Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğrenme Stillerine Göre Matematiksel İspat Hakkındaki Görüşlerinin İncelenmesi

An Analysis of Prospective Math Teachers' Thoughts about Mathematical Proof by Learning Styles

Journal Name:

  • Amasya Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2014

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Problem Statement: Individual differences have to be taken into consideration to provide quality teaching. Learning processes differs according to individual differences. Learning style is typically defined as: "characteristic strengths and preferences of individuals in the process of acquiring, maintaining and processing knowledge". Proof is: sufficient evidence or argument for the truth or falsity of a statement, proposition or a result. Mathematical proof is: the act of proving the truth or falsity of an argued mathematical statement. Students' thoughts about proof are among the most significant factors influencing their proof process. For this reason, thoughts about proofs are considered an important part of proof processes in related studies. From this point of view, learning styles of students can play a major role in understanding proofs. Purpose of the Study: Results of the study are important in terms of providing information about whether learning styles of prospective math teachers have any influence on their thoughts about proofs and mathematical proofs. It is believed that this study will contribute to the identification of learning methods for more effective proof teaching. Method(s): This is a case study aiming to find out what prospective math teachers think about mathematical proofs according to learning styles. In the study, a quantitative method was followed to define the learning styles of prospective teachers, and a qualitative method was adopted to find their thoughts about proofs. A study was carried out on 30 prospective teachers to find out their learning styles, and 8 prospective teachers with different learning styles (2 for each learning style) were studied for the qualitative part of the study. The prospective teachers were seniors in the department of Elementary Mathematics Teaching. Learning style scale and interview forms were applied to the study group. The "Learning Style Scale" was developed by Kolb (2005) was used to find out the learning styles of prospective teachers. Semi-structured Mathematical Proof Interview Form developed by the researchers was used to find out what prospective teachers think about mathematical proofs. Interviews were recorded with a tape recorder. Content analysis method was used to analyze data obtained from the prospective teachers. Conclusions and Discussions: According to the study findings, prospective teachers with different learning styles also have different thoughts about proofs. Prospective teachers' thoughts about the definition of proofs show that explanation and affirmation are the leading categories. Prospective math teachers with different learning styles also differ in terms of their thoughts about mathematical proofs. It is an important finding that prospective teachers with different learning styles consider problem solving as an application. Participant prospective teachers expressed their opinions about learning styles. Participant prospective teachers interpreted learning style in different ways. This means that prospective teachers with different learning styles also differ in terms of their thoughts about learning styles.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bu çalışmada, matematik öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stillerine göre matematiksel ispat yapmaya yönelik görüşlerindeki farklılıklar incelenmiştir. Çalışmada farklı öğrenme stiline sahip öğretmen adaylarının ispat yapmaya yönelik görüşlerinin belirlenmesinde nitel araştırma yaklaşımından yararlanılmıştır. Çalışma araştırmacılar tarafından belirlenen bir üniversitenin ilköğretim matematik öğretmenliği bölümünün dördüncü sınıfında öğrenim görmekte olan sekiz öğretmen adayı ile gerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında, çalışma grubuna öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stillerini belirlemek amacıyla Kolb (2005) tarafından geliştirilen "Öğrenme Stili Ölçeği" uygulanmıştır. Ayrıca öğretmen adaylarının matematiksel ispat hakkındaki görüşlerini ortaya koyma amacıyla yarı yapılandırılmış Matematiksel İspata Yönelik Görüşme Formu (MİYGF) uygulanmıştır. Ulaşılan araştırma bulgularına göre, çalışmaya katılan öğretmen adaylarının sahip olduğu öğrenme stiline göre matematiksel ispat yapmaya yönelik farklı görüşlerinin bulunduğu anlaşılmıştır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-ogretmen-adaylarinin-ogrenme-stillerine-gore-matematiksel-ispat-hakkindaki-goruslerinin-incelenmesi.pdf
  • 2
410
429
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Almeida, D. (2003). Engendering proof attitudes: can the
genesi
s of mathematical knowledge teach us anything? International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 34(4), 479-488. Almeida, D.A. (2000). Survey of mathematics undergraduates' interaction with proof: Some implications for mathematics education. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 31(6), 869-890. Anapa, P. & Şamkar, H. (2010). Investigation of under graduate students' perceptions of mathematical proof. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 2700-2706. Aşkar, P. ve Akkoyunlu, B. (1993) Kolb öğrenme stili envanteri.
Eğitim ve Bilim,
87, 37-47. Baker, D. & Campbell, C. (2004). Fostering the development of mathematical thinking: Observations from a proofs course. Primus, 14(4), 345-353. Baki, A. (2008). Kuramdan uygulamaya matematik eğitimi. Harf
Eğitim Yayıncılığı, 4. Baskı, Ankara. Boydak, A. (2001). Öğrenme stilleri. İstanbul: BeyazYayınları. Corbin, J.M., ve Strauss, A. C. (2007). Basics of qualitativeresearch: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
de
Villiers
, M. (1990). The role and function of proof with
sketchpad. Pythagoras, 24. 17-24. Doruk, M. ve Kaplan, A. (2013). İlköğretim matematik öğretmeni adaylarının matematiksel ispata yönelik görüşleri. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(1),
241-252.
Dunn, R. & K, Dunn (1993). Teaching secondary students through their individual learning styles. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Edwards, B.S. & Ward, M.B. (2004). Suprises from mathematics education research: Students (mis)use of mathematical definitions. The American Mathematical Monthly, 111, 411-424. Ekici, G (2003) Öğrenme stiline dayalı öğretim ve biyoloji dersi öğretimine yönelik ders planı örnekleri. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
425
Amasya Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 3(2), 410-429, 2014
Ekiz, D. (2003). Eğitim Araştırma Yöntem ve Metodlarına Giriş.
Anı Yayıncılık, Ankara Felder, R. M.
&
Silverman, L. K. (1988). Learning and teaching
styles in engineering education. Engineering Education,
78(7), 674-681.
Felder, R.M.
(1996)
. Matters of style. ASEE Prism, 6(4), 18-23.
Gencel Evin İ. (2007). Kolb'un deneyimsel öğrenme kuramına dayalı Öğrenme Stilleri Envanteri-III'ü Türkçeye uyarlama çalişması. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 9(2), 120-139.
Gibson, D. (1998). Students' use of diagrams to develop proofs in an introductory analysis course. Students' proof schemes. In E. Dubinsky, A. Schoenfeld, & J.Kaput (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education, III,
284-307. AMS.
Gregorc, A. F. (1984). Style as a symptom: A phenomenological
perspective. Theory Into Practice. 23 (1), 51-56. Güler, G. ve Dikici, R. (2012). Orta öğretim matematik
öğretmeni adaylarının matematiksel ispat hakkındaki
görüşleri.
Kastamonu
Eğitim
Dergisi, 20(2), 571-590. Jones, K. (2000). The student experience of mathematical proof
at university level. International Journal of Mathematical
Education in Science and Technology, 31(1), 53-60. Keefe, J.W. (1979).Learning style: An overview in student
learning styles, diagnosing and prescribing program.
Reston. VA: National Association of Secondary School
Principlas, Connecticut, USA. Knuth, E.J. (2002). Secondary school mathematics teachers'
conceptions of proof. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 33(5), 379-405. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the
source of learning and development. New Jersey: Prentice
Hall.
Kolb, D.A. (1999). The kolb learning style inventory. Hay
Resources Direct. Kolb, D.A. (2005). Learning style inventory - version 3.1. Hay
Group.
Loo, R. (2004). Kolb's learning styles and learning preferences: Is there a linkage. Educational Psychology, 24(1), 99-108.
426
Özdemir
& Kaplan
Marshall, C. (1990). The power of the learning styles philosophy. Educational Leadership, 48 (2), 62.
Moore, R.C. (1994). Making the transition to formal proof. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 27, 249-266.
Moralı, S., Uğurel, I., Türnüklü, E. ve Yeşildere, S. (2006).
Matematik
öğretme
n adaylarının ispat yapmaya yönelik
görüşleri.
Kastamonu
Eğitim
Dergisi, 14, 1, 147-160 More, A.J. (1987). Native Indian learning styles: A review for
researchers and teachers. Journal of American Indian
Education, 27 (1), 17-29. Raman, M.J. (2003). Key ideas: What are they and how can they
help us understand how people view proof? Educational
Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 319-325. Stylianides, A. (2007). The notion of proof in the context of
elementary school mathematics. Educational Studies in
Mathematics, 65(1), 1-20. Taşcı, S. (2005). Hemşirelikte problem çözme süreci, Erciyes
Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi Hemşirelik Özel
Sayısı, 14, 73-78. Veznedaroğlu, R.L., ve Özgür, A.O. (2005). Öğrenme Stilleri:
Tanımlamalar, modeler ve işlevleri, İlköğretim Online,
4(2), 1-16.
Weber, K. (2006). Investigating and teaching the processes used to construct proofs. In F. Hitt, G. Harel & A. Selden (Eds), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education, VI, 197¬232.
Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Özgen, K. ve Alkan, H. (2011). Matematik öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stiline göre etkinliklere yönelik tercih ve görüşlerinin incelenmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 41, 325-338.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com