Content Analysis of Research on Processes of Constructing Knowledge in Mathematics Education in Turkey

Year 2020, Volume: 9 Issue: 2, 279 - 300, 05.06.2020

Faden Topuz Berna Cantürk Günhan

https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.578076

Cited By: 2

Abstract

APOS, RBC, procept and abstraction theory with the students' knowledge creation processes on researches, are examined in order to scan in National Thesis Center, ULAKBİM, Google Scholar and papers in the symposium. A total of 27 postgraduate thesis, 15 articles and 8 papers were included in the study. By using descriptive content analysis method; the research was conducted by taking into consideration the year-type-publication language, sample-number and sampling type, the preferred topic and information creation theory in the research, the model-pattern and validityreliability used, data collection tools and data analysis methods. It was determined that the most studies were conducted in 2018, and in the field of algebra learning with numbers. Most of the studies were conducted at middle school level. Studies were conducted with a small number of students in terms of sample numbers. In most of the researches, qualitative models were preferred and mostly open-ended questions, achievement tests, video and audio recordings as well as data diversity were used for data collection. There were some deficiencies in the researches about the validation and reliability of the studies with sampling methods. In order to overcome these deficiencies, research methods courses given to the researches can be made more effective.

Keywords

processes of constructing knowledge, mathematics, content analysis

References

• KaynakçaAlbayrak, E. (2017). Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi alanında yayınlanan matematiksel model ve modelleme araştırmalarının betimsel içerik analizi (Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi). Atatürk Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzurum.Arnon, I., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Oktaç, A., Fuentes, R., S., Trigueros, M., ve Weller, K. (2014). APOS Theory: A framework for research and curriculum development in mathematics education. Springer Science & Business Media.Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: A qualitative metasynthesis. Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267.Aztekin, S., ve Taşpınar Şener, Z. (2015). Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi alanındaki matematiksel modelleme Araştırmalarının İçerik Analizi: Bir Meta-Sentez Çalışması, Eğitim ve Bilim(TED),40(178), 139-161.Bayazit, İ. (2016). Subje düşüncesi: Bir matematiksel kavramın süreç ve obje olarak anlaşılması. E. Bingölbali, S. Arslan, & İ. Ö. Zembat , (Ed.), Matematik eğitiminde teoriler (ss.183-199), Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.Boyraz, D. Ç., ve Aygün M. (2017). Türkiye’de matematikte tahmin konusuyla ilgili yapılmış çalışmalar. Millî Eğitim Dergisi Sayı 216 Güz/2017, 165-185.Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç, Çakmak E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2016). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (20.Baskı). Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., ve Valentine, J. C. (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and metaanalysis (2nd edition). New York: Russell Sage Publication.Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Nichols, D., Schwingendorf, K., Thomas, K., ve Vidakovic, D. (1996). Understanding the Limit Concept: Beginning with a Coordinated Process Schema. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(2), 167-192.Çalık, M., Ünal, S., Coştu, B. ve Karataş, F.Ö. (2008). Trends in Turkish science education. Essays in Education, Special Edition, 23-45. Çiltaş, A. (2017). Türkiye’de matematik eğitimi alanında yayınlanan matematiksel model ve modelleme araştırmalarının betimsel içerik analizi, Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, Yıl/Year:5 Sayı/Issue:9 Ekim/October 2017Çiltaş, A., Güler, G., ve Sözbilir, M. (2012). Türkiye'de matematik eğitimi araştırmaları: Bir içerik analizi çalışması. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 12(1), 565-580.Dienes, Z.P., (1961). On abstraction and generalization. Harward Educational Review, 31(3), 281-301.Dinçer, S. (2014). Eğitim bilimlerinde uygulamalı meta-analiz. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.Dreyfus, T. (2007). Processes of abstraction in context the nested epistemic actions model. Retrieved on November 12, 2014 from http://cresmet.asu.edu/news/i2/dreyfus.pdf.Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in advanced mathematical thinking. In D. Tall (ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 95-123). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Dubinksy, E. (2000). Mathematical literacy and abstraction in the 21st century. School Science and Mathematics, 100(6), 289-97.Dubinsky, E., Weller, K., McDonald, A., M., ve Brown, A. (2005). Some historical issues and paradoxes regarding the concept of infinity: An APOS-based analysis: Part 1. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 58(3), 335-359.Durlak, J. A. (1995). Reading and understanding multivariate statistics. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Finfgeld, D. L. (2003). Metasynthesis: The state of the art-so far. Qualitative Health Research, 13(7), 893904.Fraenkel, J. R. ve Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design & evaluate research in education (4. baskı). London: McGraw Hill.Göktaş, Y., Hasançebi, F., Varısoğlu, B., Akcay, A., Bayrak, N., Baran, M., ve Sözbilir, M. (2012a). Trends in educational research in Turkey: A content analysis. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 12(1), 443-460. Gray, E. M., ve Tall, D. O. (1991). Duality, ambiguity and flexibility in successful mathematical thinking. In F. Furinghetti (Ed.), Proceedings of PME XIII (n.2, pp. 72-79), Assisi, Italy.Gül, Ş., ve Sözbilir, M. (2015). Fen ve matematik eğitimi alanında gerçekleştirilen ölçek geliştirme araştırmalarına yönelik tematik içerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 40(178), 85-102.Hart, L. C., Smith, S. Z., Swars, S. L., ve Smith, M. E. (2009). An examination of research methods in mathematics education: 1995– 2005. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(1) 26–41.Hazzan, O. (1999). Reducing abstraction level when learning abstract algebra concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 40, 71–90.Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B., ve Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 195-222.Jayarajah, K., Saat, R.M. ve Rauf, R.A.A. (2014). A review of science, technology, engineering & mathematics (STEM) education research from 1999–2013: A Malaysian perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 10(3), 155-163 DOI: 10.12973/eurasia.2014.1072a.Kelly, A. E., ve Lesh, R. A. (2000). Handbook of Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers: London.Krippendorff, K. (2004). Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Kutluca, T., Hacıömeroğlu, G., ve Gündüz, S. (2016). Türkiye'de bilgisayar destekli matematik öğretimini temel alan çalışmaların değerlendirilmesi, Eğitimde Kuram ve Uygulama, 12(6), 1253-1272.Lin, T. C., Lin, T. J. ve Tsai, C.C. (2014). Research trends in science education from 2008 to 2012: A systematic content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 36(8), 1346-1372, DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2013.864428.Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB). (2013). Ortaokul matematik dersi 5-8.sınıflar öğretim programı. Ankara: Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı.Miles, M. B., ve Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. (2nd Edition). Calif. : SAGE Publications.Noss, R., ve Hoyles, C. (1996). Windows on mathematical meanings. Kluwer, Dordrecht: The Netherlands. Pershing, J. L. (2002). Using document analysis in analyzing and evaluating performance. Performance Improvement, 41(1), pp. 36-42.Piaget, J. (1985). The equilibration of cognitive structures. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Riffe, D., Lacy, S., ve Fico, F.G. (2005).Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Russell, B. (1926). Education and Good Life. NY: Boni and Liveright.Saban, A., Koçbeker-Eid, B. N., Saban, A., Alan, S., Doğru, S., Ege, İ., Arslantaş, S., Çınar, D. ve Tunç, P. (2010). Eğitimbilim alanında nitel araştırma metodolojisi ile gerçekleştirilen makalelerin analiz edilmesi. Selçuk Üniversitesi Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30, 125-142.Sarantakos, S. (2005). Social Research (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M., ve Dündar, H. (2014). Eğitim ve bilim dergisinde yayınlanan araştırmaların eğilimleri: İçerik analizi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 39(173), 430-453.Sierpinska, A. (1994). Understanding in mathematics. London: Falmer.Skemp, R. (1986). The psychology of learning mathematics. Penguin: Harmondsworth.Sözbilir, M., Kutu, H., ve Yaşar, M. D. (2012). Science education research in Turkey: A content analysis of selected features of papers published. In J. Dillon& D. Jorde (Eds). The World of Science Education: Handbook of Research in Europe (pp.341-374). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Suri, H., ve Clarke, D. (2009). Advancements in research systhesis methods: From a methodologically inclusive perspective. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 395-430.Tall, D. O. (1991). The psychology of advanced mathematical thinking. In D. O. Tall (Ed.), Advanced mathematical thinking (pp. 3-21). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Pub.Tatar, E., Kağızmanlı, T. B., ve Akkaya, A. (2013). Türkiye’deki teknoloji destekli matematik eğitimi araştırmalarının içerik analizi. Buca Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35, 33-50.Ulutaş, F., ve Ubuz, B. (2008). Matematik Eğitiminde Araştırmalar ve Eğilimler: 2000 ile 2006 Yılları Arası Research and Trends in Mathematics Education: 2000 to 2006. llköğretim Online (Elementary Education Online), 7(3), 614-626, 2008. [Online]: http://ilkogretim-online.org.tr.Umdu Topsakal, Ü., Çalık, M., ve Çavuş, R. (2012). What trends do Turkish biology education studies indicate?. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 7(4), 639-649.Walsh, D. ve Downe, S. (2005). Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: A literature review. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50(2), 204-211. Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: Quantitative methods for research synthesis. London: Sage Publications. Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık