927 resultados para Mathematics Classroom
Resumo:
In this action research study of my classroom of 8th grade mathematics, I investigated if cooperative learning could be an effective teaching method with the Saxon curriculum. Saxon curriculum is largely individualized in that most lessons could be completed without much group interaction. I discovered that cooperative learning was very successful with the curriculum as long as it was structured. Ninety-five percent of the students in the study preferred to work in groups, and I observed mathematical communication grow with most of the students. As a result of this research, I plan to continue to incorporate cooperative learning into my mathematics classroom. I will use cooperative learning with all of my mathematics classes, even the ones that do not use the Saxon curriculum. I believe in the power of working together.
Resumo:
The present thesis, orientated by a letter sent by Ernst von Glasersfeld to John Fossa, is the product of a theoretical investigation of radical constructivism. In this letter, von Glasersfeld made three observations about Fossa’s understanding of radical constructivism. However, we limited our study to the second of these considerations since it de als with some of the core issues of constructivism. Consequently, we investigated what issues are raised by von Glasersfeld’s observation and whether these issues are relevant to a better understanding of constructivism and its implications for the mathema tics classroom . In order to realize the investigation, it was necessary to characterize von Glasersfeld’s epistemological approach to constructivism, to identify which questions about radical constructivism are raised by von Glasersfeld’s observation, to i nvestigate whether these issues are relevant to a better understanding of constructivism and to analyze the implications of these issues for the mathematics classroom. Upon making a hermeneutic study of radical constructivism, we found that what is central to it is its radicalism, in the sense that it breaks with tradition by its absence of an ontology. Thus, we defend the thesis that the absence of an ontology, although it has advantages for radical constructivism, incurs serious problems not only for the theory itself, but also for its implications for the mathematics classroom. The advantages that we were able to identify include a change from the usual philosophical paths to a very different rational view of the world, an overcoming of a naive way of thi nking, an understanding of the subject as active in the construction of his/her experiential reality, an interpretation of cognition as an instrument of adaptation, a new concept of knowledge and a vision of knowledge as fallible (or provisional). The prob lems are associated with the impossibility of radical constructivism to explain adequately why the reality that we build up is regular, stable, non - arbitrary and publicly shared. With regard to the educational implications of radical constructivism, the ab sence of an ontology brings to the mathematics classroom not only certain relevant aspects (or favorable points) that make teaching a process of researching student learning, empowering the student to learn and changing the classroom design, but also certa in weaknesses or limitations. These weaknesses or limitations of constructivism in the classroom are due to its conception of knowledge as being essentially subjective. This requires it to work with one - on - one situations and, likewise, makes the success of teaching dependent on the teacher’s individual skills. Perhaps the most important weakness or limitation, in this sense, is that it makes teaching orientated by constructivist principles unable to reach the goal of the formation of a community. We conclud e that issues raised by von Glasersfeld’s observation are absolutely relevant to the context of a better understanding of radical constructivism and its implications for education, especially for Mathematics Education.
Resumo:
The angle concept is a multifaceted concept having static and dynamic definitions. The static definition of the angle refers to “the space between two rays” or “the intersection of two rays at the same end point” (Mitchelmore & White, 1998), whereas the dynamic definition of the angle concept highlights that the size of angle is the amount of rotation in direction (Fyhn, 2006). Since both definitions represent two diverse situations and have unique limitations (Henderson & Taimina, 2005), students may hold misconceptions about the angle concept. In this regard, the aim of this research was to explore high achievers’ knowledge regarding the definition of the angle concept as well as to investigate their erroneous answers on the angle concept.
104 grade 6 students drawn from four well-established elementary schools of Yozgat, Turkey were participated in this research. All participants were selected via a purposive sampling method and their mathematics grades were 4 or 5 out of 5, and. Data were collected through four questions prepared by considering the learning competencies set out in the grade 6 curriculum in Turkey and the findings of previous studies whose purposes were to identify students’ misconceptions of the angle concept. The findings were analyzed by two researchers, and their inter-rater agreement was calculated as 0.91, or almost perfect. Thereafter, coding discrepancies were resolved, and consensus was established.
The angle concept is a multifaceted concept having static and dynamic definitions.The static definition of the angle refers to “the space between two rays” or“the intersection of two rays at the same end point” (Mitchelmore & White, 1998), whereas the dynamicdefinition of the angle concept highlights that the size of angle is the amountof rotation in direction (Fyhn, 2006). Since both definitionsrepresent two diverse situations and have unique limitations (Henderson & Taimina, 2005), students may holdmisconceptions about the angle concept. In this regard, the aim of thisresearch was to explore high achievers’ knowledge regarding the definition ofthe angle concept as well as to investigate their erroneous answers on theangle concept.
104grade 6 students drawn from four well-established elementary schools of Yozgat,Turkey were participated in this research. All participants were selected via a purposive sampling method and their mathematics grades were 4 or 5 out of 5,and. Data were collected through four questions prepared by considering the learning competencies set out in the grade 6 curriculum in Turkey and the findings of previous studies whose purposes were to identify students’ misconceptions of the angle concept. The findings were analyzed by two researchers, and their inter-rater agreement was calculated as 0.91, or almost perfect. Thereafter, coding discrepancies were resolved, and consensus was established.
In the first question, students were asked to answer a multiple choice questions consisting of two statics definitions and one dynamic definition of the angle concept. Only 38 of 104 students were able to recognize these three definitions. Likewise, Mitchelmore and White (1998) investigated that less than10% of grade 4 students knew the dynamic definition of the angle concept. Additionally,the purpose of the second question was to figure out how well students could recognize 0-degree angle. We found that 49 of 104 students were unable to recognize MXW as an angle. While 6 students indicated that the size of MXW is0, other 6 students revealed that the size of MXW is 360. Therefore, 12 of 104students correctly answered this questions. On the other hand, 28 of 104students recognized the MXW angle as 180-degree angle. This finding demonstrated that these students have difficulties in naming the angles.Moreover, the third question consisted of three concentric circles with center O and two radiuses of the outer circle, and the intersection of the radiuses with these circles were named. Then, students were asked to compare the size of AOB, GOD and EOF angles. Only 36 of 104 students answered correctly by indicating that all three angles are equal, whereas 68 of 104 students incorrectly responded this question by revealing AOB<GOD< EOF. These students erroneously thought the size of the angle is related to either the size of the arc marking the angle or the area between the arms of the angle and the arc marking angle. These two erroneous strategies for determining the size of angles have been found by a few studies (Clausen-May,2008; Devichi & Munier, 2013; Kim & Lee, 2014; Mithcelmore, 1998;Wilson & Adams, 1992). The last question, whose aim was to determine how well students can adapt theangle concept to real life, consisted of an observer and a barrier, and students were asked to color the hidden area behind the barrier. Only 2 of 104students correctly responded this question, whereas 19 of 104 students drew rays from the observer to both sides of the barrier, and colored the area covered by the rays, the observer and barrier. While 35 of 104 students just colored behind the barrier without using any strategies, 33 of 104 students constructed two perpendicular lines at the both end of the barrier, and colored behind the barrier. Similarly, Munier, Devinci and Merle (2008) found that this incorrect strategy was used by 27% of students.
Consequently, we found that although the participants in this study were high achievers, they still held several misconceptions on the angle concept and had difficulties in adapting the angle concept to real life.
Keywords: the angle concept;misconceptions; erroneous answers; high achievers
ReferencesClausen-May, T. (2008). AnotherAngle on Angles. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 13(1),4–8.
Devichi, C., & Munier, V.(2013). About the concept of angle in elementary school: Misconceptions andteaching sequences. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(1),1–19. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2012.10.001
Fyhn, A. B. (2006). A climbinggirl’s reflections about angles. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25(2),91–102. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2006.02.004
Henderson, D. W., & Taimina,D. (2005). Experiencing geometry: Euclidean and non-Euclidean with history(3rd ed.). New York, USA: Prentice Hall.
Kim, O.-K., & Lee, J. H.(2014). Representations of Angle and Lesson Organization in Korean and AmericanElementary Mathematics Curriculum Programs. KAERA Research Forum, 1(3),28–37.
Mitchelmore, M. C., & White,P. (1998). Development of angle concepts: A framework for research. MathematicsEducation Research Journal, 10(3), 4–27.
Mithcelmore, M. C. (1998). Youngstudents’ concepts of turning and angle. Cognition and Instruction, 16(3),265–284.
Munier, V., Devichi, C., &Merle, H. (2008). A Physical Situation as a Way to Teach Angle. TeachingChildren Mathematics, 14(7), 402–407.
Wilson, P. S., & Adams, V.M. (1992). A Dynamic Way to Teach Angle and Angle Measure. ArithmeticTeacher, 39(5), 6–13.
Resumo:
Recurso para profesores de matemáticas de primaria y secundaria. El texto considera las cuestiones relativas a cómo los estudiantes aprenden matemáticas. Cada uno de los once capítulos trata un tema particular que ilustra la interacción entre la teoría y la práctica. Esta edición cuenta con dos nuevos capítulos: uno relacionado con la cognición y la transferencia del aprendizaje, y otro que examina la importancia del modelo de aprendizaje en las matemáticas.
Resumo:
This article presents findings of a larger single-country comparative study which set out to better understand primary school teachers’ mathematics education-related beliefs in Thailand. By combining the interview and observation data collected in the initial stage of this study with data gathered from the relevant literature, the 8-belief / 22-item ‘Thai Teachers’ Mathematics Education-related Beliefs’ (TTMEB) Scale was developed. The results of the Mann-Whitney U Test showed that Thai teachers in the two examined socio-economic regions espouse statistically different beliefs concerning the source and stability of mathematical knowledge, as well as classroom authority. Further, these three beliefs are found to be significantly and positively correlated.
Resumo:
In this action research study of my classroom of sixth grade mathematics, I investigated the impact of an increase in student oral and written communication on student level of understanding and student self-confidence. I also investigated the changes in my teaching as I increased opportunities for student oral and written communication of mathematics. While I discovered that student level of understanding was not necessarily increased if written communications were increased, I did find that there seemed to be a rise in student level of self-confidence and understanding throughout the course of the research project due to an increase in oral communication. Additionally, my intentions as a teacher were to become less dominating as communication was increased, but the opposite occurred. As a result of this research, I plan to continue to allow oral discourse to take place in my classroom much like it has in the past.
Resumo:
In this action research study of my classroom of 8th grade algebra, I investigated students’ discussion of mathematics and how it relates to interest in the subject. Discussion is a powerful tool in the classroom. By relying too heavily on drill and practice, a teacher may lose any individual student insight into the learning process. However, in order for the discussion to be effective, students must be provided with structure and purpose. It is unrealistic to expect middle school age students to provide their own structure and purpose; a packet was constructed that would allow the students to both show their thoughts and work as a small group toward a common goal. The students showed more interest in the subject in question as they related to the algebra topics being studied. The students appreciated the packets as a way to facilitate discussion rather than as a vehicle for practicing concepts. Students still had a need for practice problems as part of their homework. As a result of this research, it is clear that discussion packets are very useful as a part of daily instruction. While there are modifications that must be made to the original packets to more clearly express the expectations in question, discussion packets will continue to be an effective tool in the classroom.
Resumo:
Item 455-G-9
Resumo:
This study examines how one secondary school teacher’s use of purposeful oral mathematics language impacted her students’ language use and overall communication in written solutions while working with word problems in a grade nine academic mathematics class. Mathematics is often described as a distinct language. As with all languages, students must develop a sense for oral language before developing social practices such as listening, respecting others ideas, and writing. Effective writing is often seen by students that have strong oral language skills. Classroom observations, teacher and student interviews, and collected student work served as evidence to demonstrate the nature of both the teacher’s and the students’ use of oral mathematical language in the classroom, as well as the effect the discourse and language use had on students’ individual written solutions while working on word problems. Inductive coding for themes revealed that the teacher’s purposeful use of oral mathematical language had a positive impact on students’ written solutions. The teacher’s development of a mathematical discourse community created a space for the students to explore mathematical language and concepts that facilitated a deeper level of conceptual understanding of the learned material. The teacher’s oral language appeared to transfer into students written work albeit not with the same complexity of use of the teacher’s oral expression of the mathematical register. Students that learn mathematical language and concepts better appear to have a growth mindset, feel they have ownership over their learning, use reorganizational strategies, and help develop a discourse community.