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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This article reports the argumentation work of a group of trainee mathematicsteachers in an experiment carried out in a virtual class (due to the emergenceof COVID-19) during 2020. They worked with a task on fractions in an onlineassessment system with questions with random parameters and infinite possiblecorrect answers. This was followed by a discussion of the strategies and thejustifications, arguments and validations of these strategies and otherconjectures that emerged. This article analyzes this work from a qualitativeapproach using the Mathematical Working Space as a theoretical framework. Theresults show that the discussion work led the trainee teachers to findinterpretations for the algorithms processed by the computer, enhancingepistemic discourse and argumentation in the context of the use oftechnological artifacts. In turn, the same discourses allowed the futureteachers to instrumentalize the processes to be used in new tasks.

Argumentaci\'on de futuros profesores de matem\'aticas en tareas sobre  fracciones mediadas por un sistema de evaluaci\'on en l\'inea con feedback  autom\'atico