Preferences of Sixth Grade Students on Multiple Representations Used in Fraction Operations

Fatma Kara, Lutfi İNCİKABI

Öz


The aim of this study is to determine the representation preferences (numerical, model, number line and verbal) of the sixth-year students for the addition and subtraction of fractions and to reveal their successes in their preferences. This research has been conducted as a case study. The study group consists of 59 students, 31 of whom are boys and 28 of whom are girls, who are in the sixth grade of three junior high schools affiliated to MoNE in the city of Kastamonu. A purposeful sampling selection method was used to select participants. The data were collected by " Multiple Representations in Fraction Operations Test " and analyzed in accordance with predefined transition criteria. Representation preferences of students and interpretations of their success in their preferences were presented through descriptive statistics (percentage and frequency). While model representations take the first place in preferences, verbal representations are the least preferred type of representation. When students’ performances in the representations are examined, the most successful representations of students in addition and subtraction of fractions are numerical and model representations. On the other hand, it has been seen that the achievement status of students in the verbal and numerical representation types is considerably low.

Tam Metin:

DOCX (English)

Referanslar


Adadan, E. (2006). Promoting high school students’ conceptual understandings of the particulate nature of matter through multiple representations. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Ohio State University, Ohio.

Adadan, E. (2013). Using multiple representations to promote grade 11 students’ scientific understanding of the particle theory of matter. Research in Science Education, 43, 1079–1105.

Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33,131-152.

Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198.

Ainsworth, S. (2008). The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In Gilbert, J.K., Reiner, M. ve Nakhleh, M. (Eds), Visulaziation: Theory and Practice in Science Education(pp.191-208). Springer.

Ainsworth, S. E., Bibby, P.A. and Wood, D. J. (1997). Information technology and multiple representations: New opportunities-new problems. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 6 (1), 93-105.

Ainsworth, S. E., Bibby, P.A. and Wood, D. J. (2002). Examining the effects of different multiple representational systems in learning primary mathematics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 25-61.

Ainsworth, S. and Van Labeke, N. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learning and Instruction, 14(3), 241-255.

Akkuş, O. and Çakıroğlu, E. (2006). Seventh grade students’ use of multiple representations in pattern related algebra tasks. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31, 13-24.

Akkoç, H. (2005). Understanding of the concept of function: Tanımsal özellikler ve çoğul temsiller. Eğitim Araştırmaları(20), 14-24.

Akkoç, H. (2006). Bilgisayar Destekli Matematik Öğretimi: Grafik Analiz Yaklaşımı: İlköğretim İkinci Kademe ve Liseler İçin. Toroslu Kitaplığı: İstanbul.

Alacacı, C. (2010). Öğrencilerin kesirler konusundaki kavram yanılgıları. E. Bingölbali ve M.F. Özmantar (Ed.), Matematiksel Zorluklar ve Çözüm Önerileri. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2001). Deneysel desenler. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.

Charalambous C. Y. and Pantazi, D. P. (2005). Revisiting a theoretical Model on Fractions: Implications for teaching and Research. In Chick, H.L. ve Vincent, J. L. (Eds.), Proceedings of the29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (vol2, pp.233 – 240).

Chen, G. and Fu, X. (2003). Effects of multimodal information on learning performance and judgment of learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 29(3), 349-362.

Çepni, S. (2012). Araştırma ve proje çalışmalarına giriş. Trabzon: Celepler Matbaacılık.

diSessa, A. A. and Sherin, B. (2000). Meta-representation: An introduction. Journal of Mathematical Behavior,19(4), 385-398.

Doğan, M. ve Yeniterzi, B. (2011). İlköğretim 7. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Rasyonel Sayılar Konusundaki Hazır Bulunuşlukları. Selçuk Üniversitesi Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 31,217-237.

Edwards, L. D. (1998). Embodying mathematics and science: Microworld as representations. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(1), 53-78.

Eisner, E. W. (1997). The promise and perils of alternative forms of data representation. Educational Researcher, 26(6), 4-10.

English, L. D. (1997). Mathematical reasoning: analogies, Metaphors, and Images. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Goldin, G. A. (1998). Representational systems, learning, and problem solving in mathematics. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17 (2), 137-165.

Hanson, D. (1995). Understanding Fractions (Grades 5 to 8). http://mathcentral.uregina.ca/RR/ database/RR.09.95/hanson4.html

Hatfield, M. M., Edwards, N. T. and Bitter, G. G. (1993). Mathematics methods for the elementary and middle school (2nd edition). USA: Allyn and Bacon.

Herman, M. F. (2002). Relationship of college students' visual preference to use of representations: Conceptual understanding of functions in algebra. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Columbus: Ohio State University.

Işık, C. (2011). İlköğretim Matematik Öğretmeni Adaylarının Kesirlerde Çarpma ve Bölmeye Yönelik Kurdukları Problemlerin Kavramsal Analizi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 41, 231-243.

Işıksal, M. (2006). A study on pre-service elementary mathematics teachers‟ subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge regarding the multiplicatıon and division of fractions (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Middle East Technical University, Turkey.

İncikabı, S. (2016). Ortaokul Matematik Ders Kitaplarının Farklı Temsilleri Kullanım Biçimlerinin Araştırılması. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Kastamonu Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü.

İncikabı, S. (2017). Multiple representations and teaching mathematics: An analysis of the mathematics textbooks. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 6(1), 66-81.

Janvier, C. (1987). Representations and understanding: The notion of function as an example. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of Representations in theLearning and Teaching of Mathematics,67-73. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kaput, J. J. (1989). Linking representations in the symbol systems of algebra. In S. Wagner ve C. Kieran (Eds). Research issues in the learning and teaching of algebra (pp. 167-194). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.

Kaput, J. J. (1994). The representational roles of technology in connecting mathematics with authentic experience. In R. Biehler, R. W. Scholz, R. Strasser ve B. Winkelman (Eds.), Didactics in Mathematics as a ScientificDiscipline, 379-397. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Kocaoğlu, T. ve Yenilmez, K. (2010). Beşinci Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Kesir Problemlerinde Yaptıkları Hatalar ve Kavram Yanılgıları. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14, 71-85.

Kress, G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J. ve Tsatsarelis, C. (2001).Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London: Continuum.

Küçük, A. ve Demir, B. (2009). İlköğretim 6-8. Sınıflarda Matematik Öğretiminde Karşılaşılan Bazı Kavram Yanılgıları Üzerine Bir Çalışma. Dicle Üniversitesi Ziya Gökalp Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13, 97-112.

Lemke, J. (2004). The literacies of science. In E. W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice, (pp. 33-47). Newark: International Reading Association/National Science Teachers Association.

Lesh, R., Post, T. and Behr, M. (1987). Representations and translations among representations in mathematics learning and problem solving. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of Representation in the Teaching and Learning ofMathematics, (pp. 33-40). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Mayer, R. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139.

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB) (2005). İlköğretim matematik dersi (6, 7. ve 8. Sınıflar) matematik dersi öğretim programı. Ankara.

Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB) (2013). Ortaokul matematik dersi (5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) matematik dersi öğretim programı. Ankara.

Misquitta, R. (2011). A review of the literature: Fraction instruction for struggling learners in mathematics. Learning Disabilities Research ve Practice, 26(2), 109–119.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (2000). Standarts for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM

Norris, S. and Phillips, L. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87, 224-240.

Özgün-Koca, S. A. (2001a). Computer-based representations in mathematics classrooms: The effects of multiple-linked and semi-linked representations on students' learning of linear relationship. Published PhD dissertation. Ohio: Ohio State University.

Özgün-Koca, S. A. (2001b). The graphing skills of students in mathematics and science education. ERIC Digest.

Prain, V. and Waldrip, B. (2006). An exploratory study of teachers’and students’use of multimodal representations of concepts in primary science. International Journal of Science Education, 28(15), 1843-1866.

Prain, V. and Waldrip, B. (2010). Representing science literacies: An introduction. Research in Science Education, 40, 1-3.

Prain, V. and Tytler, R. (2012). Learning through constructing representations in science: A framework of representational construction affordances, International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751-2773.

Sankey, M., Birch, D. and Gardiner, M. (2010). Engaging students through multimodal learning environments: The journey continues. In C.H. Steel, M.J. Keppell, P. Gerbic ve S. Housego (Eds.), Curriculum, technology ve transformation for an unknown future. Proceedings ascilite, (pp. 852-863).

Schwartz, R. (1984). The problems of representations. Social Research, 51(4), 1047-1064.

Spiro, R. J. and Jehng, J. C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matters. In D. Nixand R. J. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology, (pp. 163-205). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Stavy R. and Tirosh, D. (2000). How Students (Mis-)Understand Science and Mathematics. New York, NY: Teachers College Press

Şiap, İ. ve Duru (2004). A. Kesirlerde Geometrik Modelleri Kullanabilme Becerisi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 12(1), 89-96.

Tirosh, D. (2000). Enhancing prospective teachers‟ knowledge of children‟s conception: The case of division of fraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(1), 5-25.

Treagust, D., Chittelborough, G. and Mamiala, T. (2003). Students’ understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 357-368.

Tsui, C. Y. and Treagust, D. F. (2003). Genetics reasoning with multiple external representations. Research in Science Education, 33(1), 111–135.

Van der Meij, H. (2007). What research has to say about gender-linked differences in CMC and does elementary school children’s e-mail use fit this picture?. Sex Roles, 57(5-6), 341-354.

Van der Meij, J. and De Jong, T. (2006). Supporting students’ learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 199–212.

Waldrip, B., Prain, V. and Carolan, J. (2010). Using multi-modal representations to improve learning in junior secondary science. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 65–80.

Wu, H. (1999). Some Remarks On The Teaching Of Fractions In Elementary School. http://math.berkeley.edu/~wu/fractions2.pdf

Zembat, İ.Ö. (2007). Sorun Aynı – Kavramlar; Kitle Aynı - Öğretmen Adayları. Elementer Education Online, 6(2), 305-312, [Online]: http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr. Erişim tarihi: 14.05.2015.


Refback'ler

  • Şu halde refbacks yoktur.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

 

 

 

Creative Commons Lisansı

İlköğretim Online Dergisi Creative Commons Alıntı-Gayriticari 4.0 Uluslararası Lisansı ile lisanslanmıştır.

ISSN: 1305-3515