, H. (1941). What is Mathematics? New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Cunningham, F. (1965). The Two Fundamental Theorems of Calculus. The American
Mathematical Monthly, 72(4), 406-407.
468
Davis, R. B. (1984). Learning Mathematics: The Cognitive Science Approach to

Mathematics Education. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Davis, R. B. (1986). Calculus at University High School. In R. G. Douglas (Ed.), Toward
a Lean and Lively Calculus. MAA Notes #6 (pp. 36). Washington D.C.:
Mathematical Association of America.
Davis, R. B. (1992). Understanding "Understanding". Journal of Mathematical Behavior,
/ 7(3), 225-242.
Davis, R. B. (1997). Postulated Cognitive Processes in Mathematics. In E. Pehkonen
(Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 131-138). Lahti, Finland:
University Of Helsinki.
Davis, R. B., & Maher, C. A. (1990). What are the issues? In R. B. Davis & C. A. Maher
(Eds.), Schools, Mathematics, and the World of Reality (pp. 9-34). Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Davis, R. B., & Maher, C. A. (1997). How Students Think: The Role of Representations.
In L. D. English (Ed.), Mathematical Reasoning: Analogies, Metaphors, and
Images (pp. 93-116). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Davis, R. B., & Vinner, S. (1986). The Notion of Limit: Some Seemingly Unavoidable
Misconception Stages. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5(3), 281-303.
Dennis, D., & Confrey, J. (1996). The creation of continuous exponents: A study of the
methods and epistemology of John Wallis. In J. Kaput, A. Schoenfeld & E.
Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics II (Vol. 6, pp. 33-60). AMS
& MAA: Providence, RI.
Diefenderfer, C. (Ed.). (2005). Special Focus: The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.
Advanced Placement Professional Development Materials. New York: The
College Board.
diSessa, A. (2004). Metarepresentation: Native Competence and Targets for Instruction.
Cognition & Instruction, 22(3), 293-331.
diSessa, A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing:
Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,
10, 117-160.
diSessa, A., & Sherin, B. (2000). Meta-representation: an introduction. Journal of
Mathematical Behavior, 19(4), 285-398.
Dorfler, W. (2000). Means for Meaning. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel & K. McClain (Eds.),
Symbolizing and Communicating in Mathematics Classrooms: Perspectives on
Discourse, Tools, and Instructional Design (pp. 99-131). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Dorfler, W. (2002). Formation of Mathematical Objects as Decision Making.
Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 4(4), 337-350.
Dreyfus, T. (1991). Advanced Mathematical Thinking Processes. In D. O. Tall (Ed.),
Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 25 -41). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishing.
Dubinsky, E. (1991a). The Constructive Aspects of Reflective Abstraction in Advanced
Mathematics. In L. P. Steffe (Ed.), Epistemological Foundations of Mathematical
Experience. New York: Springer-Verlag.
469
Dubinsky, E. (1991b). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. O.

Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 95 - 123). Dordrecht: Kluwer
Academic Publishing.
Dubinsky, E., & Schwingendorf, K. E. (1991). Constructing Calculus Concepts:
Cooperation in A Computer Laboratory. In C. Leinbach, J. Hundhausen, A.
Ostebee, L. Senechal & D. Small (Eds.), The Laboratory Approach to Teaching
Calculus: MAA Notes #20. Washington, D.C.: MAA.
Duffin, J., & Simpson, A. (1993). Natural, Conflicting and Alien. Journal of
Mathematical Behavior, 12, 313-328.
Duffin, J., & Simpson, A. (2000). A Search for Understanding. Journal of Mathematical
Behavior, 18(4), 415-427.
Dufour-Janvier, B., Bednarz, N., & Belanger, M. (1987). Pedagogical Considerations
Concerning the Problem of Representation. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of
Representation in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics (pp. 109-122).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Duval, R. (1999). Representation, Vision, and Visualization: Cognitive Functions in
Mathematical Thinking, Basic Issues for Learning. In F. Hitt & M. Santos (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the
International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 3-
26). Cuernavaca, Mexico.
Duval, R. (2006). A Cognitive Analysis of Problems of Comprehension in a Learning of
Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103-131.
Eisenberg, T. (1991). Functions and Associated Learning Difficulties. In D. O. Tall (Ed.),
Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 141-152). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Eisenberg, T. (1992). On the Development of a Sense for Functions. In H. Guershon & E.
Dubinsky (Eds.), The Concept of Function: Aspects of Epistemology and
Pedagogy. MAA Notes, Volume 25 (pp. 153-174). Washington DC: Mathematical
Association of America.
Erlwanger, S. (1973). Benny's conception of rules and answers in IPI mathematics.
Journal of Children's Mathematical Behaviour, 1(2).
Ernest, P. (2006). A Semiotic Perspective of Mathematical Activity: The Case of
Number. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 67-101.
Even, R. (1998). Factors Involved in Linking Representations of Functions. The Journal
of Mathematical Behavior, 17(1), 105-121.
Ferrini-Mundy, J., & Graham, K. (1991). An Overview of the Calculus Curriculum
Reform Effort: Issues for Learning, Teaching, and Curriculum Development. The
American Mathematical Monthly, 98(1), 627-635.
Ferrini-Mundy, J., & Graham, K. (1994). Research in Calculus Learning: Understanding
of Limits, Derivatives, and Integrals. In J. J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.),
Research Issues in Undergraduate Mathematics Learning, MAA Notes #33.
Washington D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.
Ferrini-Mundy, J., & Lauten, A. D. (1993). Teaching and Learning Calculus. In P. S.
Wilson (Ed.), Research Ideas for the Classroom - High School Mathematics (pp.
155-176). New York: Macmillan.
470
Forman, E. (1996). Learning Mathematics as Participation in Classroom Practice:

Implications of Sociocultural Theory for Educational Reform. In L. P. Steffe, P.
Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of Mathematical
Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2005). Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem
solving: Insights from a longitudinal study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,
24(3-4), 361-372.
Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting Mathematics Education (Vol. 9). Kluwer Academic
Publishers: Boston.
Ganter, S. L. (2001). Changing Calculus: A Report on Evaluation Efforts and National
Impact From 1988 - 1998. MAA Notes #56. Washington, D.C.: Mathematical
Association of America.
Ginsberg, H. P., Lopez, L. S., Mukhopadhyay, S., Yamamoto, T., Willis, M., & Kelley,
M. S. (1992). Assessing Understandings of Arithmetic. In R. A. Lesh & S. Lamon
(Eds.), Assessment of Authentic Performance in School Mathematics. Washington
D.C.: AAAS Press.
Giraldo, V., Carvalho, L. M., & Tall, D. O. (2003). Descriptions and Definitions in the
Teaching of Elementary Calculus. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty & J. Zilliox
(Eds.), Proceedings of the 27th Conference of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 445-452). Honolulu, Hawaii.
Goldin, G. A. (1998a). The PME Working Group on Representations. The Journal of
Goldin, G. A. (1998b). Representational Systems, Learning, and Problem Solving in
Mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 137-165.
Goldin, G. A. (2003). Developing Complex Understandings: On the Relation of
Mathematics Education Research to Mathematics. Educational Studies in
Goldin, G. A., & Kaput, J. J. (1996). A Joint Perspective on the Idea of Representation in
Learning and Doing Mathematics. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A.
Goldin & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of Mathematical Learning (pp. 397-430).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goldin, G. A., & Shteingold, N. (2001). Systems of Representations and the
Development of Mathematical Concepts. In A. A. Cuoco & F. Curcio (Eds.), The
Roles of Representation in School Mathematics. Reston VA: National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics.
Gordon, S. P., & Gordon, F. S. (2007). Discovering the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus. Mathematics Teacher, 100(9), 597-600.
Graeber, A. O. (1990). Mathematics and the Reality of the Student. In R. B. Davis & C.
A. Maher (Eds.), Schools, Mathematics, and the World of Reality (pp. 213-235).
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Graham, B. (1917). Some Calculus Suggestions by a Student. The American
Gravemeijer, K., & Doorman, M. (1999). Context Problems in Realistic Mathematics
Education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39, 111-129.
471
Gray, E. M. (1991). An Analysis of Diverging Approaches to Simple Arithmetic:

Preference and Its Consequences. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(6),
551-574.
Gray, E. M , Pinto, M., Pitta, D., & Tall, D. O. (1999). Knowledge Construction and
Diverging Thinking in Elementary and Advanced Mathematics. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 38(1-3), 111-133.
Greeno, J. G. (1991). Number Sense as Situated Knowing in a Conceptual Domain.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(3), 170-218.
Hahkioniemi, M. (2004). Perceptual and symbolic representations as a starting point for
the acquisition of the derivative. In M. J. H0ines & A. B. Fugelstad (Eds.),
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3). Bergen, Norway: Bergen
University College.
Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (2005). Advanced Mathematical-Thinking at Any Age: Its
Nature and Development. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 7(1), 27-50.
Harel, G., & Tall, D. O. (1991). The General, the Abstract, and the Generic in Advanced
Mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 11(1), 38-42.
Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1999). Visual and Symbolic Reasoning in Mathematics: Making
Connections with Computers? Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 7(1), 59-84.
Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in Context:
Epistemic Actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 195-
222.
Hong, Y. Y., & Thomas, M. (1997). Using the Computer to Improve Conceptual
Thinking in Integration. Paper presented at the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education, Lahti, Finland.
Howell, M. (2007). AP Calculus Teacher's Guide. New York: The College Board.
Hughes-Hallett, D. (1991). Visualization in Calculus Reform. In W. Zimmerman & S.
Cunningham (Eds.), Visualization in Teaching and Learning Mathematics: MAA
Notes #19. Washington, D.C.: The Mathematical Association of America.
Hughes-Hallett, D., & Gleason, A. (1998). Calculus: Single Variable. New York: John
Wiley & Sons.
Judson, T., & Nishimori, T. (2005). Concepts and Skills in High School Calculus: An
Examination of a Special Case in Japan and the United States. Journal for
Kaput, J. J. (1992). Technology and Mathematics Education. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.),
Handbook of Research on Mathematics Education (pp. 515-556). Reston, VA:
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Kaput, J. J. (1993). The urgent need for proleptic research in the graphical representation
of quantitative relationships. In T. P. Carpenter, E. Fennema & T. A. Romberg
(Eds.), Integrating research in the graphical representation of functions (Vol.
279-311). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kaput, J. J. (1998). Representations, Inscriptions, Descriptions, and Learning: A
Kaleidoscope of Windows. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 265-281.
Kennedy, D. (1997). Teacher's Guide - AP Calculus. New York: The College Board.
472
Kiczek, R. D. (2000). Tracing the development of probabilistic thinking: Profiles from a

longitudinal study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey, New Brunswick.
Kieren, T., Pirie, S., & Reid, D. A. (1994). Mathematical understanding: Always under
construction. In J. F. Matos & J. P. da Ponte (Eds.), Proceedings of the 18th
Annual Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics
Education (Vol. 4, pp. 49-56). Lisbon, Portugal: University of Lisbon.
Kline, M. (1970). Logic Versus Pedagogy. American Mathematical Monthly, 77(3), 264-
282.
Lakatos, I. (1976). Proofs and Refutations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lauten, A. D., Graham, K., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (1994). Student Understanding of Basic
Calculus Concepts: Interaction with the Graphics Calculator. Journal of
Leitzel, J. R. C , & Tucke, A. C. (Eds.). (1994). Assessing Calculus Reform Efforts.
Maher, C. A. (1991). Brian's Representation and Development of Mathematical
Knowledge: A 4-Year Study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10(2), 163-210.
Maher, C. A. (2002). How Students Structure Their Own Investigations and Educate Us:
What We've Learned from a Fourteen Year Study. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi
(Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 31-46). Norwich, England.
Maher, C. A. (2005). How students structure their investigations and learn mathematics:
insights from a long-term study. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24(\), 1-
14.
Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (1996). The Development of the Idea of Mathematical
Proof: A 5-Year Case Study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,
27(2), 194-214.
Maher, C. A., & Martino, A. M. (2000). From patterns to theories: conditions for
conceptual change. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19(2), 247'-27'1.
Maher, C. A., Pantozzi, R., Martino, A. M., Steencken, E., & Deming, L. (1996).
Analyzing students' personal histories: Foundations of mathematical ideas
(Presented paper). New York: American Educational Research Association.
Maher, C. A., & Speiser, B. (1997). How far can you go with block towers? In E.
Pehkonen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group
for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 174-181). Lahti,
Finland: University Of Helsinki.
Mamona-Downs, J. (1996). On the Notion of Function. In L. Puig & A. Gutierrez (Eds.),
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3). Valencia, Spain.
Mamona-Downs, J. (2001). Letting the Intuitive Bear on the Formal; A Didactical
Approach for the Understanding of the Limit of a Sequence. Educational Studies
in Mathematics, 48, 259-288.
Mason, J., & Pimm, D. (1984). Generic Examples: Seeing the General in the Particular.
Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15(3), 277-289.
Matos, J. F., van Dormolen, J., Groves, S., & Zan, R. (2002). Learning from Learners. In
A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of the
473
International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 83-109).

Norwich, England: University of East Anglia.
Meel, D. E. (1998). Honors Students' Calculus Understandings: Comparing Calculus &
Mathematica and Traditional Calculus Students. In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. J. Kaput
& E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education. Ill (Vol. 7,
pp. 163-215). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society.
Meira, L. (1995). The Microevolution of Mathematical Representations in Children's
Activity. Cognition & Instruction, 13(2), 269-313.
Mills, J., & Tall, D. O. (1988). From the visual to the logical in mathematics. Bulletin of
the I.M.A., 24(11/12), 176-183.
Moschkovich, J., Schoenfeld, A., & Arcavi, A. (1993). Aspects of Understanding: On
Multiple Perspectives and Representations of Linear Relationships and
Connections Among Them. In T. A. Romberg, E. Fennema & T. P. Carpenter
(Eds.), Integrating Research on the Graphical Representation of Functions.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Muter, E. M. (1999). The development of student ideas in combinatorics and proof : A six-
year study. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers, The State University of
New Jersey, New Brunswick.
Nahin, P. J. (1998). An Imaginary Tale: The Story ofi. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Nemirovsky, R. (1994). On Ways of Symbolizing: The Case of Laura and the Velocity
Sign. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 13, 389-422.
Norman, F. A., & Prichard, M. K. (1994). Cognitive Obstacles to the Learning of
Calculus: A Kruketskiian Perspective. In J. J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.),
Research Issues in Undergraduate Mathematics Learning, MAA Notes #33.
Noss, R., Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1997). The Construction of Mathematical Meaning:
Connecting the Visual with the Symbolic. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
33, 203-233.
O'Connor, M. C. (1998). Language Socialization in the Classroom. In M. Lampert & M.
L. Blunk (Eds.), Talking Mathematics in Schools (pp. 17-55). New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Orton, A. (1983a). Students' understanding of differentiation. Educational Studies in
Orton, A. (1983b). Students' understanding of integration. Educational Studies in
Ostebee, A., & Zorn, P. (2002). Calculus from Graphical, Numerical, and Symbolic
Points of View, Single Variable (2nd ed.). Fort Worth TX: Brooks/Cole -
Thomson Learning.
Otte, M. (2001). Mathematical epistemology from a semiotic point of view. Paper
presented to the Discussion Group on Semiotics and Mathematics Education at
the 25th PME International Conference. Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Pantozzi, R. (1997). How do you know when you're done? Students reflect on their proof
making. In E. Pehkonen (Ed.), Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the
International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp.
254). Lahti, Finland: University of Helsinki.
474
Parnafes, O., & diSessa, A. (2004). Relations Between Types of Reasoning and
Computational Representations. International Journal of Computers for
Mathematical Learning, 9, 251-280.
Pinto, M , & Tall, D. O. (2002). Building Formal Mathematics on Visual Imagery: A
Case Study and a Theory. For the Learning of Mathematics, 22(1), 2-10.
Pirie, S., & Kieren, T. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we
characterize it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics,
26(2-3), 165-190.
Porzio, D. (1995). Effects of Differing Technological Approaches on Students' Use of
Numerical, Graphical, and Symbolic Representations and Their Understanding of
Calculus Concepts. In D. T. Owens, M. K. Reed & G. M. Millsaps (Eds.),
Proceedings of the 17th Annual Meeting ofPME-NA (pp. 228-). Columbus, Ohio:
ERIC/CSMEE Publications.
Porzio, D. (1999). Effects of Differing Emphases in the Use of Multiple Representations
and Technology on Students' Understanding of Calculus Concepts. Focus on
Learning Problems in Mathematics, 2/(3), 1-29.
Powell, A. B. (2003). "So let's prove it!": Emergent and elaborated mathematical ideas
and reasoning in the discourse and inscriptions of learners engaged in a
combinatorial task. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers, the State
University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.
Prenowitz, W. (1953). Insight and Understanding in the Calculus. The American
Presmeg, N. (1992). Prototypes, Metaphors, Metonymies and Imaginative Rationality in
High School Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 25, 595-610.
Presmeg, N., & Balderas-Canas, P. E. (2001). Visualization and Affect in Nonroutine
Problem Solving. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 3(4), 289-313.
A Private Universe In Mathematics. (2000). from
http://www.learner.org/workshops/pupmath/index.html
Radford, L. (2000). Signs and Meanings in Students' Emergent Algebraic Thinking: A
Semiotic Analysis. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42, 237-268.
Radford, L. (2006). The Anthropology of Meaning. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
61, 39-65.
Rasmussen, C. (1998). Reform in Differential Equations: A Case Study of Students'
Understandings and Difficulties. (Presented Paper). San Diego: American
Educational Research Association.
Rasmussen, C , & King, K. (1998). Sociomathematical Norms and Student Autonomy in
Calculus II Honors Students. In S. Berenson, K. Dawkins, M. Blanton, W.
Coulombe, J. Kolb, K. Norwood & L. Stiff (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual
Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 131-135). Raleigh, NC: North
Carolina State University.
Rasmussen, C , Zandieh, M., King, K., & Teppo, A. (2005). Advancing Mathematical
Activity: A Practice Oriented View of Advanced Mathematical Thinking.
Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 7(1), 51-73.
Rasslan, S., & Tall, D. O. (2002). Definitions and images for the definite integral
concept. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Annual
475
Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education

(Vol. 4, pp. 89-96). Norwich, UK.
Roberts, A. W. (Ed.). (1996). Calculus: The Dynamics of Change. MAA Notes #39.
Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.
Rosenstein, G. (2002). One Hundred Fifty Years of Teaching Calculus. Retrieved January
2, 2007 from apcentral.collegeboard.com
Saxe, G., & Bermudez, T. (1996). Emergent Mathematical Environments in Children's
Games. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin & B. Greer (Eds.),
Theories of Mathematical Learning (pp. 51-68). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Schnepp, M., & Nemirovsky, R. (2001). Constructing a Foundation for the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus. In A. A. Cuoco & F. Curcio (Eds.), The Roles of
Representation in School Mathematics (pp. 90-102). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: challenges of educational
theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(1), 4-14.
Schoenfeld, A. H., Smith, J. P., & Arcavi, A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic
analysis of one student's evolving understanding of a complex subject matter
domain. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 55-
176): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schwarz, B. B., & Hershkowitz, R. (2001). Production and Transformation of Computer
Artifacts Toward Construction of Meaning in Mathematics. Mind, Culture &
Activity, 8(3), 250-267.
Selden, J., Mason, A., & Selden, A. (1989). Can Average Calculus Students Solve
Nonroutine Problems? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 8(2), 45-50.
Selden, J., Selden, A., & Mason, A. (1994). Even Good Calculus Students Can't Solve
Nonroutine Problems. In J. J. Kaput & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research Issues in
Undergraduate Mathematics Learning, MAA Notes #33. Washington D.C.:
Mathematical Association of America.
Sfard, A. (1991). On the Dual Nature of Mathematical Conceptions: Reflections on
Processes and Objects as Different Sides of the Same Coin. Educational Studies
in Mathematics, 22(1), 1-36.
Sfard, A. (2000). Symbolizing Mathematical Reality into Being - or How Mathematical
Discourse and Mathematical Objects Create Each Other. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel &
K. McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and Communicating in Mathematics Classrooms.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sfard, A. (2001). There Is More to Discourse Than Meets the Ears: Looking at Thinking
as Communicating To Learn More about Mathematical Learning. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 46(1-3), 13-57.
Sfard, A., & Lavie, I. (2005). Why Cannot Children See as the Same What Grown-Ups
Cannot See as Different - Early Numerical Thinking Revisited. Cognition &
Instruction, 23(2), 237-309.
Sfard, A., & Linchevski, L. (1994). The Gains and the Pitfalls of Reification - The Case
of Algebra. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2-3), 191-228.
Sfard, A., Nesher, P., Streefland, L., Cobb, P., & Mason, J. (1998). Learning
Mathematics through Conversation: Is It as Good as They Say? For the Learning
of Mathematics, 18( 1), 41 -51.
476
Sierpinska, A. (1992). On Understanding The Notion of Function. In G. Harel & E.

Dubinsky (Eds.), The Concept of Function: Aspects of Epistemology and
Pedagogy (Vol. 25, pp. 25-28). Washington D.C.: MAA.
Skemp, R. R. (1986). The Psychology of Learning Mathematics (2nd ed.).
Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
Speiser, B., & Walter, C. (1994). Catwalk: First Semester Calculus. Journal of
Speiser, B., & Walter, C. (1996). Second Catwalk: Narrative, Context, and Embodiment.
Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15,351-371.
Speiser, B., Walter, C , & Glaze, T. (2005). Getting At The Mathematics: Sara's Journal.
Speiser, B., Walter, C , & Maher, C. A. (2003). Representing motion: an experiment in
learning. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(1), 1-35.
Steffe, L. P., & Thompson, P. W. (1999). Teaching Experiment Methodology:
Underlying Principles and Essential Elements. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.),
Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education. Mahwah:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Steinbring, H. (1997). Epistemological investigation of classroom interaction in
elementary mathematics teaching. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32(1), 49-
92.
Steinbring, H. (2006). What makes a sign a mathematical sign? - An Epistemological
perspective on mathematical interaction. Educational Studies in Mathematics,
61(1/2), 133-162.
Stylianou, D. A., & Silver, E. A. (2004). The Role of Visual Representations in
Advanced Mathematical Problem Solving: An Examination of Expert-Novice
Similarities and Differences. Mathematical Thinking & Learning, 6(4), 353-387.
Suzuki, J. (2003). The Area under a Curve: Conjecturing the Fundamental Theorem of
Calculus. Mathematics Teacher, 96(7), 474-477.
Tall, D. O. (1978). The Dynamics of Understanding Mathematics. Mathematics
Teaching(S4), 50-52.
Tall, D. O. (1985). Understanding the Calculus. Mathematics Teaching, 110,49-53.
Tall, D. O. (1986). A Graphical Approach to Integration and the Fundamental Theorem.
Mathematics Teaching, 113,48-51.
Tall, D. O. (1989). Concept Images, Generic Organizers, Computers, and Curriculum
Change. For the Learning of Mathematics, 9(3), 37-42.
Tall, D. O. (1991a). Intuition and Rigor: The Role of Visualization in the Calculus. In W.
Zimmerman & S. Cunningham (Eds.), Visualization in Mathematics MAA Notes
#19 (pp. 105-119).
Tall, D. O. (1991b). The Psychology of Advanced Mathematical Thinking. In D. O. Tall
(Ed), Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 5 - 21). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic Publishing.
Tall, D. O. (1991c). Visualizing Differentials in Integration to Picture the Fundamental
Theorem of Calculus. Mathematics Teaching, 137, 29-32.
Tall, D. O. (1992). Mathematical process and symbols in the mind. In Z. Karian (Ed.),
Symbolic Computation in Undergraduate Mathematics Education: MAA Notes
#24 (pp. 57-68). Washington, D.C.: Mathematical Association of America.
477
Tall, D. O. (1993). Students' Difficulties in Calculus. Proceedings of Working Group 3

on Students' Difficulties in Calculus ICME-7, Quebec, Canada, 13- 28.
Tall, D. O. (1995). Cognitive Growth in Elementary and Advanced Mathematical
Thinking. In L. Meira & D. Carraher (Eds.), Proceeding of the 19th International
Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 161-175).
Recife, Brazil: Atual Editora Ltda.
Tall, D. O., & Thomas, M. (1989). Versatile Learning and the Computer. Focus on
Learning Problems in Mathematics, 7/(1-2), 117-125.
Tall, D. O., & Thomas, M. (1991). Encouraging Versatile Thinking in Algebra Using the
Computer. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(2), 125-147.
Tall, D. O., Thomas, M., Davis, G., Gray, E. M., & Simpson, A. (2000). What is the
object of the encapsulation of a process? Journal of Mathematical Behavior,
18(2), 1-19.
Tall, D. O., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept Image and Concept Definition in Mathematics
with Particular Reference to Limits and Continuity. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 12(2), 151-169.
Thomas, G., & Finney, R. (1988). Calculus and Analytic Geometry (7th ed.). Reading,
MA: Addison Wesley.
Thomas, K. S. C. (1995). The fundamental theorem of calculus: An investigation into
students' constructions. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Purdue University.
Thompson, P. W. (1982). Were lions to speak, we wouldn't understand. Journal of
Thompson, P. W. (1994a). Images of Rate and Operational Understanding of the
Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26(2/3),
229-274.
Thompson, P. W. (1994b). Students, Functions, and the Undergraduate Curriculum. In E.
Dubinsky, A. Schoenfeld & J. J. Kaput (Eds.), Research in Collegiate
Mathematics Education 1 (Vol. 4, pp. 21-44). Providence, RI: American
Mathematical Society.
Thompson, P. W. (1996). Imagery and the development of mathematical reasoning. In L.
P. Steffe, B. Greer, P. Nesher, P. Cobb & G. Goldin (Eds.), Theories of
Mathematical Learning (pp. 267-283). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum.
Thompson, P. W. (1999). Some Remarks on Conventions and Representations. Paper
prepared for the Panel for the PME-NA XXI Working Group on Representations.
Cuernavaca, Mexico.
Thompson, P. W., & Sfard, A. (1994). Problems of reification: Representations and
mathematical objects. In D. Kirscher (Ed.), Proceedings of the 16th Annual
Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the
Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 1-32). Baton Rouge, LA.
Thompson, P. W., & Silverman, J. (2007). The Concept of Accumulation in Calculus. In
M. Carlson & C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and
teaching in undergraduate mathematics (pp. 117-131). Washington, D.C.:
Mathematical Association of America,
van Oers, B. (1996). Learning Mathematics As Meaningful Activity. In L. P. Steffe, P.
Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of Mathematical
Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
478
van Oers, B. (2001). Educational Forms of Initiation into Mathematical Culture.

Vergnaud, G. (1998). A Comprehensive Theory of Representation for Mathematics
Education. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(2), 167-181.
Vinner, S. (1976). The Naive Concept of Definition in Mathematics. Educational Studies
in Mathematics, 7(4), 413-429.
Vinner, S. (1989). The Avoidance of Visual Considerations in Calculus Students. Focus
on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 11(1-2), 149-156.
Vinner, S. (1992). The Function Concept as a Prototype for Learning Problems in
Mathematics. In H. Guershon & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), The Concept of Function:
Aspects of Epistemology and Pedagogy. MAA Notes, Volume 25 (pp. 195-213).
Vinner, S. (1997). The Pseudo-Conceptual and the Pseudo-Analytical Thought Processes
in Mathematics Learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 34(2), 97-129.
Vinner, S., & Dreyfus, T. (1989). Images and Definitions for the Concept of Function.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(4), 356-366.
Voigt, J. (1996). Negotiation of Mathematical Meaning in Classroom Processes: Social
Interaction and Classroom Processes. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A.
Goldin & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of Mathematical Learning (pp. 21-50).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Aspects of Radical Constructivism and Its Educational
Recommendations. In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin & B. Greer
(Eds.), Theories of Mathematical Learning. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Wagner, J. (2006). Transfer in Pieces. Cognition & Instruction, 24(1), 1-71.
Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2002). Extending Example Spaces as a Learning/Teaching
Strategy in Mathematics. In A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of
the 26th Annual Meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of
Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 378-385). Norwich, England.
Watson, A., & Mason, J. (2005). Mathematics as a Constructive Activity. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Weber, K., & Alcock, L. (2004). Semantic and Syntactic Proof Productions. Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 56, 209-234.
White, P., & Mitchelmore, M. (1996). Conceptual Knowledge in Introductory Calculus.
Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(\), 79-95.
Wilensky, U. (1991). Abstract Meditations on the Concrete and Concrete Implications for
Mathematics Education. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism.
Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing.
Williams, S. R. (1991). Models of Limit Held by College Calculus Students. Journal for
Zack, V., & Reid, D. A. (2003). Good-enough understanding: theorising about the
learning of complex ideas (part 1). For the Learning of Mathematics, 23(3), 43-
50.
479
Zack, V., & Reid, D. A. (2004). Good-enough understanding: theorising about the
learning of complex ideas (part 2). For the Learning of Mathematics, 24(1), 25-
28.

Making Sense of The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus - Pantozzi (2009)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Making Sense of The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus - Pantozzi (2009)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Dissertation submitted to the

Graduate School - New Brunswick

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of

Graduate Program in Mathematics Education

Written under the direction of

Dr. Carolyn A. Maher

New Brunswick, New Jersey

Making Sense of the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

Dissertation Chairperson: Carolyn A. Maher, Ed. D.

This dissertation provides an elaborated examination of how a group of students,

The students were videotaped as they worked cooperatively on developing an

The AP Calculus course description emphasizes "understanding the meaning" of

the Fundamental Theorem from multiple perspectives, but students' understandings of

The students, who had grown accustomed to participating in mathematical

understandings in multiple ways.

In disagreement with Boyer in The History of Calculus and its Conceptual

Development, there is no strong temptation here to seek to ascribe the completion of a

teachers from whom I had much to learn as an educator.

assistance, support, understanding, suggestions, and friendship: Claudio Burgaleta,

made it easier to concentrate on my writing.

1.1. Origins of the Study

1.1.1. A Reflection upon "Meaning"

In Freudenthal's book, Revisiting Mathematics Education, (Freudenthal, 1991), he

expression a + b- 2m, and thus, (a + b)l2 - m.

the formula (a + b) 12 found "the number halfway between two numbers".

the word "average." The symbolic representation of (a + b)/2. "made sense" to me as an

explanation. To arrive at an explanation, I used other representations - square tiles being

this movement between representations as a means of "making sense" of a situation is

As a classroom teacher, I have endeavored to listen to the meanings that students

questions where I believed finding an "average" might be appropriate. How do students

themselves decide if finding an "average" is appropriate? Discounting clues such as

1.1.2. Reflecting Upon the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus

this dissertation: an interest in how learners assign meanings to mathematical

Fundamental Theorem of Calculus, students "should understand the relationship between

"involves the differentiation of functions defined by definite integrals, that is,

Kennedy writes that the AP Calculus committee chose to emphasize "concepts"

some of the techniques of calculus: rules for differentiation, and techniques of

Shortly afterward, I learned the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. My notes

a function, there is no evidence in my notes of a graph of A.

values found by using an antiderivative, I wrote "ifF'(x) = f(x) , then

provide me with an answer to the question posed.

The next year, as a undergraduate interested in teaching, I joined a group of

because these kinds of questions were not previously within my experience.

1.1.3. Teaching Calculus

courses in undergraduate and graduate mathematics where I was aware of a difference

motivated by my experiences observing students in research settings and a personal need

more questions I needed to ask.

were accustomed to constructing understandings through investigation and inquiry. Those

students in particular pushed me to ask more questions about my own understandings,

something about what it might mean to "learn mathematics".

1.2. Statement of the Problem

1.2.1 The Teaching of Calculus

assistants presenting a 'notational' calculus to vast numbers of freshmen...it can seem

that only the existence of non-conceptual 'manipulative' notational alternatives allows

of thinking". Davis spoke with a chorus of others at a conference of mathematics

years, placing a greater "emphasis on concepts" and "multiple representations of

Kennedy describes these reform efforts as being motivated by a "dissatisfaction

they were doing, or to translate a problem communicated to them in words without

symbolic, verbal, numerical, and graphical representations of mathematical ideas" in

should "understand the connections" between representations (Kennedy, 1997).