Effects of Using Dynamic Geometry Activities on Eighth Grade Students’ Achievement Levels and Estimation Performances in Triangles

Year 2015, Volume: 2 Issue: 3, 43 - 54, 01.10.2015

Bilal Özçakır Cahit Aytekin Bülent Altunkaya Bekir Kürşat Doruk

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.15.22.2.3

Cited By: 3

Abstract

In this study, we administrated dynamic geometry activities which provide students opportunities to explore and estimate geometric figures to connect measurement estimation with geometry. The aim of the study is to investigate effects of using dynamic geometry activities on eighth graders’ achievement levels and estimation performances in triangles. The study was designed a quantitative research design. A pretest – posttest experimental study was employed to investigate using dynamic geometry activities on eighth grade students’ achievement level and estimation performance in triangles. Participants were 63 eighth graders. The participants’ ages vary between 13 and 14 years. Since the school is a public school, it contains students at nearly every socio-economic level. Experimental group consists of 32 students and comparison group consists of 31 students. Dynamic geometry supported instruction and traditional instruction methods were used in experimental and comparison groups, respectively. The results revealed that teaching triangles with instruction supported by dynamic geometry activities increased eighth graders’ performance in triangles. In addition, the instruction supported by dynamic geometry activities had significant effects on eighth graders’ estimation performances in triangles. Using dynamic geometry activities provides students experiences about conceptual bases of the relations in triangles. Therefore, students who take a dynamic geometry instruction make better estimations than those who did not take.

Keywords

dynamic geometry software, GeoGebra, achievement in triangles, estimation in triangles

Supporting Institution

Ahi Evran University,

Project Number

PYO-EGF.4001.13.003.

References

• Adams, T.L. & Harrel, G. (2010). A Study of Estimation by Professionals at Work. Journal of Mathematics & Culture, November, 5 (2). Baki, A., Kosa, T., & Guven, B. (2011). A Comparative Study of The Effects of Using Dynamic Geometry Software and Physical Manipulative on The Spatial Visualization Skills of Pre-Service Mathematics Teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 291-310. Battista, M. T. (2002). Learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment. Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 333-339. Battista, M. T. (2007). The development of Geometric and Spatial Thinking. In F. K. Lester, Jr., (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Bright, G.W. (1979). Measuring experienced teachers’ linear estimation skills at two levels of abstraction. School Science and Mathematics, 79, 161-64. Budi, M. (2011). Traditional Teaching About Angles Compared To An Active Learning Approach That Focuses On Students Skills In Seeing, Measuring And Reasoning, Including The Use Of Dynamic Geometry Software: Differences In Achievement. In PROCEEDINGS International Seminar and the Fourth National Conference on Mathematics Education. Department of Mathematics Education, Yogyakarta State University. Caglayan, G. (2014). Static versus Dynamic Disposition: The Role of GeoGebra in Representing Polynomial-Relational Inequalities and Exponential-Logarithmic Functions. Computers in the School, 31:339-370. Canpekel, M. (2009). İlköğretim 8. sınıf matematik ders kitabı. Ankara: Dikey Yayıncılık. Clements, D. H. & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D.A Grouws, (ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, pp .420-464. Macmillan, New York.
• Daher, W. M., & Shahbari, J. A. (2013). Pre-Service Teachers’modelling Processes Through Engagement with Model Eliciting Activities with A Technological Tool. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1-22.
• Doğan, M. & İçel, R. (2011). The Role of Dynamic Geometry Software in The Process of Learning: GeoGebra Example about Triangles. International Journal of Human Sciences, 8(1), ISSN: 1303-5134.
• Dye, B. (2001). The Impact of Dynamic Geometry Software on Learning. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications, 20(4).
• Forrester, M. A. (1990). Exploring estimation in young children. Educational Psychology, 4(10).
• Forsythe, S. (2007). Learning geometry through dynamic geometry software, Mathematics Teaching, 202, 31-35.
• Gecü, Z. (2011). The effect of using photographs with dynamic geometry software on achievement and geometric thinking level. Unpublished master thesis, Marmara University, İstanbul, Turkey.
• Gilliland, K. (2002). Why not just use a formula? Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 7, 510–511.
• Güven, B. & Karataş, İ. (2009). The Effect of Dynamic Geometry Software (CABRI) on Pre-Service Elementary Mathematics Teachers' Academic Achievement About Locus Problems. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences (JFES), 42(1), 1.
• Hall, J., & Chamblee, G. (2013). Teaching Algebra and Geometry with GeoGebra: Preparing Pre-Service Teachers for Middle Grades/Secondary Mathematics Classrooms. Computers in the Schools, 30:12-29.
• Hershkowitz, R. (1989). Visualisation in geometry – two sides of the coin. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 11(1), 61–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013499.006
• Hill, J. R. & Hannafin, M. J. (2001). Teaching and Learning in Digital Environments: The Resurgence of Resource-based Learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 37-52.
• Hohenwarter, J., Hohenwarter, M. & Lavicza, Z. (2010). Evaluating Difficulty Levels of Dynamic Geometry Software Tools to Enhance Teachers' Professional Development. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 17(3), 127-134.
• Hohenwarter, M. & Jones, K. (2007). Ways of linking geometry and algebra: the case of Geogebra. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 27(3), 126-131.
• Idris, N. (2007). The effect of Geometers’ Sketchpad on the performance in geometry of Malaysian students’ achievement and van Hiele geometric thinking. Malaysian Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 1(2), 169-180.
• İçel, R. (2011). Effects of computer based teaching on students' mathematics achievements: Example of GeoGebra. Unpublished master thesis, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey.
• Jiang, Z. & White, A. (2012).An Efficacy Study on the Use of Dynamic Geometry Software. In the Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education.
• Koreňová, L (2014). The Role of Digital Materials in Developing the Estimation Ability in Elementary and Secondary School Mathematics. ACTA MATHEMATICA 17, 87.
• Laborde, C., Kynigos, K. H. & Strasser, R. (2006). Teaching and learning geometry with technology. In A. Gutiérrez & P. Boero (Eds), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: Past, present and future (pp. 275-304). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
• Lucas, K. & Son, J. (2013). Integrating Measurement and Computational Estimation in Geometry. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, Vol. 18, No. 5, 308-316
• Markovits, Z. & Herskovits, R. (1993). Visual estimation of discrete quantities. ZDM. 93/4, 137-140.
• McLaughin, J. (1981). Development of children’s ability to judge relative numerosity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31, 103-114. Ministry of National Education, (2009). İlköğretim Matematik Dersi (6 - 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Retrieved June 12, 2012, from TTKB website:http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/dosyalar/programlar/ilkogretim/matematik6_8.rar.
• Ministry of National Education, (2013). Ortaokul Matematik Dersi (5 - 8. Sınıflar) Öğretim Programı. Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı, Ankara. Olkun, S. & Toluk Uçar, Z. (2006) .İlköğretimde Matematik Öğretimine Çağdaş Yaklaşımlar [Contemporary Approaches in Elementary Mathematics Education], Ankara: Ekinoks Yayıncılık.
• Pajera, J.L. (2001). Estimation de candidades discretas por alumnos de Magisteria (Memoria de Tercer Ciclo). Estimation of discrete quantities by preservice teachers (Third Cycle Report). Mathematics Didactics Department, University of Granada.
• Pea, R. D. (1987). Cognitive Technologies for Mathematics Education. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive Science and Mathematics Education (pp. 89-122). Hilldale, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Piaget, J.L. & Szeminska, A. (1964). Genesis del numero en el nino, Guedalupe, Buenos Aires.
• Reys, R. E., Lindquist, M. M., Lambdin, D. V., & Smith, N. L. (2009). Helping children learn mathematics (9th ed.). Danvars: John Wiley & Sons.
• Samková, L.(2013).Volume and area ratios with GeoGebra. North American GeoGebra Journal, 2(1), str. 10-13, 2013.
• Segovia, I. (1997). Estimación de cantidades discretas. Estudio de variables y procesos. Granada: Comares.
• Segovia, I., & Castro, E. (2009). Computational and measurement estimation: curriculum foundations and research carried out at the University of Granada, Mathematics Didactics Department. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 17(7), 499-536.
• Siegel, A. W., Goldsmith, L. T., & Madson, C. R. (1982). Skill in estimation problems of extent and numerosit. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 3(13), 211-232.
• Siegler & Booth (2004). Development of Numerical Estimation in Young Children. Child Development. 75(2), 428-444.
• Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2010). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Workman, J. E., & Ahn, I. (2011). Linear measurement and linear measurement estimation skills in apparel design. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 0887302X11407911.
• Zbiek, R. M., Heid, M. K. &Blume, G. W., & Dick, T. P. (2007).Research on technology in mathematics education: The perspective of constructs. In F. Lester (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 1169-1207). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.