English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Traditional (e.g., constructivist) accounts of knowledge ground its origin in the intentional construction on the part of the learner. Such accounts are blind to the fact that learners, by the fact that they do not know the knowledge to be learned, cannot orient toward it as an object to be constructed. In this study, I provide a phenomenological account of the naissance (birth) of knowledge, two words that both have their etymological origin in the same, homonymic Proto-Indo-European syllable ĝen-, ĝenә-, ĝnē-, ĝnō-. Accordingly, the things of the world and the bodily movements they shape, following Merleau-Ponty (1964), are pregnant with new knowledge that cannot foresee itself, and that no existing knowledge can anticipate. I draw on a study of learning in a second-grade mathematics classroom, where children (6-7 years) learned geometry by classifying and modeling 3-dimensional objects. The data clearly show that the children did not foresee, and therefore did not intentionally construct, the knowledge that emerged from the movements of their hands, arms, and bodies that comply with the forms of things. Implications are drawn for classroom instructio

On the pregnance of bodily movement and geometrical objects: A post-constructivist account of the origin of mathematical knowledge