MATEMATİK EĞİTİMİ ALANINDA MATEMATİKSEL MODELLEME İLE İLGİLİ TAMAMLANMIŞ LİSANSÜSTÜ TEZLERİN TEMATİK VE YÖNTEMSEL EĞİLİMLERİNİN İNCELENMESİ

Abstract

Araştırmanın amacı matematik eğitimi alanında matematiksel modelleme ile ilgili tamamlanmış ulusal ve uluslararası yüksek lisans ve doktora tezlerinin tematik ve yöntemsel eğilimlerini belirlemektir. Araştırmada nitel araştırma yöntemi kullanılmış, model olarak ise durum çalışması benimsenmiştir. Araştırmanın amacı kapsamında 2013-2023 (Ekim ayı) yıllarını kapsayan matematik eğitimi ve öğretimi alanında Türkçe ve İngilizce olarak, YÖK Ulusal Tez Merkezi’nde ve ProQuest veri tabanında yayınlanan yüksek lisans ve doktora tezlerinden; matematiksel modellemeyi konu edinen toplam 197 tez Tez Değerlendirme Formu aracıyla incelenmiştir. Verilerin analizinde Mendeley Reference Manager, SPSS Statistics 26 paket programı ve VOSviewer programından yararlanılmıştır. Tematik analiz ve içerik analizi, bibliyometrik analizlerden alıntı analizi ve anahtar kelime analizi yapılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre; matematik eğitiminde matematiksel modelleme ile ilgili tezlerde özellikle 2019 yılında belirgin bir artışın olduğu, 2020 ve 2021 yıllarında ise tez sayılarının düştüğü ve 2022 yılında tekrar belirgin bir yükseliş yaşandığı görülmektedir. Türkiye’de matematik eğitiminde matematiksel modelleme üzerine yapılan çalışmaların büyük çoğunluğunun yüksek lisans seviyesinde olduğu, ABD ve Kanada’da ise doktora çalışmalarının daha yaygın olduğu tespit edilmiştir. İlgili araştırmalarda alanda en yüksek tez üreten üniversite yurt içinde Atatürk Üniversitesi, yurt dışında ise Columbia Üniversitesi’dir. Araştırmaların konularının dağılımına bakıldığında; en yaygın konu, 45 çalışmayla modelleme etkinlikleri geliştirme olduğu görülmüştür. Öğrenme alanlarının dağılımına bakıldığında en fazla çalışılan alan 58 tez ile "Sayılar ve İşlemler" konusudur. En çok kullanılan yöntem, %61,42 ile nitel araştırma olup en yaygın model, %59,39 oranıyla durum çalışmasıdır. Araştırmalarda kullanılan en yaygın örneklem türü, ortaokul öğrencilerinin olduğu belirlenmiştir. İçerik analizi tezlerde en sık kullanılan analiz türü olup, GeoGebra en sık kullanılan teknolojidir. Bu sonuçlar bağlamında paydaşlara öneriler sunulmuştur.

Keywords

• Matematiksel modelleme
• Bibliyometrik analiz
• Matematik eğitimi
• Modelleme
• Teknoloji

Investigation of the Thematic and Methodological Trends of Completed Graduate Theses Related to Mathematical Modeling in The Field of Mathematics Education

Abstract

The aim of the research is to determine the thematic and methodological trends of completed national and international master's and doctoral theses related to mathematical modeling in the field of mathematics education. Qualitative research method was used in the study, and a case study was adopted as a model. Within the scope of the research, from the master's and doctoral theses published in Turkish and English in the field of mathematics education and training covering the years 2013-2023 (October), in the YÖK National Thesis Center and in the ProQuest database; A total of 197 theses on mathematical modeling were examined with the Thesis Evaluation Form. Mendeley Reference Manager, SPSS Statistics 26 package program and VOSviewer program were used in the analysis of the data. Thematic analysis and content analysis, quotation analysis from bibliometric analysis and keyword analysis were performed. According to the results of the research; It is seen that there was a significant increase in theses related to mathematical modeling in mathematics education, especially in 2019, while the number of theses decreased in 2020 and 2021, and there was a significant increase again in 2022. It has been determined that the majority of studies on mathematical modeling in mathematics education in Turkey are at the master's level, while doctoral studies are more common in the USA and Canada. The university that produces the highest number of theses in the field in related researches is Atatürk University in Turkey and Columbia University abroad. Considering the distribution of the subjects of the researches; The most common issue was the development of modeling activities with 45 studies. When we look at the distribution of learning areas, the most studied area is the subject of "Numbers and Operations" with 58 theses. The most commonly used method is qualitative research with 61.42% and the most common model is case study with 59.39%. It was determined that the most common sample type used in the studies was secondary school students. Content analysis is the most commonly used type of analysis in theses, and GeoGebra is the most commonly used technology. In the context of these results, suggestions were presented to the stakeholders.

Keywords

• Mathematical modeling
• bibliometric analysis
• mathematics education
• modeling
• technology

References

1. Albayrak, E., & Çiltaş, A. (2017). Descriptive content analysis of mathematical model and modeling research published in the field of mathematics education in Turkey. International Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences, 9, 258-283.
2. Albayrak, E. (2017). Descriptive content analysis of mathematical model and modeling research published in the field of mathematics education in Turkey (Master’s thesis). Atatürk University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Erzurum.
3. Arbain, N., & Shukor, N. A. (2015). The effects of GeoGebra on students' achievement. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 172, 208-214.
4. Arseven, A. (2016). Self-efficacy: A concept analysis. Electronic Turkish Studies, 11(19), 63-80.
5. ATAUNI. (2024). Retrieved from https://avesis.atauni.edu.tr/alperciltas (Accessed: August 17, 2024).
6. Ay, Y., Karadağ, E., & Acat, M. B. (2015). The technological pedagogical content knowledge-practical (TPACK-Practical) model: Examination of its validity in the Turkish culture via structural equation modeling. Computers & Education, 88, 97-108.
7. Aztekin, S., & Şener, Z. T. (2015). Content analysis of mathematical modeling research in the field of mathematics education in Turkey: A meta-synthesis study. Education and Science, 40(178), 139-161.
8. Balci, A. (2013). Ph.D. program: Here are some suggestions for Ph.D. programs in Turkish universities. Journal of Research in Educational Sciences, 3(2), 1-20.

9. Barnett, J. V., Harris, R. A., & Mulvany, M. J. (2017). A comparison of best practices for doctoral training in Europe and North America. FEBS Open Bio, 7(10), 1444-1452.
10. Berry, J., & Houston, K. (1995). Mathematical modeling. J. W. Arrowsmith Ltd.
11. Bilgin, İ., Tatar, E., & Ay, Y. (2012). Investigation of the contribution of primary school teacher candidates' attitudes towards technology to technological pedagogical domain knowledge (TPAB). X. National Science and Mathematics Education Congress Proceedings Book, Niğde, 1-10.
12. Blum, W., & Leiß, D. (2007). How do students and teachers deal with modelling problems? In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical Modelling: Education, Engineering And Economics (pp. 222-231). Horwood Publishing.
13. Blum, W., & Ferri, R. B. (2009). Mathematical modelling: Can it be taught and learnt? Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application, 1(1), 45-58.
14. Bukova Güzel, E., Tekin Dede, A., Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N., Kula Ünver, S., & Özaltun Çelik, A. (2024). Mathematical modeling in mathematics education (E. Bukova Güzel, Ed., 5th ed.). Pegem Academy Publishing.
15. Carlson, M. A., Wickstrom, M. H., Burroughs, E., & Fulton, E. (2016). A case for mathematical modeling in the elementary classroom. In C. Hirsch (Ed.), Annual Perspectives in Mathematics Education: Mathematical Modeling and Modeling Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
16. Carreira, S., & Baioa, A. M. (2011). Students' modelling routes in the context of object manipulation and experimentation in mathematics. In G. Kaiser, W. Blum, R. B. Ferri, & G. Stillman (Eds.), Trends in Teaching and Learning of Mathematical Modelling: ICTMA 14 (pp. 211-220). Springer.
17. Cirillo, M., Pelesko, J., Felton-Koestler, M. D., & Rubel, L. (2016). Perspectives on modeling in school mathematics. In C. R. Hirsch & A. R. McDuffie (Eds.), Annual Perspectives in Mathematics Education 2016: Mathematical Modeling and Modeling Mathematics (pp. 3–16). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
18. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2017). Critical educational research. In Research methods in education (pp. 51-67). Routledge.
19. Çarıkcı, E., & Uluğ, F. (2024). Analysis of graduate theses on employability in Turkey. Journal of Education and Social Research, 11(1), 75-99.
20. Sergeant-Erdem, Z. (2018). Investigation of the learning process based on modeling activities in the context of field measurement (Doctoral dissertation). Adıyaman University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Adıyaman.
21. Demirbilek, M. (2022). Alternative models for transition to secondary education. Dokuz Eylül University Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 53, 133-149.
22. Demirel, O.E., & Turkmen, L. (2023). Student Opinions on the Use of Common Knowledge Construction Model (CKCM) in Science Lessons, Anatolian Turkish Journal of Education, 5(1), 29-53.
23. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296.
24. Dost, S. (2019). Modeling activities in mathematics education (1st ed.). Pegem Academy.
25. Erbaş, A., Kertil, M., Çetinkaya, B., Çakıroğlu, E., Alacacı, C., & Baş, S. (2014). Mathematical modeling in mathematics education: Basic concepts and different approaches. Educational Sciences in Theory and Practice, 14(4), 1-21.
26. Eryiğit, E. (2022). Examination of graduate theses on mathematical modeling in the field of elementary mathematics in Turkey (Master’s thesis). Hacettepe University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
27. Galbraith, P., & Stillman, G. (2006). A framework for identifying student blockages during transitions in the modelling process. Zentralblatt für Didactik der Mathematik-ZDM, 38(2), 143-162.
28. Gopal, V. (2020). Digital education transformation: A pedagogical revolution. I-Manager's Journal of Educational Technology, 17(2), 66.
29. Kaiser, G., & Schwarz, B. (2006). Mathematical modelling as a bridge between school and university. Zentralblatt für Didactik der Mathematik, 38(2), 196–208.
30. Aries, D. (2020). An investigation on theses and dissertations on mathematical modeling in Turkey in the last two decades (Master’s thesis). Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
31. Fabric, A. (2021). Evaluation of Logger Pro innovative technology supported applications in the scope of STEM. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 79(5), 751–766.
32. Famous, V. (2023). The effect of teaching with mathematical modeling on mathematics achievement and attitude: A meta-analysis study (Doctoral dissertation). Necmettin Erbakan University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Konya.
33. Keskin, Ö. Ö. (2008). A research on the development of mathematical modeling skills of secondary school mathematics teacher candidates (Doctoral dissertation). Gazi University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
34. Koyuncu, İ., Güzeller, C. Ö., & Akyüz, D. (2017). The development of a self-efficacy scale for mathematical modeling competencies. International Journal of Assessment Tools in Education, 4(1), 19–36.
35. Lesh, R., & Doerr, H. M. (2003). Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching. Routledge.
36. Martin, L., & Tapp, D. (2019). Teaching with Teams: An introduction to teaching an undergraduate law module using Microsoft Teams. Innovative Practice in Higher Education Journal, 3(3), 58–66.
37. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
38. Niss, M. (1988). Theme Group 3: Problem solving, modeling, and applications. In A. Hirst & K. Hirst (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 237–252). János Bolyai Mathematical Society.
39. Özgen, K., & Bindak, R. (2018). Development of the mathematical association self-efficacy scale. Kastamonu Education Journal, 26(3), 913–924.
40. Pollak, H. (2007). Mathematical modelling—A conversation with Henry Pollak. In W. Blum, P. L. Galbraith, H. W. Henn, & M. Niss (Eds.), Modelling and applications in mathematics education: The 14th ICMI study series (pp. 109–120). Springer.
41. ProQuest. (2024). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global: The world's most comprehensive collection of dissertations and theses. Retrieved from https://about.proquest.com (Accessed: 06 March 2024).
42. Sonmez, M. T. (2016). Investigation of mathematization processes and financial literacy of seventh grade students through mathematical modeling activities (Doctoral dissertation). Hacettepe University, Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
43. Stohlmann, M., & Yang, Y. (2023). Investigating the alignment to mathematical modelling of teacher-created mathematical modelling activities available online. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 54(5), 671–686.
44. Wallen, N. E., & Fraenkel, J. R. (2013). Educational research: A guide to the process. Routledge.
45. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2008). Qualitative research methods in social sciences. Seçkin Publishing.