A praxeological analysis of tasks on oblique launch in physics and mathematics textbooks:

possibilities for interdisciplinarity

Authors

  • Fabiana Venhoven Martins Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUC-SP
  • Barbara Lutaif Bianchini Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUC-SP

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23925/2358-4122.74537

Keywords:

oblique launch, textbook, interdisciplinarity, praxeological analysis

Abstract

This article presents the praxeological analysis of the tasks on oblique launch present in mathematics and physics textbooks most adopted by public schools and federal institutes by PNLD 2022, in force by 2025. The textbook was chosen as an object of study because it was portrayed by several authors as one of the main resources of teaching practice. The purpose of this research is to analyze whether some assumptions of the didactic anthropological theory - the expected techniques, technologies and theories to perform the same tasks - have convergences or divergences when dealt with in the mathematics book and in the physics book. We understand that convergences favor the recognition of the same object of knowledge in different contexts and the articulation of knowledge from one area to another. Divergences provide indications for improvements in the production of teaching materials and teacher education, aiming at a teaching supported by interdisciplinarity. Our analysis concludes that, even in the same -kind tasks involving the oblique launch, the analyzed books employed different technologies, technologies, and theories, in which it was not possible to articulate knowledge from one area to another. This divergence occurs as a result of the different information provided for the accomplishment of tasks - while the physics book provides vector quantities, the mathematical book provides the algebraic expression of the function. At the end of our analysis, we present a proposition of interdisciplinarity for one of the tasks, with the objective of relating the vector quantities involved in a given task to their possible functions. It is noteworthy that the books analyzed are in accordance with the skills defined by the Common National Curriculum Base.

Author Biographies

Fabiana Venhoven Martins, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUC-SP

Doutoranda do curso de Educação Matemática na Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUC-SP.

Barbara Lutaif Bianchini, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo - PUC-SP

Doutora em Educação pela Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, e professora de pós-graduação em Educação Matemática pela mesma universidade.

References

ALMOULOUD, Saddo Ag. Teoria Antropológica do Didático: metodologia de análise de materiais didáticos. Unión Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Matemática. Número 42. Novembro de 2015. p. 09-34.

BARRETO Filho, Benigno; SILVA, Claudio Xavier da. 360°: física aula por aula: partes 1, 2 e 3, volume único. 3ª edição. São Paulo: FTD, 2015.

BONJORNO, José Roberto; GIOVANNI Jr, José Ruy; SOUSA, Paulo Roberto Câmara de. Prisma matemática: conjuntos e funções. Ensino médio. Área do conhecimento: matemática e suas tecnologias. 1ª edição. São Paulo: Editora FTD, 2020.

BRASIL. MEC. Base Nacional Comum Curricular. Brasília. 2018.

CHEVALLARD, Yves. Organiser l’etude. 1. Structures & fonctions. Actes de la 11 École d’ Été de Didactique dês Mathématiques. France: La Penseé Sauvage. 2002.

CHEVALLARD, Yves. Introducing the anthropological theory of the didatic: an attempt at a principled approach. Hiroshima Journal of Mathematics Education. 12: 71-114, 2019.

DANTE, Luiz Roberto. LIVRO DIDÁTICO DE MATEMÁTICA: uso ou abuso? Em Aberto, Brasília, ano 16, n.69, jan./mar. 1996.

GODOY, Leandro Pereira de; AGNOLO, Rosana Maria Dell’; MELO, Wolney Candido de. Multiversos: ciências da natureza: movimentos e equilíbrios na natureza. Ensino médio. 1ª edição. São Paulo: Editora FTD, 2020.

INEP. MEC e Inep divulgam resultados do Censo Escolar 2023. 2024. Disponível em: https://www.gov.br/inep/pt-br/assuntos/noticias/censo-escolar/mec-e-inep-divulgam-resultados-do-censo-escolar-2023. Acesso em: 08 out. 2024.

JOHANSSON, Helena; ÖSTERHOLM, Magnus. Algebra discourses in mathematics and physics textbooks: comparing the use of algebraic symbols. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. 2023.

LAJOLO, Marisa. LIVRO DIDÁTICO: um (quase) manual de usuário. Em Aberto, Brasília, ano 16, n.69, jan./mar. 1996.

PIETROCOLA, Maurício. A matemática como estruturante do conhecimento físico. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, v. 19, n. 1, p. 93-114, 2002. Acesso em: 12 mar. 2025.

PLANINIC, Maja et al. Comparison of student understanding of line graph slope in physics and mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 2012.

SILVA, Marco Antônio. A fetichização do livro didático no Brasil. Educação & Realidade, Porto Alegre, v. 37, n. 3, p. 803-821, set./dez. 2012.

Published

2025-12-27

How to Cite

Martins, F. V., & Bianchini, B. L. (2025). A praxeological analysis of tasks on oblique launch in physics and mathematics textbooks:: possibilities for interdisciplinarity. Ensino Da Matemática Em Debate, 12(3), 30–50. https://doi.org/10.23925/2358-4122.74537