An Analysis of Students’ Communication during Group Work in Mathematics

Yıl 2013, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 2, 59 - 72, 30.06.2013

Pinelopi D. Vasileiadou

https://doi.org/10.1501/OTAM_0000000522

Öz

Utilizing observation grid and interview study methologies, this research examines the ways in which students communicate with each other while working in a team during problem solving in mathematics. The study focuses primarily on the language used for communication. Results suggest that participants make assumptions to solve mathematical problems and justify their individual opinions, and cooperate and help each other, rarely asking for their teacher’s help, while using both the ordinary, and the mathematical spoken and written language. The interview indicates that students, although not experienced in undertaking group work, are able to readily identify its benefits and positive aspects

Anahtar Kelimeler

Mathematics education; cooperative learning; problem solving; communication; language

An Analysis of Students’ Communication during Group Work in Mathematics

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

-

Kaynakça

• Bauersfeld, H. (1988). Interaction, construction, and knowledge: Alternative perspectives for Mathematics education. In T. Cooney & D. Grouws (Eds.), Effective mathematics teaching (pp. 27- 46). Reston, VA: NCTM and LEA.
• Billstein, R., Libenskind, S., Lott, J., (1987). A problem Solving Approach to Mathematics for Elementary School Teachers (third edition). California: The Benjamin/ Cummings Publishing Company.
• Bishop, A. (1985). The social construction of meaning – a significant development for mathematics education? For the Learning of Mathematics, 5 (1), 24-28.
• Bussi, M.B. (1991). Social interaction and mathematical knowledge. In F. Furinghetti (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fifteenth Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1-16). Genoa, Italy: Program Committee of the 15th PME Conference.
• Cobb, P. (1986). Contexts, goals, beliefs, and learning mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 6 (2), 2-9.
• Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1991a). A constructivist approach to second grade mathematics. In E. von Glasersfeld (Ed.), Constructivism in Mathematics Education (pp. 157-176). Dordrecht: Reidel.
• Cobb, P., Wood, T., & Yackel, E. (1991b). Analogies from the philosophy and sociology of science for understanding classroom life. Science Education, 75, 23-44.
• Curcio, F. (1990). Mathematics as communication: Using a language-experience approach in the elementary grades. In T. Cooney & C. Hirsch (Eds), Teaching and Learning Mathematics in the 1990’s (pp. 69-75). Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• De Corte, E., VerSchool Affel, L. & Op't Eynde, P. (2000). Self-regulation: A characteristic and a goal of mathematics education. In M. Boekaerts, P. R., Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.). Handbook of self- regulation (pp. 687-726). New York: Academic Press.
• Davidson, N. (1990). Small-Group Cooperative Learning in Mathematics. In T. Cooney & C. Hirsch (Eds), Teaching and Learning Mathematics in the 1990’s (pp. 52-61). Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Effandi, Z. & Zonaton I. (2007), Promoting Cooperative Learning in Science and Mathematics Education: A Malaysian Perspective. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(1), 35-39.
• Kotsopoulos, D. (2010). An analysis of talking aloud during peer collaborations in mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 1049-1070.
• Levina, R. E. (1981). L.S. Vygotsky’s ideas about the planning function of speech in students. In. J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 279-299). Armont, NY: Sharpe.
• Perret-Clermont, A. N. (1980). Social interaction and cognitive development in students. New York: Academic Press.
• Pirie, S. E. B. (1998). Crossing the gulf between thought and symbol: Language as (slippery) stepping- stones. In H. Steinbring, M. G. Bartolini Bussi, & A. Sierpinska (Eds), Language and communication in the Mathematics classroom (pp. 7-29). Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic Press.
• Sakonidis, H. (1999). Mathematical Signs and Symbols: Semiotic, Psychological and Pedagogical Searches. In: Proceedings of the 4th National Conference Teaching of Mathematics and Informatics in Education. Pedagogical Institute and University of Crete, Rethymno.
• Singel, I. E. (1981). Social experience in the development of representational thought: Distancing theory. In I. E. Singel, D. M. Brodzinsky, & R. M. Golinkoff (Eds.), New directions in Piagetian theory and practice (pp. 203-217). Hillside, NJ: LEA.
• Voigt, J. (1985). Patterns and routines in classroom interaction. Recherches en Didactique des Mathematiques, 6, 69-118.
• Von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). Learning as a constructive activity. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 3-18). Hillside, NJ: LEA.
• Von Glasersfeld, E. (1990). Environment and communication. In L. P. Steffe & T. Wood (Eds.), Transforming student’s mathematics education: International perspectives (pp. 30-38). Hillside, NJ: LEA.
• Yackel, Cobb, Wood, Wheatley & Merkel (1990), The importance of social interaction in students’s construction of mathematical knowledge. In T. Cooney & C. Hirsch (Eds), Teaching and Learning Mathematics in the 1990’s (pp 12-21). Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Van de Walle, J., (2007), Teaching Mathematics (trans. Arapoglou V.). Thessaloniki: Epikentro.
• Matsagouras, I. (2001). Teaching Strategies, Athens: Gutenberg.
• Chionidou-Moskofoglou, M. (2000). Basics Methods of Cooperative Teaching and Learning in Mathematics. Euclidis C΄, Review of Mathematical Education, vol 16, issue 52, 39-53. Websites:
• http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/communication retrieved 3/23/2012