Effects of Using The Computer Based Concept Maps in The Web Based Dıstance Educatıon for Processors Courser

Abstract

In this study, students’ views on the teaching of microprocessors through Web Based Distance Education (WBDE) using Computer Based Concept Maps (CBCM) were surveyed. Teaching materials were designed in the scope of the study to teach microprocessors to the students. Two questionnaires were administered at the end of the study to survey the students’ views, one consisting of 9 questions concerning features of the CBCM and the other consisting of 11 questions concerning the teaching of CBCM through WBDE. Impacts of the demographic profile (personality characteristics) of the students who took part in the questionnaire were also reviewed. With regards to the features of the CBCM questionnaire, 77% of students replied “Completely agree” and 23% responded “Agree.” As for the CBCM through WDBE questionnaire, 72% of the students replied “Completely agree” and 28% responded “Agree”. ANOVA and t-tests indicated that the demographic variables of the students did not add a significant difference to these results.

Keywords

• Computer based concept map, Web based distance education, Microprocessors education

Sinan UĞUZ*a, Tuncay AYDOĞAN a

Abstract

References

1. Akar, F. (2006). The efffectiveness of the discovery learning strategy on the mathematics achievement at the second step elementary. Unpublished master’s thesis, Çukurova University, The Institute of Social Sciences, Adana, Turkey.
2. Altun, M. (2002). Maths teaching in 6th,, 7th and 8th classes, (2nd ed.). Bursa: Alfa Publishing.
3. Başar,M., Ünal, M. &Yalçın, M. (2001). The reasons of the maths fear starting from the primary school. the congress of v. science and maths education. Retrieved August 10, 2007, from http://www.fedu.metu.edu.tr/ufbmek-5/b_kitabi/PDF/Matematik/Bildiri/t212d.pdf
4. Cooper, B. & Harries, T. (2002). Children’s responses to contrasting ‘realistic’ mathematics problems: Just how realistic are children ready to be mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 49, 1-23.
5. De Bock, D., Van Dooren,W., Janssens, D. & Verschaffel, L. (2002). Improper use of linear reasoning: An in-depth study of the nature and the irresistibility of secondary school students’ errors. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 50, 311–334.
6. Depaepe, F., De Corte, E. & Verschaffel, L. (2010). Teachers’ approaches towards word problem solving: Elaborating or restricting the problem context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 152-160.
7. Dursun, Ş. & Dede, Y. (2004). The factors affecting students’ success in mathematics: Mathematics teachers’ perspectives. Gazi University, The Journal of the Education Faculty, 24(2), 217–230.
8. Erden, M. (1986). Primary school 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th graders’ behaviours when solving problems based on four operations. Hacettepe University, The Journal of the Education Faculty, 1, 105–113.

9. Ersoy, Y. & Gür, H. (2004). Maths teaching based on problem setting and solving approach – 1: Teachers’ experiences and some problems. The board of mathematicians: The science corner. Retrieved July 17, 2007, from http://www.matder.org.tr/bilim/hgyepk.asp?ID=82
10. Gainsburg, J. (2008). Real-worlds connections in secondary mathematics classrooms. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 199-219.
11. Greer, B. (1997). Modelling reality in mathematics classrooms: The case of word problems. Learning and Instruction, 7(4), 293–307.
12. Gür, H. & Korkmaz, E. (2003). The identification of primary school 7th graders’ problem development skills. The board of mathematicians: The science corner. Retrieved August 15, 2007, from http://www.matder.org.tr/bilim/i7sopoabb.asp?ID=38
13. Inoue, N. (2005). The realistic reasons behind unrealistic solutions: the role of interpretive activity in word problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 15, 69-83.
14. Inoue, N. (2002). The role of personal interpretation in mathematical problem solving. Columbia University.
15. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for school mathematics, national council of teachers of mathematics. Reston, VA.
16. Reusser, K. & Stebler, R. (1997). Every word problem has a solution – the social rationality of mathematical modeling in schools. Learning and Instruction, 7, 309-327.
17. Sevgen, B. (2002). The structure and the development of mathematical thought. The proceedings of v. national science and maths teaching congress ulusal fen bilimler. Retrieved August 10, 2007, from http://www.fedu.metu.edu.tr/ufbmek-5/b_kitabi/PDF/Matematik/Bildiri/t250DD.pdf
18. Soylu, Y. & Soylu, C. (2006). The importance of problem solving in the way of achievement in maths classes. İnönü University, The Journal of the Education Faculty, 7(11), 97–111.
19. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E. & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of school arithmetic word problems. Learning and Instruction, (4), 273-294.
20. Verschaffel, L., Greer, B. & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Lise: Swets and Zeitlinger.
21. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., & Viersraete H. (1999). Upper elementary school pupils’ difficulties in modeling and solving nonstandard additive word problems involving numbers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3(30), 265-285.
22. Umay, A. (2007). The new face of our old friend (1st ed.). Ankara: Aydan WEB Foundations.
23. Umay, A. (2003). The ability of mathematical reasoning. Hacettepe University, The Journal of the Education Faculty, 24, 234-243.
24. Xin, Z. & Zhang, L. (2009). Cognitive holding power, fluid intelligence, and mathematical achievement as predictors of children’s realistic problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 19, 124-129.
25. Yazgan, Y. & Bintaş, J. (2005). Fourth and fifth grade students’ level of problem solving strategies: A teaching experiment. Hacettepe University, the Journal of the Education Faculty, 28, 210-218.
26. Yoshida, H., Vershaffel, L. & De Corte, E. (1997). Realistic considerations in solving problematic word problems: Do Japanese and Belgian children have the same difficulties? Learning And Instruction, 7, 329-338.