İLKOKUL MATEMATİĞİNDE ÇOKLU-DUYUMA DAYALI ÖĞRETME TEKNİKLERİNİN ÖNEMİNİN EVRİMİ: KURAM VE UYGULAMA

Year 2008, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 239 - 252, 14.01.2013

Jenny R. Raıns Catherine A. Kelly Robert L. Durham

Abstract

Kısmen yasal gelişmeler nedeniyle, bütün eğitim alanlarında performansla ilgili sorumluluk alma eğilimi giderek yaygınlaşmaktadır. İlkokul düzeyinde matematik performansı da bu konuda bir istisna değildir. Bu çalışmada Piaget, Bruner ve Vygotsky'nin kuramlarının ilgili bölümlerini ve öğrencileri matematik kavramlarıyla tanıştırırken öğretmenlerin karşılaşabilecekleri zorlukları gözden geçirdik. Yayınlanmış olan kuramsal ve deneysel çalışmalar, özellikle anaokulu seviyesinden üçüncü sınıf sonuna kadarki dönemde, çoklu-duyuma (multi-sensory) dayalı öğretim tekniklerinin kullanımını desteklemektedir. Normal ve engelli çocukların gelişim ve öğrenme hızları farklılık gösterdiğinden, çocukların tümünün yeni matematik kavramlarını idrak etmeye aynı anda hazır olma olasılığı düşüktür. Çoklu-duyum teknikleri, birçok çocuğun anlaşılması zor matematik kavramlarını asimile etme yoluyla öğrenmesini sağlayarak akranlarından geri kalmamasını sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

Matematik öğretimi, çok duyuma dayalı öğretim teknikleri

References

• Baroody, A. J. (1989). Manipulatives don’t come with guarantees. The Arithmetic Teacher 37(2). 4-5.
• Bassano, S. (1982). Multi-sensory input in the non-academic ESL classroom. CATESOL Occasional Papers, 8, 51-60.
• Bruner, J. (1973). Beyond the information given. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
• Bullock, J. (Personal communication, October 2003).
• Bybee, R. W. (1982) Piaget for educators. Columbus: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
• Cazden, C. (1981). Performance before competence: Assistance to child discourse in the zone of proximal development. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 3(1), 5-8.
• Chester, J., Davis, J., & Reglin, G. (1991). Math manipulatives use and math achievement of third grade students. University of North Carolina at Charlotte.
• Clements, D. (1999). ‘Concrete’ manipulatives, concrete ideas. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1(1), 45-60.
• Dev, P.C., Doyle, B.A., & Valente, B. (2002). Labels needn’t stick: “At-risk” first graders rescued with appropriate intervention. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 7(3), 327-332.
• Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (1990). Teaching mind in society: Teaching, schooling and literate discourse. In L., Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of socio-historical psychology (pp. 175-205). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Hiebert, J. (1988). A theory of developing competence with written mathematical symbols. Educational Studies in Mathematics (19), 333-355.
• Hiebert, J. (1989). The struggle to link written symbols with understandings: An update. The Arithmetic Teacher 36(7), 38-43.
• Institute for Multi-sensory Education. (2000). Orton-Gillingham.com. Retrieved February 7, 2003, from http://www.orton-gillingham.com/
• Kalivoda, T. B. (1978). Increasing communication with multi-sensory exercises. Hispania, 61(4), 923-926. Retrieved November 11, 2003, from JSTOR.
• Kamii, C. (1982). Number in preschool and kindergarten: Educational implications of Piaget’s theory. Washington, D. C.: National Association of the Education of Young Children.
• Kamii, C., Lewis, B. A., & Booker, B. M. (1998). Instead of teaching missing addends. Teaching Children Mathematics, 4, 458-461. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from EBSCOhost.
• Kamii , C., & Rummelsburg, J. (2008). Arithmetic for first graders lacking number concepts. Teaching Children Mathematics, 14(7), 389-394.
• Kelly, C., Durham, R., & Rains, J. (2004, October). Using multi-sensory materials for supplementing the elementary mathematics curriculum: Necessary or not? Paper presented at the meeting of School Science and Mathematics Association, Atlanta, GA.
• Kuhn, J. N., & Schroeder, H. H. (1971). A multisensory approach for teaching spelling. Elementary English, 48(7), 865-869.
• Marzola, E. S. (1987). Using manipulatives in math instruction. Reading, Writing, and Learning Disabilities, 3, 9-20.
• Moll, L. C. (1990). Introduction. In L., Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of socio-historical psychology (pp. 1- 27). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Moyer, P.S., Boylard, J.J., & Spikell, M.A. (2002). What are virtual manipulatives? Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 372-377.
• NCTM (1973). Instructional Aids in Mathematics, Thirty-fourth Yearbook.
• NCTM (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics: An Overview.
• No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, 20 USC § 6301 (2002).
• Perry, W.G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Reinhart, & Winston.
• Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence; an essay on the construction of formal operational structures. New York: Basic Books.
• Piaget, J. (1965). The child’s conception of number. New York: W. W. Norton & Company Inc.
• Reys, R. E. (1971). Considerations for teachers using manipulative materials. The Arithmetic Teacher, 18 (8) 551-558.
• Scott, K. S. (1993). Multisensory mathematics for children with mild disabilities. Exceptionality, 4(2), 97-111.
• Sowell, E. J. (1989). Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Instruction, 20(5), 498-505.
• Spicer, J. (2000). Virtual manipulatives: A new tool for hands-on math. ENC Focus, 7(4), 14-15.
• Suydam, M. N., & Higgins, J. L. (1984). Manipulative materials. Arithmetic Teacher, 33, 27.
• Thorne, B. M., & Henley T. B. (1997). Connections in the history and systems of psychology. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company.
• Thornton, C. A., Jones, G. A., & Toohey, M. A. (1982). A multisensory approach to thinking strategies for remedial instruction in basic addition facts. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(3), 198-203.
• Tudge, J. (1990). Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development and peer collaboration: implications for classroom practices. In L., Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of socio-historical psychology (pp. 155-174). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• United States Department of Education. (n.d.). No Child Left Behind. Retrieved November 26, 2003, available from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml?src=ln
• Van de Walle, J. (2007). Teaching developmentally: Elementary and middle school mathematics (6th Ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the development of higher psychological processes. (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S., S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds & Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.