Volume 6, Issue 4 (December 2024)
IEEPJ 2024, 6(4): 57-86 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Kalati Z, Rostamy-Malkhalife M, Behzadi M H. (2024). Ranking the Components of Algebraic Thinking Model in Sixth-Grade Students during Coronavirus Pandemic Based on Fuzzy Analysis. IEEPJ. 6(4), 57-86. doi:10.22034/6.4.57
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-751-en.html
URL: http://ieepj.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-751-en.html
1- Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran ,Mohsen_rostamy@yahoo.com
3- Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran
2- Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran ,
3- Department of Mathematics, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad university, Tehran, Iran
Abstract: (2204 Views)
Objective: Studies on teaching and learning algebra point to the fact that algebra is a branch of mathematics that deals with the general notation of relationships between numbers and mathematical structures and also performing operations on those structures. Algebra problems that students face is mainly in mathematical modeling, perception of algebraic expressions, applying arithmetic operations, and comprehending the different meanings of the equal sign and the variable symbol. Given the lack of attention to the promotion of the algebraic thinking components, the current study aimed to explain and prioritize these components in sixth-grade elementary students through virtual education during the coronavirus pandemic.
Methods: To collect data based on survey research, an open and closed-ended questionnaire was used.
Results: Statistical analysis revealed that the students mostly achieved generalized arithmetic (2.92) and modeling in algebraic thinking (2.89), and they tended to answer through generalization and relied on pre-learned formulas. The lowest dispersion of answers was related to the reasoning component. Fuzzy analysis indicated the modeling component was ranked first (0.075251). And the reasoning component was ranked fourth (0.074962). The third and second ranks respectively belonged to the functions and generalized arithmetic component.
Conclusions: Consequently, ranking algebraic thinking components could be effective for teaching mathematics.
Methods: To collect data based on survey research, an open and closed-ended questionnaire was used.
Results: Statistical analysis revealed that the students mostly achieved generalized arithmetic (2.92) and modeling in algebraic thinking (2.89), and they tended to answer through generalization and relied on pre-learned formulas. The lowest dispersion of answers was related to the reasoning component. Fuzzy analysis indicated the modeling component was ranked first (0.075251). And the reasoning component was ranked fourth (0.074962). The third and second ranks respectively belonged to the functions and generalized arithmetic component.
Conclusions: Consequently, ranking algebraic thinking components could be effective for teaching mathematics.
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Psychology
Received: 2023/03/13 | Accepted: 2023/08/26 | Published: 2024/12/1
Received: 2023/03/13 | Accepted: 2023/08/26 | Published: 2024/12/1
References
1. Andini, W., & Suryadi, D. (2017). Student obstacles in solving algebraic thinking problems. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 895, No. 1, p. 012091). IOP Publishing. [DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/895/1/012091]
2. Ayber, G. & Tanışlı, D. (2017). An analysis of middle school mathematics textbooks from the perspective of fostering algebraic thinking through generalization. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 17(6). http://dx.doi.org/10.12738/estp.2017.6.0506 [DOI:10.12738/estp.2017.6.0506]
3. Bakker, A., & Wagner, D. (2020). Pandemic: lessons for today and tomorrow?. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 104(1), 1-4. [DOI:10.1007/s10649-020-09946-3]
4. Baloglu, M., & Kocak, R. (2006). A multivariate investigation of the differences in mathematics anxiety. Personality and individual differences, 40(7), 1325-1335. [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2005.10.009]
5. Blanton, M. L., & Kaput, J. J. (2004). Elementary Grades Students' Capacity for Functional Thinking. International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 135-142.
6. Blanton, M. L., & Kaput, J. J. (2005). Characterizing a classroom practice that promotes algebraic reasoning. Journal for research in mathematics education, 36(5), 412-446. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/30034944 [DOI:10.2307/30034944]
7. Carpenter, T. P., & Levi, L. (2000). Developing Conceptions of Algebraic Reasoning in the Primary Grades. Research Report.
8. Carraher, D., Schliemann, A. D., & Brizuela, B. M. (2000). Early algebra, early arithmetic: Treating operations as functions. In Presentado en the Twenty-second annual meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Tucson, Arizona.
9. Chen, C. T. (2001). A fuzzy approach to select the location of the distribution center. Fuzzy sets and systems, 118(1), 65-73. [DOI:10.1016/S0165-0114(98)00459-X]
10. Chen, S. J., & Hwang, C. L. (1992). Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making methods. In Fuzzy multiple attribute decision making (pp. 289-486). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-46768-4_5]
11. Choudhury, R., & kumar Das, D. (2012). Influence of Algebraic Ability and Study Habit on the Achievement in Mathematics at Secondary Stage. International Journal of Mathematics Education, 5(1), 1.
12. Clark-Wilson, A., Robutti, O., & Thomas, M. (2020). Teaching with digital technology. Zdm, 52(7), 1223-1242. [DOI:10.1007/s11858-020-01196-0]
13. Clausen-May, T. (2005). Teaching maths to pupils with different learning styles. Sage. [DOI:10.4135/9781446212011]
14. Dehaene, S., Spelke, E., Pinel, P., Stanescu, R., & Tsivkin, S. (1999). Sources of mathematical thinking: Behavioral and brain-imaging evidence. Science, 284(5416), 970-974. [DOI:10.1126/science.284.5416.970]
15. Di Pietro, G., Biagi, F., Costa, P., Karpiński, Z., & Mazza, J. (2020). The likely impact of COVID-19 on education: Reflections based on the existing literature and recent international datasets (Vol. 30275). Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European :union:.
16. Driscoll, M. (1999). Fostering Algebraic Thinking: A Guide for Teachers, Grades 6-10. Heinemann, 361 Hanover Street, Portsmouth, NH 03801-3912.
17. Eisner, E. W. (2000). Those who ignore the past…: 12 'easy' lessons for the next millennium. Journal of curriculum studies, 32(2), 343-357. [DOI:10.1080/002202700182808]
18. Engelbrecht, J., Borba, M. C., Llinares, S., & Kaiser, G. (2020). Will 2020 be remembered as the year in which education was changed?. Zdm, 52(5), 821-824. [DOI:10.1007%2Fs11858-020-01185-3]
19. Ferdig, R. E., Baumgartner, E., Hartshorne, R., Kaplan-Rakowski, R., & Mouza, C. (Eds.). (2020). Teaching, technology, and teacher education during the COVID-19 pandemic: Stories from the field. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
20. Hakkarainen, A., Holopainen, L., & Savolainen, H. (2013). Mathematical and reading difficulties as predictors of school achievement and transition to secondary education. Scandinavian journal of educational research, 57(5), 488-506. [DOI:10.1080/00313831.2012.696207]
21. Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In Multiple attribute decision making (pp. 58-191). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3]
22. Indraswari, N. F., Budayasa, I. K., & Ekawati, R. (2018). Algebraic reasoning in solving mathematical problem based on learning style. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 947, No. 1, p. 012061). IOP Publishing. [DOI:10.1088/1742-6596/947/1/012061]
23. Jacobs, V. R., Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., & Battey, D. (2007). Professional development focused on children's algebraic reasoning in elementary school. Journal for research in mathematics education, 38(3), 258-288. [DOI:10.2307/30034868]
24. Jupri, A., Drijvers, P., & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2014). Difficulties in initial algebra learning in Indonesia. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 26(4), 683-710. [DOI:10.1007/s13394-013-0097-0]
25. Kaput, J. J. (1995). A Research base supporting long term algebra reform? In D. T. Owens, M. K. Reed, & G. M. Millsaps, Proceedings of the 17th Annual meeting of PME- NA. Symposium conducted at the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED389539.pdf
26. Kaput, J. J., Carraher, D. W., & Blanton, M. L. (Eds.). (2017). Algebra in the early grades. Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781315097435]
27. Kazemi moghadam, M. (2017). Investigating the causes of eighth grade students' misconception in solving equations and providing training to resolve misunderstandings using Bruner's theory (dissertation), Farhangian University, Tehran.
28. Kieran, C. (1981). Concepts associated with the equality symbol. Educational studies in Mathematics, 12(3), 317-326. [DOI:10.1007/BF00311062]
29. Kilpatrik, J. & Soford, J. (2002). Helping Children Learn Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; Illustrated edition.
30. Kim, J., Kim, J., DesJardins, S. L., & McCall, B. P. (2015). Completing algebra II in high school: Does it increase college access and success?. The Journal of Higher Education, 86(4), 628-662. [DOI:10.1080/00221546.2015.11777377]
31. Kızıltoprak, A., & Köse, N. Y. (2017). Relational thinking: The Bridge between arithmetic and algebra. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 10(1), 131-145. Retrieved from https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/305 [DOI:10.26822/iejee.2017131893]
32. Kusumaningsih, W., & Herman, T. (2018). Improvement Algebraic Thinking Ability Using Multiple Representation Strategy on Realistic Mathematics Education. Journal on Mathematics Education, 9(2), 281-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.22342/jme.9.2.5404.281-290 [DOI:10.22342/jme.9.2.5404.281-290]
33. Lee, L. (2001). Early algebra - but which algebra? In H. K. Chick, K. Stacey, J. Vincent, & J. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 12th ICMI Study Conference: The Future of Teaching and Learning Algebra. The University of Melbourne; (pp. 392-398). Retrieved from https://minerva-access.unimelb.edu.au/handle/11343/35000
34. Lentz, U. (2018). Algebraic thinking of sixth graders through the lens of multimodality (PhD thesis). The University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Retrieved from https://island1.uncc.edu/islandora/object/etd%3A1516/datastream/PDF/download/citation.pdf
35. Loibl, K. & Leuders, T. (2019). How to make failure productive: Fostering learning from errors through elaboration prompts. Learning and Instruction, 62, 1-10. http://dx.doi 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.03.002 [DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.03.002]
36. Mardiyana, M. (2019). The profile of high school students' algebraic reasoning abilities: from the perspective of gender difference. In PROCEEDING 1st International Seminar STEMEIF (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Learning International Forum "Strengthening the STEM Education and Digital Skills".
37. Mashuri, M., Waluya St. B., & Rochmad, R. (2018). Student Competence in Algebraic Thinking Based on Kieran's Theory in the Introduction to Algebra Structure. PRISMA, Proceedings of the National Mathematics Seminar, 1, 663-668. Retrieved from https://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/prisma/article/view/20214
38. Misbahuddin, Mustamin, SH., & Nur, F. (2019). Analysis of the algebraic thinking skills of class VIII MTs students. Al-Asma. Journal of Islamic Education, 1 (2), 76-88. Retrieved from https://journal3.uin-alauddin.ac.id/index.php/alasma/issue/view/1071 [DOI:10.24252/asma.v1i2.11162]
39. NCTM (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
40. Nurlaeli, T., & Agoestanto, A. Mashuri. (2018). The Analysis of Algebraic Thinking Ability of 7 th Grade Students on SQ4R Models Reviewed from Student's Self-Regulated Learning. UNNES Journal of Mathematics Education.
41. Ralston N. C. (2013). The development and validation of a diagnostic assessment of algebraic thinking skills for students in the elementary grades (PhD Dissertation). University of Washington. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/docview/1428435529
42. Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2007). The importance of mathematics in health and human judgment: Numeracy, risk communication, and medical decision making. Learning and individual differences, 17(2), 147-159. [DOI:10.1016/j.lindif.2007.03.010]
43. Rittle-Johnson, B., Matthews, P. G., Taylor, R. S., & McEldoon, K. L. (2011). Assessing knowledge of mathematical equivalence: A construct-modeling approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 85. [DOI:10.1037/a0021334]
44. Schliemann, A. D. (2013). Bringing out the algebraic character of arithmetic: From children's ideas to classroom practice. Routledge.
45. Schliemann, A., Carraher, D., Brizuela, B., Earnest, D., Goodrow, A., Lara-Roth, S., & Peled, I. (2003). Algebra in Elementary School. International group for the psychology of mathematics education, 4, 127-134.
46. Sibgatullin, I. R., Korzhuev, A. V., Khairullina, E. R., Sadykova, A. R., Baturina, R. V., & Chauzova, V. (2022). A Systematic Review on Algebraic Thinking in Education. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(1). [DOI:10.29333/ejmste/11486]
47. Socas, M. (2011). The teaching of algebra in compulsory education. Research contributions. NUMEROS. Mathematics Didactics Magazine, 77, 5-34. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3781349
48. Somasundram P. (2018). Acognitive Model of Year Five Pupil's Algebra Thinking, [PhD dissertation], Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Kualalumpur. http://studentsrepo.um.edu.my/id/eprint/8526
49. Somasundram, P. (2021). The Role of Cognitive Factors in Year Five Pupils' Algebraic Thinking: A Structural Equation Modelling Analysis. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 17(1). [DOI:10.29333/ejmste/9612]
50. Stephens, A., Blanton, M., Knuth, E., Isler, I., & Gardiner, A. M. (2015). Just say yes to early algebra!. Teaching children mathematics, 22(2), 92-101. [DOI:10.5951/teacchilmath.22.2.0092]
51. Tian, Y., Yao, J., & Ding, J. (2020). How the school's information technology hardware investment affects students' achievements: Based on the empirical research of Nan-jing middle school. Education Research Monthly, 37(1), 87-94.
52. Usiskin, Z. (1988). Conceptions of school algebra and uses of variables. The ideas of algebra, K-12, 8, 19.
53. Warsitasari, W. (2015). Algebraic Thinking in Mathematical Problem Solving, Apotema Journal, 1(1). Retrieved from https://stkippgri-bkl.ac.id/jurnal-apotema-vol-1-no-2-juni-2015/ [DOI:10.31597/ja.v1i1.161]
54. Zayyadi, M., Nusantara, T., Hidayanto, E., Sulandra, I. M., & Asari, A. R. (2019). Exploring prospective student teacher's question on mathematics teaching practice. JOTSE, 9(2), 228-237. Retrieved from https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=7635289 [DOI:10.3926/jotse.465]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
