Research Article
BibTex RIS Cite

Sadeleştirilmiş Matematik Maddeleriyle Öğrenci Performansı ve Madde Anlaşılırlığı Arasındaki İlişki

Year 2022, Volume: 51 Issue: 236, 3315 - 3344, 11.11.2022
https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.991519

Abstract

Bu araştırmanın amacı sadeleştirilmiş matematik maddeleriyle öğrenci performansı ve madde anlaşılırlığı arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemektir. Araştırma, çoklu durum çalışması modelinde tasarlanmıştır. Araştırmanın çalışma grubu, farklı illerde ikamet eden, farklı okullarda okuyan ve çevrimiçi olarak ulaşılabilen 38 öğrenciden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmanın esas uygulaması 14 yaşındaki 20 öğrenciyle yapılmıştır. Çalışmanın verileri iki aşamada toplanmıştır. İlk aşamada, çevrimiçi olarak 14 yaş grubundaki 20 öğrencinin her biriyle sesli düşünme protokolleri (SDP) ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler yürütülmüştür. Bu aşamada veriler orijinal ve sadeleştirilmiş matematik başarı testleri ve yarı yapılandırılmış görüşme formu yardımıyla toplanmıştır. İkinci aşamada orijinal ve sadeleştirilmiş test formlarındaki maddelerin dilsel karmaşıklık düzeyi puanlanmıştır. Bu işlem için dereceli puanlama anahtarı (DPA) kullanılmıştır. Verilerin çözümlenmesinde hipotez testlerinden, frekans dağılımlarından ve içerik analizinden faydalanılmıştır. Araştırma bulguları, matematik maddelerinin yaygın kelimelerle ve kısa cümlelerle oluşturulmasının, maddenin ölçtüğü davranışa sahip öğrenciler için anlaşılırlığa katkı yapabileceğine işaret etmektedir. Elde edilen bulgular, bu katkının dil becerileri bakımından yetersizliği olan öğrencilerde daha fazla olabileceğine işaret etmektedir.

References

  • Abedi, J. (2006). Language issues in item development. In S. M. Downing& T. H. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development. (pp. 377-398). Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
  • Abedi, J. (2010). Linguistic factors in the assessment of english language learners. In G. Walford, E. Tucker& M. Viswanathan (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of measurement. (pp. 129-150). SAGE Publications.
  • Abedi, J. (2011). Language issues in the design of accessible items. InS. N. Elliott, R. J. Kettler, P. A. Beddow& A. Kurz (Eds.), Handbook of accessible achievement tests for all students. (pp. 217-230).Springer.
  • Abedi, J., and Lord, C. (2001). The language factor in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(3), 219-234. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1403_2
  • Abedi, J., Lord, C., and Hofstetter, C. (1998). Impact of selected background variables on students’ naep math performance [Yayımlanmış teknik rapor]. University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, California.
  • Abedi, J., Lord, C., Hofstetter, C., and Baker, E. (2005). Impact of accommodation strategies on english language learners' test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2000.tb00034.x
  • Abedi, J., Lord, C., and Plummer, J. R. (1997). Final report of language background as a variable in NAEP mathematics performance [Yayımlanmış teknik rapor]. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Los Angeles.
  • Adams, M. J. (1994). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. MIT Press.
  • Ateşman, E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi TÖMER Dil Dergisi, 58,171-174.
  • Bormuth, J. R. (1966). Readability: A new approach. Reading Research Quarterly, 1(3), 79-132. https://doi.org/10.2307/747021
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi.
  • Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., and Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Çetinkaya, G. (2010). Türkçe metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeylerinin tanımlanması ve sınıflandırılması [Yayımlamış doktora tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Dancey, C. P., and Reidy, J. (2017). Statistics without maths for psychology. Pearson.
  • Erkuş, A. (2003). Psikometri üzerine yazılar. Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
  • Flores, C. (2015). Linguistic complexity and relationship to student achievement [Yayımlanmış doktora tezi].Ball State University, Eğitim Yönetimi Bölümü, Muncie.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., and Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw Hill Companies.
  • Goldstein, E. B. (2008). Cognitive psychology. Thomson Wadsworth.
  • Haladyna, T. M., and Downing, S. M. (2004). Construct‐irrelevant variance in high‐stakes testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23(1), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2004.tb00149.x
  • İskender, H., ve Yiğit, F. (2015). Küçük yapı düzeyindeki değişimlerin öğrencilerin metni anlamalarına ilişkin görüşleri üzerine etkisi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32): 450-476.
  • Jerman, M., and Rees, R. (1972). Predicting the relative difficulty of verbal arithmetic problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 4, 306–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302580
  • Kettler, R. J., Rodriguez, M. C., Bolt, D. M., Elliott, S. N., Beddow, P. A., and Kurz, A. (2011). Modified multiple-choice items for alternate assessments: reliability, difficulty, and differential boost. Applied Measurement in Education, 24(3), 210-234. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9356-4_9
  • Krahmer, E., and Ummelen, N. (2004). Thinking about thinking aloud: a comparison of two verbal protocols for usability testing. IEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 47(2), 105-117. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2004.828205
  • Larsen, S. C., Parker, R. M., and Trenholme, B. (1978). The effects of syntactic complexity upon arithmetic performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1(4), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510980
  • Martiniello, M. (2007). Linguistic complexity and differential item functioning (dif) for english language learners (ell) in math word problems [Yayımlanmış doktora tezi]. Harvard Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Cambridge.
  • Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
  • Pallant, J. (2011). Spss survival manual. Allen & Unwin.
  • Peat, J. (2001). Health science research: a handbook of quantitative methods. Allen & Unwin.
  • Reynolds, C. R., and Livingston, R. B. (2014).Mastering modern psychological testing theory & methods. Pearson Education.
  • Rivera, C. and Stansfield, C. W. (2001). The effects of linguistic simplification of science test items on performance of limited English proficient and monolingual english-speaking students (ED455289). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED455289
  • Tekin, H. (1991). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Yargı Yayınları.
  • vonEye, A., and Mun, E. Y. (2004). Analyzing rater agreement. Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek. H. (2018). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research design and methods. Sage publications.
  • Wheeler, L. J., and McNutt, G. (1983). The effect of syntax on low-achieving students' abilities to solve mathematical word problems. The Journal of Special Education, 17(3), 309-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698301700307

The Relationship Between Simplified Mathematics Items with Student Performance and Item Comprehensibility

Year 2022, Volume: 51 Issue: 236, 3315 - 3344, 11.11.2022
https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.991519

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between simplified mathematics items with student performance and item comprehensibility. The research was designed in a multiple case study model. The study group of the research consists of 38 students residing in different provinces, enrolled at different schools, and can be accessed online. The main data of the study were collected from 20 students aged 14 years. The data of the study were collected in two stages. In the first stage, think-aloud protocols (TAP) and semi-structured interviews were conducted with each of the 20 students aged 14 years online. At this stage, data were collected with the help of original and simplified mathematics achievement tests and a semi-structured interview form. In the second stage, the linguistic complexity level of the items in the original and simplified test forms was scored. A rubric was used for this process. In the analysis of the data, hypothesis tests, frequency distributions, and content analysis were used. Research findings indicate that the creation of mathematics items with common words and short sentences can contribute to comprehensibility for students with the behavior measured by the item. The findings of the study indicate that this contribution may be higher in students with language skills deficiency.

References

  • Abedi, J. (2006). Language issues in item development. In S. M. Downing& T. H. Haladyna (Eds.), Handbook of test development. (pp. 377-398). Lawrance Erlbaum Associates.
  • Abedi, J. (2010). Linguistic factors in the assessment of english language learners. In G. Walford, E. Tucker& M. Viswanathan (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of measurement. (pp. 129-150). SAGE Publications.
  • Abedi, J. (2011). Language issues in the design of accessible items. InS. N. Elliott, R. J. Kettler, P. A. Beddow& A. Kurz (Eds.), Handbook of accessible achievement tests for all students. (pp. 217-230).Springer.
  • Abedi, J., and Lord, C. (2001). The language factor in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(3), 219-234. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324818AME1403_2
  • Abedi, J., Lord, C., and Hofstetter, C. (1998). Impact of selected background variables on students’ naep math performance [Yayımlanmış teknik rapor]. University of California, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, California.
  • Abedi, J., Lord, C., Hofstetter, C., and Baker, E. (2005). Impact of accommodation strategies on english language learners' test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2000.tb00034.x
  • Abedi, J., Lord, C., and Plummer, J. R. (1997). Final report of language background as a variable in NAEP mathematics performance [Yayımlanmış teknik rapor]. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, Los Angeles.
  • Adams, M. J. (1994). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. MIT Press.
  • Ateşman, E. (1997). Türkçede okunabilirliğin ölçülmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi TÖMER Dil Dergisi, 58,171-174.
  • Bormuth, J. R. (1966). Readability: A new approach. Reading Research Quarterly, 1(3), 79-132. https://doi.org/10.2307/747021
  • Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç-Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş., ve Demirel, F. (2018). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Pegem Akademi.
  • Clark, R. C., Nguyen, F., and Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. John Wiley & Sons.
  • Çetinkaya, G. (2010). Türkçe metinlerin okunabilirlik düzeylerinin tanımlanması ve sınıflandırılması [Yayımlamış doktora tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
  • Dancey, C. P., and Reidy, J. (2017). Statistics without maths for psychology. Pearson.
  • Erkuş, A. (2003). Psikometri üzerine yazılar. Türk Psikologlar Derneği Yayınları.
  • Flores, C. (2015). Linguistic complexity and relationship to student achievement [Yayımlanmış doktora tezi].Ball State University, Eğitim Yönetimi Bölümü, Muncie.
  • Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., and Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw Hill Companies.
  • Goldstein, E. B. (2008). Cognitive psychology. Thomson Wadsworth.
  • Haladyna, T. M., and Downing, S. M. (2004). Construct‐irrelevant variance in high‐stakes testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 23(1), 17-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2004.tb00149.x
  • İskender, H., ve Yiğit, F. (2015). Küçük yapı düzeyindeki değişimlerin öğrencilerin metni anlamalarına ilişkin görüşleri üzerine etkisi. Mustafa Kemal Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 12(32): 450-476.
  • Jerman, M., and Rees, R. (1972). Predicting the relative difficulty of verbal arithmetic problems. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 4, 306–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302580
  • Kettler, R. J., Rodriguez, M. C., Bolt, D. M., Elliott, S. N., Beddow, P. A., and Kurz, A. (2011). Modified multiple-choice items for alternate assessments: reliability, difficulty, and differential boost. Applied Measurement in Education, 24(3), 210-234. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9356-4_9
  • Krahmer, E., and Ummelen, N. (2004). Thinking about thinking aloud: a comparison of two verbal protocols for usability testing. IEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 47(2), 105-117. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2004.828205
  • Larsen, S. C., Parker, R. M., and Trenholme, B. (1978). The effects of syntactic complexity upon arithmetic performance. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1(4), 80–85. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510980
  • Martiniello, M. (2007). Linguistic complexity and differential item functioning (dif) for english language learners (ell) in math word problems [Yayımlanmış doktora tezi]. Harvard Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Cambridge.
  • Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons' responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741-749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741
  • Pallant, J. (2011). Spss survival manual. Allen & Unwin.
  • Peat, J. (2001). Health science research: a handbook of quantitative methods. Allen & Unwin.
  • Reynolds, C. R., and Livingston, R. B. (2014).Mastering modern psychological testing theory & methods. Pearson Education.
  • Rivera, C. and Stansfield, C. W. (2001). The effects of linguistic simplification of science test items on performance of limited English proficient and monolingual english-speaking students (ED455289). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED455289
  • Tekin, H. (1991). Eğitimde ölçme ve değerlendirme. Yargı Yayınları.
  • vonEye, A., and Mun, E. Y. (2004). Analyzing rater agreement. Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Yıldırım, A., ve Şimşek. H. (2018). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık.
  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research design and methods. Sage publications.
  • Wheeler, L. J., and McNutt, G. (1983). The effect of syntax on low-achieving students' abilities to solve mathematical word problems. The Journal of Special Education, 17(3), 309-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698301700307
There are 35 citations in total.

Details

Primary Language Turkish
Journal Section Research Article
Authors

Özgür Avcı 0000-0002-6119-000X

Seher Yalçın 0000-0003-0177-6727

Publication Date November 11, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022 Volume: 51 Issue: 236

Cite

APA Avcı, Ö., & Yalçın, S. (2022). Sadeleştirilmiş Matematik Maddeleriyle Öğrenci Performansı ve Madde Anlaşılırlığı Arasındaki İlişki. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 51(236), 3315-3344. https://doi.org/10.37669/milliegitim.991519