Araştırma Makalesi
BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Predicting the Geometry Knowledge of Pre-Service Elementary Teachers

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3, 15 - 27, 19.03.2016

Asuman Duatepe Paksu

Öz

In this study, the aim was to examine the factors that predict the geometry knowledge of pre-service elementary teachers. Data was collected on 387 pre-service elementary teachers from four universities by using a geometry knowledge test, the van Hiele geometric thinking level test, a geometry self efficacy scale and a geometry attitude scale. Correlation analyses which were carried out between the geometry knowledge score and all predictor variables revealed that the relationships between all predictors and geometry knowledge were statistically significant. Furthermore, the findings from the regression analyses showed that a combination of the variables of van Hiele geometric thinking level, geometry self efficacy and attitude towards geometry was able to predicts geometry knowledge significantly.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Geometry Knowledge Van Hiele Geometric Thinking Level Geometry Self

Kaynakça

  • Aiken, L. R. (1976). Update of attitude towards mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 46 (3) 293-311.
  • Alpar, R. (2003). Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemlere giriş 1. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Atiyah, M. (2001). Mathematics in the 20th Century, American Mathematical Monthly, 108(7), 654-666.
  • Ball D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 241-247.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thoughts and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Cantürk Günhan, B. and Başer, N. (2007). Geometriye Yönelik Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi. Hacettepe University Journal of Education 33: 68-76.
  • Chen, P. (2003). Exploring the accuracy and predictability of the self-efficacy beliefs of seventh-grade mathematics students. Learning and individual differences, 14, 79-92.
  • Cunningham, R. F. and Roberts, A. (2010). Reducing the Mismatch of Geometry Concept Definitions and Concept Images Held by Pre-Service Teachers IUMPST The Journal, 1, 1-17.
  • Davis, B. (2002). Motivating students. Tools for teaching. Retrieved November 19, 2006, from: http://teaching.berkeley.edu/bgd/motivate.html
  • Duatepe, A. (2000). An Investigation on the Relationship between van Hiele Geometric Levels of Thinking and Demographic Variables for Pre-service Elementary School Teachers. Unpublished Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.
  • Duatepe, A., and Ubuz, B. (2007). Development of a geometry attitude scale. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 11 (2), 205–209.
  • Fuys, D. Geddes, D. and Tischler, R. (1988). The van Hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph 3 Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • Gutierrez, A. & Jaime, A. (1999). Pre-service Primary Teachers‟ Understanding of the Concept Of Altitude of a Triangle. Journal of Mathematics Teacher of Education, 2(3), 253-275.
  • Hackett, G. and Betz, N., E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy / mathematics performance correspondence. Journal for Research Mathematics Education, 20, 261-273.
  • Haladyna, T., Shaughnessy, J. & Shaughnessy, M. J. (1983). A causal analysis of attitude toward mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(1), 19-29.
  • Kulm, G. (1980). Research on mathematics attitude. In R. J. Shum Way (Ed.), Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 356-387). Reston, Va. NCTM.
  • Kloosterman, P. (1991). Beliefs and achievement in seventh grade mathematics. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 13 (3), 3-15.
  • Lundsgaard, V. (1998). General considerations on curricula designs in geometry. In Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century. An ICMI study . ed. C. Mammana & V. Villani 235-242. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Ma, X. (1997). Reciprocal relationships between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 90 (4), 221-229.
  • Ma, X. and Kishor N. (1997). Assessing the relationship between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics: a meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (1), 26-47.
  • Mason, M. M., and Schell, V. (1988). Geometric understanding and misconceptions among pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers. In Proceedings of the tenth annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education M. J. Behr, B. C. Lacampagne, & M. M. Wheeler (Eds.),.290- 296. Northern Illinois University.
  • Mayberry, J.W. (1981). An investigation of the van Hiele levels of geometric thought in undergraduate pre-service teachers. Unpublished Dissertation, Graduate school of University of Georgia
  • Mayberry, J. W. (1983). The van Hiele levels of geometric thought in undergraduate preservice teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 58 – 69
  • MullisIS I. V.S., Martin M. O., Gonzalez E. J., Gregory K. D, Garden R. A., O'Connor K. M., Chrostowski S. J., ve Smith T. A. TIMSS 1999 International Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA’s Repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eighth Grade, Chestnut Hill, MA, Boston College (2000).
  • NCTM (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, Va. NCTM.
  • Parsons, R. R. (1993). Teacher beliefs and content knowledge: influences on lesson crafting of pre-service teachers during geometry instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington State University.
  • Reyes, L. H. (1984). Affective variables and mathematics education. Elementary School Journal, 84, 558-581
  • Roberts, S. K. (1995). A study of the relationship between demographic variables and van Hiele level of thinking for pre-service elementary school teachers Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Graduate schools of Wayne State University
  • Saads, S. and Davis, G. (1997). Spatial abilities, van Hiele levels & language use in three dimensional geometry. In Proceedings of the 21th PME Conference 4, 104-111.
  • Shrigley, R. L. (1983). The attitude concept and science teaching. Science Education, 67 849, 425-442.
  • Shulman L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57:1-22.
  • Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207– 231.
  • Swafford, J. O., Jones, G. A., and Thornton, C. A. (1997). Increased knowledge in geometry and instructional practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(4), 467- 483.
  • Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th Ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele Levels and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1982. ERIC Document Reproduction Service no. ED 220 288.
  • Van der Sandt, S. and Nieuwoudt, H. (2003). Grade 7 teachers and prospective teachers' content know ledge of geometry. South African Journal of Education, 23:199-206.
  • Van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and Insight. New York: Academic Press.
  • White, J. N. (2001). Socioeconomic, Demographic, Attitudinal, and Involvement Factors Associated with Math Achievement in Elementary School. Unpublished EdD Dissertation, East Tennessee State University, USA. APPENDIX Specimen items from the geometry knowledge test
  • 17) Which one is regular quadrilateral? A) rhombus B) rectangle
  • C) parallelogram D) square
  • 7) Whose diagonals are perpendicular? A) rhombus B) rectangle C) trapezoid D) parallelogram
  • 29 ) Which one gives an example of two parallel planes?
  • A) door and ceiling of the classroom
  • B) top of the desk and the wall of the classroom
  • C) blackboard and ceiling of the classroom
  • D) top of the desk and the floor of the classroom
  • 31) Which one cannot be the open the form of a rectangular prism? A) B) C) D)
  • 36) Which of the followings has two symmetry axes? A) B) C) D)
  • Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Geometri Bilgilerinin Yordanması

Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Geometri Bilgilerinin Yordanması

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3, 15 - 27, 19.03.2016

Asuman Duatepe Paksu

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının geometri bilgilerini yordayan faktörleri belirlemektir. Araştırmanın verileri dört farklı üniversitede son sınıfta okumakta olan 387 sınıf öğretmeni adayından, geometri bilgisi testi, van Hiele Geometrik düşünme testi, geometriye yönelik öz yeterlik ölçeği ve geometriye yönelik tutum ölçeği kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Veri analizleri öğretmen adaylarının geometri bilgisi ve öngörülen her bir yordayıcı faktör arasında hesaplanan korelasyon değerlerinin istatistiksel olarak anlamlı olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Bununla birlikte gerçekleştirilen regresyon analizi geometrik düşünme düzeyleri, geometriye yönelik özyeterlik ve geometri tutum puanlarının öğretmen adaylarının geometri bilgisi puanlarını istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir şekilde yordayabildiğini göstermiştir

Anahtar Kelimeler

Geometri Bilgisi Van Hiele Geometric Düşünme Düzeyleri Geometriye Yönelik Öz Yeterlik Geometriye Yönelik Tutum

Kaynakça

  • Aiken, L. R. (1976). Update of attitude towards mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 46 (3) 293-311.
  • Alpar, R. (2003). Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemlere giriş 1. Ankara: Nobel Yayınları.
  • Atiyah, M. (2001). Mathematics in the 20th Century, American Mathematical Monthly, 108(7), 654-666.
  • Ball D. L. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 241-247.
  • Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thoughts and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Cantürk Günhan, B. and Başer, N. (2007). Geometriye Yönelik Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeğinin Geliştirilmesi. Hacettepe University Journal of Education 33: 68-76.
  • Chen, P. (2003). Exploring the accuracy and predictability of the self-efficacy beliefs of seventh-grade mathematics students. Learning and individual differences, 14, 79-92.
  • Cunningham, R. F. and Roberts, A. (2010). Reducing the Mismatch of Geometry Concept Definitions and Concept Images Held by Pre-Service Teachers IUMPST The Journal, 1, 1-17.
  • Davis, B. (2002). Motivating students. Tools for teaching. Retrieved November 19, 2006, from: http://teaching.berkeley.edu/bgd/motivate.html
  • Duatepe, A. (2000). An Investigation on the Relationship between van Hiele Geometric Levels of Thinking and Demographic Variables for Pre-service Elementary School Teachers. Unpublished Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.
  • Duatepe, A., and Ubuz, B. (2007). Development of a geometry attitude scale. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 11 (2), 205–209.
  • Fuys, D. Geddes, D. and Tischler, R. (1988). The van Hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. Monograph 3 Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  • Gutierrez, A. & Jaime, A. (1999). Pre-service Primary Teachers‟ Understanding of the Concept Of Altitude of a Triangle. Journal of Mathematics Teacher of Education, 2(3), 253-275.
  • Hackett, G. and Betz, N., E. (1989). An exploration of the mathematics self-efficacy / mathematics performance correspondence. Journal for Research Mathematics Education, 20, 261-273.
  • Haladyna, T., Shaughnessy, J. & Shaughnessy, M. J. (1983). A causal analysis of attitude toward mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(1), 19-29.
  • Kulm, G. (1980). Research on mathematics attitude. In R. J. Shum Way (Ed.), Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 356-387). Reston, Va. NCTM.
  • Kloosterman, P. (1991). Beliefs and achievement in seventh grade mathematics. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 13 (3), 3-15.
  • Lundsgaard, V. (1998). General considerations on curricula designs in geometry. In Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century. An ICMI study . ed. C. Mammana & V. Villani 235-242. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Ma, X. (1997). Reciprocal relationships between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 90 (4), 221-229.
  • Ma, X. and Kishor N. (1997). Assessing the relationship between attitude toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics: a meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28 (1), 26-47.
  • Mason, M. M., and Schell, V. (1988). Geometric understanding and misconceptions among pre-service and in-service mathematics teachers. In Proceedings of the tenth annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education M. J. Behr, B. C. Lacampagne, & M. M. Wheeler (Eds.),.290- 296. Northern Illinois University.
  • Mayberry, J.W. (1981). An investigation of the van Hiele levels of geometric thought in undergraduate pre-service teachers. Unpublished Dissertation, Graduate school of University of Georgia
  • Mayberry, J. W. (1983). The van Hiele levels of geometric thought in undergraduate preservice teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 58 – 69
  • MullisIS I. V.S., Martin M. O., Gonzalez E. J., Gregory K. D, Garden R. A., O'Connor K. M., Chrostowski S. J., ve Smith T. A. TIMSS 1999 International Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA’s Repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eighth Grade, Chestnut Hill, MA, Boston College (2000).
  • NCTM (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, Va. NCTM.
  • Parsons, R. R. (1993). Teacher beliefs and content knowledge: influences on lesson crafting of pre-service teachers during geometry instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Washington State University.
  • Reyes, L. H. (1984). Affective variables and mathematics education. Elementary School Journal, 84, 558-581
  • Roberts, S. K. (1995). A study of the relationship between demographic variables and van Hiele level of thinking for pre-service elementary school teachers Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Graduate schools of Wayne State University
  • Saads, S. and Davis, G. (1997). Spatial abilities, van Hiele levels & language use in three dimensional geometry. In Proceedings of the 21th PME Conference 4, 104-111.
  • Shrigley, R. L. (1983). The attitude concept and science teaching. Science Education, 67 849, 425-442.
  • Shulman L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57:1-22.
  • Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207– 231.
  • Swafford, J. O., Jones, G. A., and Thornton, C. A. (1997). Increased knowledge in geometry and instructional practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(4), 467- 483.
  • Tabachnick, B.G. and Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th Ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele Levels and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1982. ERIC Document Reproduction Service no. ED 220 288.
  • Van der Sandt, S. and Nieuwoudt, H. (2003). Grade 7 teachers and prospective teachers' content know ledge of geometry. South African Journal of Education, 23:199-206.
  • Van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and Insight. New York: Academic Press.
  • White, J. N. (2001). Socioeconomic, Demographic, Attitudinal, and Involvement Factors Associated with Math Achievement in Elementary School. Unpublished EdD Dissertation, East Tennessee State University, USA. APPENDIX Specimen items from the geometry knowledge test
  • 17) Which one is regular quadrilateral? A) rhombus B) rectangle
  • C) parallelogram D) square
  • 7) Whose diagonals are perpendicular? A) rhombus B) rectangle C) trapezoid D) parallelogram
  • 29 ) Which one gives an example of two parallel planes?
  • A) door and ceiling of the classroom
  • B) top of the desk and the wall of the classroom
  • C) blackboard and ceiling of the classroom
  • D) top of the desk and the floor of the classroom
  • 31) Which one cannot be the open the form of a rectangular prism? A) B) C) D)
  • 36) Which of the followings has two symmetry axes? A) B) C) D)
  • Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Geometri Bilgilerinin Yordanması
Toplam 49 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil İngilizce
Bölüm Articles
Yazarlar

Asuman Duatepe Paksu

Yayımlanma Tarihi 19 Mart 2016
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2013Cilt: 2 Sayı: 3

Kaynak Göster

APA Duatepe Paksu, A. (2016). Predicting the Geometry Knowledge of Pre-Service Elementary Teachers. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 2(3), 15-27.

e-ISSN: 2147-1606

14550        14551