Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example

Sefa Dündar

doi:10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

Full Text (PDF)

Sefa Dündar ¹ ^*

More Detail

¹ Abant Izzet Baysal University^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Background:
Using multiple representations of a problem can reveal the relationship between complex concepts by expressing the same mathematical condition differently and can contribute to the meaningful learning of mathematical concepts. The purpose of this study is to assess the performances of mathematics teacher-candidates on trigonometry problems represented in different formats and to examine the reasons for test failures.

Materials and methods:
This study uses a mixed-method approach and consists of 51 teacher-candidates enrolled in the Department of Mathematics Education at a state university. The data collection tools were a symbolic trigonometry test, a visual trigonometry test, and a verbal trigonometry test. Interviews were conducted with the teacher-candidates to reveal the reasons of their failures and the advantages and disadvantages of each representation style for the trigonometry problems.

Results:
This study found that the teacher-candidates were most successful on the symbolic test and least successful on the verbal test.

Conclusions:
The teacher-candidates stated that seeing different representation forms helped them to understand the questions better and produce multiple solutions.

Keywords

teacher education
mathematics teacher candidates
trigonometry
representations

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2015, Volume 11, Issue 6, 1379-1397

https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

Publication date: 29 Sep 2015

Article Views: 1989

Article Downloads: 1389

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Adamek, T., Penkalski, K., & Valentine, G. (2005). The History Of Trigonometry, History of Mathematics. Retrieved at June 2th, 2014, from www.math.rutgers.edu/~mjraman/History_Of _Trig.pdfweb.
Akyüz, D., Coşkun, S., & Coşkun, E. S., (2009). An investigation into preservice teachers’use of different representations in solving a pattern task. Procedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 5, 1261-1265.
Alamolhodaei, H. (1996). A study in higher education calculus and students' learning styles. (Doctoral dissertation), University of Glasgow, England.
Altun, M. (2005). Teaching Mathematics for Education Faculty and Elementary Teachers, Bursa: Alfa Publishing.
Baki, A. (2006). Mathematics teaching from theory to practice. Trabzon: Derya Publications.
Baştürk, S. (2010). First-year secondary school mathematics students' conceptions mathematical proofs and proving. Educational Studies, 36(3), 283-298. doi:10.1080/03055690903424964
Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Data analysis handbook for social sciences. Ankara: PegemA.
Castro, E., Morcillo, N., & Castro, E. (2001). Representations produced by secondary education pupils in mathematical problem solving. Paper presented at the Procedings of the Twenty First Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 547-558.
Çelik, D., & Sağlam-Arslan, A. (2012). The analysis of teacher candidates’ translating skills in multiple representations. Elementary Education Online, 11(1), 239-250.
Challenger, M. (2009). From Triangles to A Concept: A Phenomenographic Study of A-Level Students’ Development of The Concept of Trigonometry. (Doctoral Dissertation), University of Warwick, UK.
Clement, J. (2000). Analysis of clinical interviews: Foundations and model viability. Eds: Kelly, A. E., & Richard A. L. Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Asssociates Publishers.
Creswell, J. W., & Plano-Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
DeBellis, V., & Goldin, G. (2006). Affect and Meta-Affect in Mathematical Problem Solving: a Representational Perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 131-147. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9026-4
Delice, A. (2004). Trigonometry word problems in creating visualization and diagrams. 6th National Sciences and Mathematics Education Congress, Istanbul.
Dikici, R., & İşleyen, T. (2003). The study of learning difficulties in relation and function from the point view of certain variables, Gazi University Kastamonu Education Journal, 11(2), 105-116.
Doğan, A., & Abdildaeva, E. (2013). Study on the visual and analytical application for solution of trigonometric equation systems. MANAS Journal of Engineering, 1(1), 51-58.
Doğan, A. (2001). A research on misconceptions and mistakes of the students and their attitudes towards the trigonometry subjects which are teaching in the high schools. (Master Thesis), Selçuk University, Turkey.
Durmuş, S. (2004). A diagnostic study to determine learning difficulties in mathematics. Gazi University Kastamonu Education Journal, 12(1).
Dündar, S. (2014). The investigation of spatial skills of prospective teachers with different cognitive. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 3(1). doi:10.14686/BUEFAD.201416209
Dündar, S. (2015). An analysis on the pattern generalizations of the Turkish pre-service Mathematics teachers that are presented in a different structure and presentation. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(2), 210-224. doi: 10.5897/ERR2014.2057
Dündar, S., Bulut, M., Canan, S., Özlü, Ö., Kaçar, S., & Çankaya, İ. (2014). The Investigation of Brain Waves in Problem Solving Process. Journal of Erzincan University Education Faculty, 16(2), 1-23.
English, L. D., & Warren, E. A. (1998). Introducing the variable through pattern exploration. Mathematics Teacher, 91(2), p.166-170. ERIC Number: EJ559997
Feifei, Y. (2005). Diagnostic assessment of urban middle school student learning of prealgebra patterns (Doctoral Dissertation), Ohio State University, USA.
Friedlander, A., & Tabach, M. (2001). Promoting multiple representations in algebra. In A. Cuoco (Ed.), The roles of representation in school mathematics (pp. 173-184). Reston, VA: NCTM.
Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. Newyork: McGraw-Hill.
Goldin, G.A, & Kaput, J. (1996), A Joint Perspective on the Idea of Representation in Learning and Doing Mathematics, Theories of Mathematical Learning, Steffe, L. & Nesher, P. (Eds.) Mahwah (New Jersey): LEA.
Gürbüz, R., & Birgin, O. (2008). The comparison of students’ performance at different grades regarding to making operation with different types of representation of the rational numbers, Journal of Pamukkale University Education Faculty, 23, 85-94.
Hammill, L. (2010). The interplay of text, symbols, and graphics in mathematics education. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching & Learning Journal, 3(3), 1-8.
Hashweh, M. Z. (2005). Teacher pedagogical constructions: a reconfiguration of pedagogical content knowledge. Teachers and Teaching, 11(3), 273-292. doi: 10.1080/13450600500105502
Jamison, R. E. (2000). Learning the language of mathematics. Language and Learning Across the Disciplines, 4(1), 45-54.
Kar, T., & İpek, A. S. (2009). The usage of vısual representatıons ın solvıng word problems ın hıstory of mathematıcs. Journal of Qafqaz University, 28, 138-147.
Kardeş, D., Aydın, E. & Delice, A. (2012). Öğretmen adaylarının lineer denklem sistemleri konusundaki temsil dönüşüm başarıları. X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, Niğde Üniversitesi, Niğde.
Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), The handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 390-419). New York: Macmillan.
Kieren, T. E. (1976). On The Mathematical, Cognitive, and Instructional Foundations of Rational Numbers. In R.A.Lesh (Ed.), Number and Measurement (101-144). Columbus, Oh: Ohio State University, EEIC, SMEAC.
Konyalıoğlu, A. C. (2003). Investigation of effectiveness of visualization approach on understanding of concepts in vector spaces at the university level. (Doctoral Thesis), Atatürk University, Erzurum.
Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An ıntroduction to qualitative research ınterviewing. California, CA: Sage Pub
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). An application of hierrachical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observes. Biometrics, 33, 363-374. doi: 10.2307/2529786
Leikin, R., & Levav-Waynberg, A. (2007). Exploring mathematics teacher knowledge to explain the gap between theory-based recommendations and school practice in the use of connecting tasks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(3), 349-371. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9071-z
Lesh, R., Post, T., & 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 of mathematics (pp.33-40). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lin, M., Hsieh, K. & Pierson, M. (2004). The change of pre-service teachers' computer attitudes and confidence as a function of time. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Markel, W. D. (1982). Trigonometry-Forgotten and Abused? School Science and Mathematics, 82, 548-551. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.1982.tb10055.x
McMillian, J. H. (2000). Educational research: Fundamentals for the consumer (3. Edition). New York: Longman.
Moseley, B. (2005). Students’ Early Mathematical Representaion Knowledge: The Effects of Emphasizing Single or Multiple Perspectives of the Rational Number Domain in Problem Solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 37–69. doi: 10.1007/s10649- 005-5031-2
NCTM, (2000). National Council of Teacher of Mathematics, Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Retrieved at December 11th, 2014, from http://standards.nctm.org/document/appendix/numb.htm.
Piro, J. S., Anderson, G., & Fredrickson, R. (2015). Quality and early field experiences: Partnering with junior achievement. The Teacher Educator, 50(1), 31-46. doi:10.1080/08878730.2014.975060.
Poon, K. K. (2011). Tour of a simple trigonometry problem. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 43(4), 449-461. doi: 10.1080/0020739X.2011.622798
Reusser, K., & Stebler, R. (1997). Every word problem has a solution: The social rationality of mathematical modeling in schools. Learning and Instruction, 7(4), 309-327. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(97)00014-5
Sam, L. C., Lourdusamy, A., & Ghazali, M. (2001). Factors Affecting Students' Abilities to Solve Operational and Word Problems in Mathematics. Journal of Science and Mathematics Education in S.E. Asia, 24(1), 853-860.
Sevimli, E., & Delice, A. (2012). May mathematical thinking type be a reason to decide what representations to use in definite integral problems? Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 32(2), 76-81.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Simon, H .A. & Hayes, J. R. (1976). The understanding process: Problem isomorphs, Cognitive Psychology, 8, 165-190.
Soylu, Y., & Soylu, C. (2005). Learning difficulties of 5fh class in primary education at fraction: ordering, adding, subtraction, multiplication in fraction and problems related to fraction. Journal of Education Faculty, 7(2), 101-117.
Stoessiger, R., & Ernest, P. (1992). Mathematics and national curriculum: primary teacher attitudes. The International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 23(1), 65- 74. doi: 10.1080/0020739920230107
Tatar, E., Okur, M., & Tuna, A. (2008). A study to determine learning difficulties in secondary mathematics education. Kastamonu University Kastamonu Education Journal, 16(2).
Thompson, K. A. (2007). Student’s understanding of trigonometry enhanced through the use of a real world problem: ımproving the ınstructional sequence. (Doctoral Thesis), Department of Mathematics, Illinois State University, USA.
Thompson, P. W. & Silverman, J. (2007). The Concept of accumulation in calculus. In M. Carlson ve C. Rasmussen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics (pp. 117-131).
Tuna, A. (2011). The effect of the 5e learning cycle model on students’ mathematical thinking and academic achievements in teaching trigonometry, (Doctoral Thesis), Gazi University, Ankara.
Villegas, A. M. (2007). Dispositions in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(5), 370-380. doi: 10.1177/0022487107308419.
Villegas, J. L., Castro, E., & Gutierrez, E. (2009). Representations in problem solving: a case study with optimization problems. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 7(1), 279-308.
Weber, K. (2005). Students’ understanding of trigonometry functions. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 17(3), 91-112. doi: 10.1007/BF03217423.
Wilkerson, J. R. (2015). The need for ınstructional sensitivity and construct clarity in pact a commentary on “examining the ınternal structure evidence for the performance assessment for california teachers”. Journal of Teacher Education, 66(2), 184-192. doi: 10.1177/0022487114561029.
Xenofontos, C., & Andrews, P. (2014). Defining mathematical problems and problem solving: prospective primary teachers’ beliefs in Cyprus and England. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(2), 279-299. doi: 10.1007/s13394-013-0098-z
Yan, Z., & Lianghuo, F. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in intended curriculum: A comparison of selected Mathematics textbooks from mainland China and the United States, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(4), 609-626. doi: 10.1007/s10763-006-9036-9
Yılmaz, G. K., Ertem, E., & Güven, B. (2010). Dynamic geometry software of cabri’s influence on 11 grade students’ to learn in trigonometry issues, Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 1(2), 200-216.

How to cite this article

APA

Dündar, S. (2015). Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), 1379-1397. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

Vancouver

Dündar S. Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2015;11(6):1379-97. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

AMA

Dündar S. Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2015;11(6), 1379-1397. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

Chicago

Dündar, Sefa. "Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2015 11 no. 6 (2015): 1379-1397. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

Harvard

Dündar, S. (2015). Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), pp. 1379-1397. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a

MLA

Dündar, Sefa "Mathematics Teacher-Candidates’ Performance in Solving Problems with Different Representation Styles: The Trigonometry Example". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 11, no. 6, 2015, pp. 1379-1397. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1396a