Field Dependency and Performance in Mathematics

Abstract

Mathematics is an important school subject but one which often poses problems for learners. It has been found that learners do not possess the cognitive capacity to handle understanding procedures, representations, concepts, and applications at the same time. while the extent of field dependency may hold the key to one way by which the working memory can be used more efficiently. This study aims to explore the concept of field dependency which may offer a way forward in reducing the cognitive demands of finite working memory capacity, thus enabling higher performance to be attained. Age and gender were considered. With a sample of 120 secondary school students, the importance of working memory in relation to mathematics performance was confirmed (r = 0.55 ). The extent of field dependency was measured with a larger sample of 547, drawn from five age groups. The outcomes were related to the performance in mathematics examinations, a correlation of 0.32 being obtained overall, with every age group showing positive significant correlations. In this, the more field independent perform much better. The outcomes are interpreted in terms of the increased efficiency in the use of finite working memory capacity resources. It was found that students become more field independent with age but the rate of growth of independence declines with age. Girls tended to be slightly more field-independent than boys, perhaps reflecting maturity or their greater commitment during their years of adolescence. The findings are interpreted in terms of the way the brain processes information and the implications for mathematics education are discussed briefly.

Keywords

• field dependency, working memory, mathematics education

References

1. Al-Ahmadi, F and Oraif, F. (2009) Working memory capacity, confidence and scientific thinking, Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(2), 225-243.
2. Al-Enezi, D. (2008) Difficulties Associated with Teaching and Learning Mathematics: A Study of Psychological Factors Affecting Pupils’ Performance, PhD thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow. [thesis.gla.ac.uk/333/]
3. Ali, A. A. (2008) Perceptions, Difficulties and Working Memory Capacity Related to Mathematics Performance, MSc thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow. [http://theses.gla.ac.uk/441/]
4. Ali, A.A. and Reid, N. (2012) Understanding Mathematics Some Key Factors, European Journal of Educational Research, 1(3), 283-299.
5. Alosaimi, K.H., Reid, N and Rodrigues, S. (2014) Critical Thinking - Can it be measured ? Journal of Science Education, paper accepted.
6. Ausubel, D. P. (1968) Educational Psychology: a Cognitive View, New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
7. Bahar and Hansell (2000) The Relationship Between Some Psychological Factors and their Effect on the Performance of Grid Questions and Word Association Tests, Educational Psychology, 20(3), 349-364.
8. Cakan, M. (2003) Psychometric Data on the Group Embedded Figure Tests for Turkish Undergraduate Students, Perceptual and Motor Skills, 96, 993-1004.

9. Case, R. (1974) Structures and Structures, Some Functional Limitations on the Course of Cognitive Growth, Cognitive Psychology, 6, 544-574.
10. Chen and Whitehead, (2009) Understanding physics in relation to working memory, Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(2), 151-160.
11. Christou, K. (2001) Difficulties in Solving Algebra Story Problems with Secondary Pupils, MSc Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
12. Chu, Y-C and Reid, N. (2012) Genetics at school level: addressing the difficulties, Research in Science and Technological Education, 31(1), 1-25.
13. Chu, Y. C. (2007) Learning difficulties in Genetics and the Development of Related Attitudes in Taiwanese Junior High Schools, PhD Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow. [http://theses.gla.ac.uk/168/]
14. Danili, E. (2001) New Teaching Materials for Secondary School Chemistry: A Study of Psychological factors Affecting Pupil Performance, MSc Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
15. Danili, E. and Reid, N. (2004) Some Strategies to Improve Performance in School Chemistry Based on two Cognitive Factors, Research in Science and Technological Education, 22(2), 203-226.
16. Danili, E. and Reid, N. (2006) Some potential factors affecting pupils’ performance, Chemistry Education Research and Practice,7(2), 64-83.
17. El-Banna, H. (1987) The Development of a Predictive Theory of Science Education Based upon Information Processing Theory, PhD Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
18. Ghani, S. A. (2004) Attitudes, Performance, and Psychological Characteristics of Student Teachers Learning Introductory Statistics, PhD Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
19. Goodenough, D.R. (1976) The role of individual differences in field dependence as a factor in learning and memory, Psychological Bulletin, 83(4), 675-694.
20. Gurley, M. P. (1984) Characteristics of Motivation, Field-independence, Personality Type, Learning Style and Teaching Preference of the Adult Learner as Compared with Traditional Age College Students. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Catholic University of America), Dissertation Abstracts International, 145, 1268.
21. Hindal, H., Reid, N. and Whitehead, R. (2013) A Fresh look at High Ability, International Journal of Instruction. 6(1), 59-76.
22. Johnstone, A. H. (1991) Why is Science Difficult to Learn? Things are seldom what they seem, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, 75-83.
23. Johnstone, A. H. (1993) The Development of Chemistry Teaching - A Changing Response to Changing Demand, Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701-705.
24. Johnstone, A. H. (1997) Chemistry Teaching, Science or Alchemy? Journal of Chemistry Education, 74(3), 262-268.
25. Johnstone, A.H. and Al-Naeme, F. (1991) Room for Scientific Thought?, International Journal of Science Education, 13(2), 187-192.
26. Johnstone, A.H. and El-Banna, H. (1986) Capacities, Demands and Processes: a Predictive Model for Science Education, Education in Chemistry, 23(3), 80-84.
27. Johnstone, A.H. and El-Banna, H. (1989) Understanding Learning Difficulties - A Predictive Research Model, Studies in Higher Education, 14(2), 159-68.
28. Jonassen, D. H. and Grabowski, B. L. (1993) Handbook of Individual Differences, Learning and Instruction, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
29. Korchin, S. J. (1986) Field-Dependence, Personality Theory and Clinical Research, in: Bertini, M., Pizzamiglio, L. and Wapner, S. (Ed.), Field-dependence in Psychological Theory, Research, and Application, New York: Cambridge University Press.
30. Miller, G. D. (1956) The Magical Number Seven Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information, Psychological Reviews, 63, 81-97.
31. Musser, T. (1998) Individual Differences, How Field-Dependence-Independence Affect Learners (From http: //www.personal.psu.edu/staff/t/x/txm4/paper1.htm1)
32. Piaget, J. (1963) The Child’s Conception of the World, Peterson, N. J.: Little Field, Adams.
33. Prasad, P.N. (2006) Performance of secondary students in India related to working memory with reference to some learning styles, MSc Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
34. Reid, N. (2009) The Concept of Working Memory, Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(2), 131-138.
35. Reid, P.A. (2002) Problem solving by primary school children with particular reference to dyslexics, MSc Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
36. Sawer, W. W. (1959) Mathematician's Delight, Harmondsworth: Penguin.
37. Scardamalia, M. (1977) Information Processing Capacity and the Problem of Horizontal Decalage: A Demonstration using Combinatorial Reasoning Tasks, Child Development, 48, 28-37.
38. Thurstone, L. L. (1944) A factorial study of perception, Chicago, IL, US: University of Chicago Press.
39. Tinajero C and Paramo M (1998) Field dependence-independence, cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory. European Journal of Psychology of Education. 13(2) 227-251.
40. Uz-Zaman, T. (1996) The Use of an Information Processing Model to Design and Evaluate Physics Undergraduate Laboratory, PhD Thesis, Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
41. Witkin , H. A. (1964) Origins of Cognitive Style, in: Sheerer, C. (Ed.) Cognition: Theory, Research and Promise, New York: Harper and Row.
42. Witkin, H. A. , Dyk, R. B., Faterson, H. F., Goodenough, D. R, Karp, S.A. (1962) Psychological Differentiation, New York: Wiley.
43. Witkin, H. A. and Asch, S. E. (1948) Studies in Space Orientation (III): Perception of the Upright in the Absence of Visual Field, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 604-614.
44. Witkin, H. A. and Goodenough, D. R. (1981) Cognitive Styles Essence and Origins: Field Dependence and Field Independence Psychological Issues, New York: International University Press.
45. Witkin, H. A., Dyk, R. B. Faterson, H. F, Goodenough, D. R. and Karp, S. A. (1974) Psychological Differentiation: Studies of Development, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
46. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C., Goodenough, D. and Cox, P. (1977) Field-dependent and Field-independent Cognitive Styles and their Educational Implications, Review of Educational Research, 47, 1-64.
47. Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P, Raskin, E., Karp, S. (1971) A Manual for Embedded Figure Test, Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.