Investigation of pre-service elementary mathematics teachers’ understanding on solids
Downloads
Abstract
The aim of the present study is to determine the elementary pre-service mathematics teachers’ understanding on solids. For this purpose, pre-service teachers’ definitions and drawings of these objects were examined. Qualitative research method was used. A written questionnaire consisting of sixteen open-ended and multiple-choice questions was conducted with 127 elementary pre-service mathematics teachers chosen by convenience sample which is one of non-random sampling method. The collected qualitative data were analyzed by both descriptive and content analysis. The results revealed that pre-service teachers made insufficient connections among cylinder, prism, cone and pyramid. So, it can be said that their understanding about solids was weak and procedural.Downloads
References
Avgören, S. (2011). Farklı sınıf seviyelerindeki öğrencilerin kati cisimler (prizma, piramit, koni, silindir, küre) ile ilgili sahip oldukları kavram imajı. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
Google Scholar CrossrefBaki, A. (2001). Bilişim teknolojisi ışığı altında matematik eğitiminin değerlendirilmesi. Milli eğitim dergisi, 149, 26–31.
Google Scholar CrossrefBaykul, Y. (2012). İlkokulda matematik öğretimi. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
Google Scholar CrossrefNational Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM.
Google Scholar CrossrefBingolbali, E., & Monaghan, J. (2008). Concept image revisited. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(1), 19-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9112-2
Google Scholar CrossrefBozkurt, A.& Koç, Y. (2012). İlköğretim matematik öğretmenliği birinci sınıf öğrencilerinin prizma kavramına dair bilgilerinin incelenmesi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(4), 2941-2952.
Google Scholar CrossrefCunningham, R. F., & Roberts, A. (2010). Reducing the Mismatch of Geometry Concept Definitions and Concept Images Held by Pre-Service Teachers. Issues in the Undergraduate Mathematics Preparation of School Teachers, 1, 1-17.
Google Scholar CrossrefDeliyianni, E., Elia, I., Gagatsis, A., Monoyiou, A., & Panaoura, A. (2010). A theoretical model of students’ geometrical figure understanding. In Proceedings of the 6th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 696-705).
Google Scholar CrossrefDe Villiers, M. (1998). To teach definitions in geometry or teach to define? In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22nd conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 248–255). University of Stellenbosch.
Google Scholar CrossrefErgin, A. S. & Türnüklü, E. (2015). Ortaokul öğrencilerinin cisim imgelerinin incelenmesi: geometrik ve uzamsal düşünme ile ilişkiler. Eğitim ve öğretim araştırmaları dergisi, 4(2), 188-199.
Google Scholar CrossrefErtekin, E., Yazici, E., & Delice, A. (2014). Investigation of primary mathematics student teachers’ concept images: cylinder and cone. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 45(4), 566-588. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.868537
Google Scholar CrossrefFujita, T., & Jones, K. (2007). Learners’ understanding of the definitions and hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals: Towards a theoretical framing. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1, 2), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800008520167
Google Scholar CrossrefGökbulut, Y. (2010). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının geometrik cisimler konusundaki pedagojik alan bilgileri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi.
Google Scholar CrossrefGökkurt, B. (2014). Ortaokul matematik öğretmenlerinin geometrik cisimler konusuna ilişkin pedagojik alan bilgilerinin incelenmesi. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Atatürk Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzurum.
Google Scholar CrossrefGökkurt, B., Şahin, Ö. Başıbüyük, K., Erdem, E., & Soylu, Y (2014, May). Öğretmen adaylarının koni kavramına ilişkin pedagojik alan bilgilerinin bazı bileşenler açısından incelenmesi. Matematik Sempozyumunda sunulan sözlü bildiri. Karabük: Karabük Üniversitesi.
Google Scholar CrossrefGökkurt, B., Şahin, Ö., Soylu, Y. & Doğan, Y. (2015). Öğretmen adaylarının geometrik cisimler konusuna ilişkin öğrenci hatalarına yönelik pedagojik alan bilgileri. İlköğretim Online 14(1), 55-71.
Google Scholar CrossrefGutierrez, A., & Jaime, A. (1999). Preservice primary teachers' understanding of the concept of altitude of a triangle. Journal of mathematics teacher education, 2(3), 253-275.
Google Scholar CrossrefGülkılık, H. (2008). Öğretmen adaylarının bazı geometrik kavramlarla ilgili sahip oldukları kavram imajlarının ve imaj gelişimlerinin incelenmesi üzerine fenomenografik bir çalışma. Yayımlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Google Scholar CrossrefHacısalihoğlu, H. H. (2006). Lise geometri 3. Serhat Yayınları A.Ş.
Google Scholar CrossrefHallowell, D. A., Okamoto, Y., Romo, L. F., & La Joy, J. R. (2015). First-graders’ spatial-mathematical reasoning about plane and solid shapes and their representations. ZDM, 47(3), 363-375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0664-9
Google Scholar CrossrefHershkowitz, R. (1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry. In P. Nesher and J. Kilpatrick (eds.), Mathematics and Cognition (pp. 70-95). Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefKabaca, T., Karadag, Z., & Aktumen, M. (2011). Misconception, cognitive conflict and conceptual changes in geometry: a case study with pre-service teachers. Mevlana International Journal of Education (MIJE), 1(2), 44-55.
Google Scholar CrossrefKarakuş, F. (2018). Investigation of Primary Pre-service Teachers’ Concept Images on Cylinder and Cone. Elementary Education Online, 17(2), 1033-1050.
Google Scholar CrossrefKoç, Y. & Bozkurt, A. (2011). Evaluating pre-service mathematics teachers’ comprehension level of geometric concepts. In B. Ubuz, (Ed.), The Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education. (pp. 335). IGPME.
Google Scholar CrossrefLevenson, E., Tirosh, D., & Tsamir, P. (2011). Theories and research related to concept formation in geometry. In E. Levenson, D. Tirosh, and P. Tsamir (Eds.), Preschool Geometry (pp. 3-18). Sense Publishers.
Google Scholar CrossrefMarchis, I. (2012). Preservice primary school teachers' elementary geometry knowledge. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(2), 33-40.
Google Scholar CrossrefMcMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2014). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry. Pearson.
Google Scholar CrossrefMeng, C. C., & Idris, N. (2012). Enhancing students’ geometric thinking and achievement in solid geometry. Journal of Mathematics Education, 5(1), 15-33.
Google Scholar CrossrefMiles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
Google Scholar CrossrefMilli Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2010). İlköğretim 7 matematik ders kitabı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Yayınları.
Google Scholar CrossrefMonaghan, F. (2000). What difference does it make? Children’s views of the differences between some quadrilaterals. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42 (2),179-196. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004175020394
Google Scholar CrossrefMullis, I.V.S., Martin M.O., Gonzalez E. J., Gregory K. D., Garden R. A., O’Connor K. M., Chrostowski S. J., and Smith T. A. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA’s Repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eighth Grade. OECD Publishers.
Google Scholar CrossrefOkazaki, M., & Fujita, T. (2007). Prototype phenomena and common cognitive paths in the understanding of the inclusion relations between quadrilaterals in Japan and Scotland. In Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 41-48).
Google Scholar CrossrefOral, I. & McGivney, E. (2011). Türkiye’de Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Alanlarında Öğrenci Performansı ve Başarının Belirleyicileri. İstanbul: Eğitim Reformu Girişimi. http://www.egitimreformugirisimi.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/ERG-TIMSS-2011-Analiz-Raporu.pdf
Google Scholar CrossrefPittalis, M.; Mousoulides, N. & Christou, C. (2010). Students’ 3D Geometry Thinking Profiles, In: Durand-Guerrier, V.; Soury-Lavergne, S. & Arzarello, F. (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 6, January 28th-February 1st 2009, Lyon France (pp. 816-825), INRP.
Google Scholar CrossrefSarfaty, Y., & Patkin, D. (2013). The ability of second graders to identify solids in different positions and to justify their answer. Pythagoras, 34(1), 1-10.
Google Scholar CrossrefSkemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics teaching, 77(1), 20-26.
Google Scholar CrossrefSkemp, R. R. (1978). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Arithmetic Teacher, 26(3), 9-15.
Google Scholar CrossrefToluk-Uçar, Z. (2011). Öğretmen adaylarının pedagojik içerik bilgisi: öğretimsel açıklamalar. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 87-102.
Google Scholar CrossrefTürnüklü, E., & Ergin, A. S. (2016). Sınıf öğrencilerinin cisimleri görsel tanıma ve tanımlamaları: cisim imgeleri. İlköğretim Online, 15(1), 40-52.
Google Scholar CrossrefVan de Walle, J., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2014). Elementary and middle school mathematics: teaching developmentally. Pearson.
Google Scholar CrossrefVinner, S. (1991). The role of definitions in the teaching and learning of mathematics. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 65-81). Kluwer Academic Press.
Google Scholar CrossrefWilson, P.S. (1990). Inconsistent ideas related to definitions and examples. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 12(3&4), 31-47.
Google Scholar CrossrefYıldız, Z. (2009). Geometrik cisimlerin yüzey alanları ve hacimleri konularında bilgisayar destekli öğretimin ilköğretim sınıf öğrenci tutumu ve başarısına etkisi (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Gazi Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
Google Scholar CrossrefDownloads
Published
Almetric
Dimensions
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Fatih Karakus, Zeynep Bahar Erşen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication but allow anyone to share: (unload, , reprint, distribute and/or copy) and adapt (remix, transform reuse, modify,) for any proposition, even commercial, always quoting the original source.
