Matematik Analiz Dersinde Öğretim Elemanlarının Tercih Ettiği ve Ders Kitabının İçerdiği Örneklerin Yapısal İncelenmesi

Bu çalışmanın amacı mühendislik matematiğinde derskitaplarının içerdiği ve öğretim elemanlarının tercih ettiğiörnekleri, yapısal özelliklerine göre değerlendirmek ve öğretimelemanlarının örnek tercihlerine etki eden durumlarıbelirlemektir. Nitel-yorumlayıcı paradigmaya sahip olançalışmada, veri toplama süreci içerik analizi üzerindengerçekleştirilmiştir. Araştırma kapsamında değerlendirilenöğretim içerikleri, bir mühendislik fakültesinde, MatematikAnaliz dersini veren beş öğretim elemanın ders notları ve derskitabından elde edilmiştir. Öğretim içeriğinde yer alan örnekleryapısal özelliklerine göre değerlendirilirken, temsil, dil ve bilgibileşenleri göz önünde bulundurulmuş; veriler, betimsel istatistikkullanılarak sunulmuştur. Öğreticilerin örneklendirmedavranışına etki edebilecek olası durumları tespit etmek için yarıyapılandırılmış görüşmelerden yararlanılmıştır. Bulgular, derskitabı ile benzer olarak ders notlarında da formel dil ve işlemselbilgi yapısına sahip örneklerin daha sık kullanıldığınıgöstermiştir. Bununla birlikte ders kitabından farklı olarak, dersnotlarında, grafik yerine cebirsel temsiller daha fazla yer almıştır.Çalışma sonuçları, öğretim elemanlarının tercih ettiği örnekyapılarının, ders kitabı ile genel anlamda benzerlik gösterdiğiniancak epistemolojik inanç, öğretim ortamının niteliği veyararlanılan kaynakların örnek tercihinde belirleyici olduğunuortaya koymuştur. Kitap yazarları ve araştırmacılar için öğretimpratiğine katkı sağlamak üzere, gelecekte yapılabilecek bazıçalışma önerileri paylaşılmıştır.

Investigation of Structural Features of Examples Which Textbook Located and Lecturers’ Preferred in Calculus

The aim of this study is to analyse the structural features of examples which textbook located and lecturers’ choosed in teaching of engineering calculus. The study had interpretivist paradigm in qualitative research approach and the data collection process was conducted through content analysis method. The course content of calculus, which are lectured by different instructors in engineering departments, are followed during a semester within the context of the study. Examples in the textbooks and the lecture notes are analyzed with document analysis method based on their structural features of representation, language and knowledge. Besides, data are presented with descriptive statistics method. Semi-structured interviews are conducted to detect any possible components affecting lecturers’ exemplification behavior, and the records are interpreted by using the inferential content analysis. The findings show that the examples of both textbooks and lecture notes have a formal language and procedural knowledge. It is also found that lecturers, unlike the content of textbooks, use more algebric representations than graphical ones. The results of the study indicate that the structural features of examples which were choosed by lecturers and which were located in textbook are similar. Besides epistemological belief, the components of the teaching environment and the type of used sources have a significant role affecting the choices of the lecturers. It has been made some suggestions for authors and researchers, which may contribute to the teaching practice for further studies.

PDF

___

Alcock, L. ve Inglis, M. (2008). Doctoral students’ use of examples in evaluating and proving conjectures. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69, 111–129.
Bills, L., Dreyfus, T., Mason, J., Tsamir, P., Watson, A. ve Zaslavsky, O. (2006). Exemplification in mathematics education. Proceeding of the 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Prague, Czech Republic: PME.
Brandstrom, A. (2005). Differentiated tasks in mathematics textbooks. (Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi), Lulea University of Technolgy, Sweden.
Brousseau, G. (1986). Fondements et méthodes de la didactique des mathématiques. Recherches en Didactique des Mathématiques, 7(2), 33–115.
Cavallaro, M. ve Anaya, M. (2011). Exploring different approaches to mathematical modelling in engineering calculus courses. J. Filipe Matos, W. Blum, K. Houston ve S. Carrriera (Ed.). Modelling and Mathematics Education içinde (s. 271-279). Chichester: Horwood.
Chevallard, Y. (1985). La transposition didactique, du savoir savant au savoir enseigné. Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
Chevallard, Y. (1992). Fundamental concepts in didactics: Perspectives provided by an anthropological approach. R. Douady ve A. Mercier (Ed.). Research in Didactique of Mathematics, Selected Papers içinde (s. 131-167). Grenoble: La Pensée Sauvage.
Chick, H. L. (2009). Choice and use of examples as a window on mathematical knowledge for teaching. For the Learning of Mathematics, 29(3), 26-30.
Coutis, P. F., Farrell, T. W. ve Pettet, G. J. (1999). Improving engineering mathematics education at Queensland University of Technology. Proceedings of the Delta’ 99 symposium of undergraduate mathematics içinde (s. 69–74). Rockhampton: University of Central Queensland.
Dubinsky, E. (1991). Reflective abstraction in mathematical thinking. D. Tall (Ed.). Advanced mathematical thinking. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103-131.
Edwards, H. C. ve Penney, D. (2008). Matematik analiz ve analitik geometri. (Ö. Akın, Çev.). Ankara: Palme Yayıncılık.
Güner, N. ve Çomak, E. (2011). Mühendislik öğrencilerinin Matematik-I derslerindeki başarısının destek vektör makineleri kullanılarak tahmin edilmesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, 17(2), 87-96.
Felszeghy, S. F. (2010). On reforming the teaching of calculus to engineering students at CSULA (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). California State University, USA.
Hiebert, J. ve Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hsieh, H. F. ve Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
Hughes-Hallett, D. (1991). Visualization and calculus reform. W. Zimmermann ve S. Cunningham (Ed.). Visualization in Teaching and Learning Mathematics içinde(s. 121-126). Washington, DC: MAA.
Jungic, V., Kent, D. ve Menz, P. (2012). On online assignments in a calculus class. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 9(1), 28-35.
Kendal, M. (2002). Teaching and learning introductory differential calculus with a computer algebra system (Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi). University of Melbourne, Australia.
Kendal, M. ve Stacey, K. (2003). Tracing learning of three representations with the differentiation competency framework. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 22-41.
Lam, C., Danforth, M. ve Hughes, R. (2014). A comprehensive approach on delivering calculus to engineering students. Annual Conference for the American Society for Engineering Education toplantısında sunulmuş sözlü bildiri, Indianapolis, USA.
Lithner, J. (2004). Mathematical reasoning in calculus textbooks exercises. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23, 405-427.
Mason, J. ve Pimm, D. (1984). Generic examples: seeing the general in the particular. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 15, 227-289.
Mesa, V. (2004). Characterizing practices associated with functions in middle school textbooks: An empirical approach. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 56, 255-286.
Ostebee, A. ve Zorn, P. (1997). Calculus from graphical, numerical and symbolic points of view. Fort Worth, TX: Saunder College Publishing.
Patterson, N. ve Norwood, K. (2004). A case study of teacher beliefs in students’ beliefs about multiple representations. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(1), 5-23.
Peled, I. ve Zaslavsky, O. (1997). Counter-examples that (only) prove and Counter-examples that (also) explain. FOCUS on Learning Problems in mathematics, 19(3), 49-61.
Powell, A. B., Borge, I. C., Floriti, G. I., Kondratieva, M., Koublanova, E. ve Sukthankar, N. (2009). Challenging tasks and mathematics learning. E. J. Barbeau ve P. J. Taylor (Ed.). Challenging mathematics in and beyond the classroom: The 16th ICMI study. New York: Springer.
Raman, M. (2004). Epistemological messages conveyed by three high-school and college mathematics textbooks. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23, 389-404.
Rowland, T. Thwaites, A. ve Huckstep, P. (2003). Novices’ choice of examples in the teaching of elementary mathematics. A. Rogerson (Ed.). Proceedings of th International Conference on the Decidable and the Undecidable in Mathematics Education. Brno, Czech Republic.
Rowland, T. (2008). The purpose, design and use of examples in the teaching of elementary mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69, 149-163.
Sandefur, J., Mason, J., Stylianides, G. J. ve Watson, A. (2013). Generating and using examples in the proving process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 323-340.
Schommer, M., Duel, O. ve Huter, R. (2005). Epistemological beliefs, mathematical problem-solving and academic performance of middle school students. Elementery School Journal, 105(3), 290-304.
Thomson, S. ve Fleming, N. (2004). Summing it up: Mathematics achievement in Australian schools in TIMSS 2002. Melbourne: ACER.
Watson, A. ve Chick, H. (2011). Qualities of examples in learning and teaching. ZDM, 43(2), 283–294.
Watson, A. ve Mason, J. (2002). Student-generated examples in the learning of mathematics. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(2), 237-249.
Zaslavsky, O. ve Zodik, I. (2007). Mathematics teachers’ choices of examples that potentially support or impede learning. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 143-155.
Zodik, I. ve Zaslavsky, O. (2008). Characteristics of teachers’ choice of examples in and for the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 69(2), 165-182.