Osmanlı Geç Dönemine ait bir Türkçe Matematik Ders Kitabının Çağdaş İlköğretim Eğitiminin Dayanakları Açısından Incelenmesi

Year 2018, , 214 - 231, 29.12.2018

Esra Yaprak M. Sencer Çorlu Emin Aydın

https://doi.org/10.19126/suje.446057

Abstract

Türkiye Cumhuriyeti'nin
eğitim geleneğinin temellerinin anlaşılması, Osmanlı Devletindeki eğitim
anlayışının özelliklerinin araştırılmasına bağlıdır. Bu nitel çalışmada,
yirminci yüzyılın başlarında yayınlanan bir Osmanlı matematik ders kitabı
inceleme konusu edildi.  Natüralist
araştırma metodolojisinin etkisi altında, bu ders kitabı ilköğretim matematik
eğitiminin içeriği, organizasyonu ve ilkeleri açısından analiz edilmiştir.
Araştırmanın sonunda, ders kitabında çoklu temsiller ve gerçek yaşam örnekleri
başarılı bir şekilde sunulurken, içeriğin akışı, akıl yürütme becerilerini
geliştirmek için yeterli fırsatlar sağlamadığı sonucuna varılmıştır.

Keywords

Matematik Eğitimi, Eğitim Tarihi, Ders Kitabı İncelemesi

Analysis of a Turkish Mathematics Textbook in the Late Ottoman Era with respect to the Principles of Contemporary Elementary Education

Abstract

Developing an understanding of the foundations of the educational
tradition of the Turkish Republic is connected to an exploration of the
specifics of Ottoman education. This qualitative study explored an Ottoman
mathematics textbook published in the early twentieth century. Under the
influence of naturalistic inquiry, the textbook was analyzed in terms of content,
organization, and principles of elementary mathematics education. It was
concluded that the textbook is successfully presented multiple representations
and real-life examples while the development of content did not provide
opportunities to develop reasoning skills.

Keywords

Mathematics Education, History of Education, Textbook Analysis

References

• Aiken, L. R. (1972). Language factors in learning mathematics. Review of Educational Research, 42(3), 359-385.
• Akyüz, Y. (1993). Türk eğitim tarihi [The history of Turkish education]. Istanbul, Turkey: Kültür Koleji Yayıncılık.
• Anghileri, J. (2006). Teaching number sense (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing Group.
• Askey, R. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. American Educator, 23, 6-13.
• Aslan, E., &Olkun, S. (2011). Elementary school mathematics in the first curricula of Turkish Republic. Elementary Education Online, 10(3), 991-1009.
• Austin, R. A., Thompson, D. R., & Beckmann, C. E. (2005). Exploring measurement concepts through literature: Natural links across disciplines. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 10(5), 218-224.
• Aydın, E; Delice; A & Demiroğlu, D. (2016). An analysis of history of mathematics research literature in Turkey: the mathematics education perspective. Journal of the British Society for the History of Mathematics. 31(3); 215-229. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17498430.2016.1190201
• Brahier, D. J. (2013). Teaching secondary and middle school mathematics (4thed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• Brownell, W. A., & Chazal, C. B. (1935). The effects of premature drill in third-grade mathematics. The Journal of Educational Research, 29(1), 17-28.
• Burkhardt, H. (1981). The real world and mathematics. Glasgow: Blackie.
• Capraro, R. M., Capraro, M. M., & Rupley, W. H. (2011). Theorizing an integration of reading and mathematics: Solving mathematical word problems in the elementary grades. Learning Landscapes, 5(1), 227-250.
• Carpenter, T.P., & Lehrer, R. (1999). Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. In E. Fennema & T. Romberg (Eds.). Mathematics classrooms that promote understanding (pp. 19-32). Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Carpenter, T. P., & Moser, J. M. (1984). The acquisition of addition and subtraction concepts in grades one through three. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15(3), 179-202.
• Carpenter, T. P., Hiebert, J., & Moser, J. M. (1981). Problem structure and first-grade initial solution processes for simple addition and subtraction problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 12(1), 27-39.
• Cemaloğlu, N. (2005). Osmanlı Devleti’nde yapılan Tanzimat reformlarının eğitim sistemine etkileri, uygulamaları ve sonuçları [The effects, applications and results of the Tanzimat reforms in education in the Ottoman Empire]. Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 14, 153-165.
• Ceylan, S., & Özdemir, A.Ş. (2012). Nihayetul-elbab adlı eserde kullanılan zihinden hesap yöntemlerinin 6.sınıf öğrencilerinin zihinden hesap ve tahmin becerilerine etkisi [The influence of mental calculation techniques published in Nihayetul-elbab on the mental calculation and prediction skills of 6th grade students]. Paper presented at the X. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresi, Niğde, Türkiye.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis e-book.
• Corlu, M. S., Burlbaw, L. M., Capraro, R. M., Corlu, M. A, & Han, S. (2010). The Ottoman palace school Enderun and the man with the multiple talents, Matrakci Nasuh. Journal of the Korea Society of Mathematical Education Series D: Research in Mathematical Education, 14(1), 19-31.
• Creswell, J. W. (2011). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
• Elia, I., Gagatsis, A., & Demetriou, A. (2007). The effects of different modes of representation on the solution of one-step additive problems. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 658-672.
• Fuson, K. C. (1986). Teaching children to subtract by counting up. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18, 363-381.
• Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Boston, MA: A & B publications.
• Göçek, F. M. (1996). The rise of the bourgeoisie, demise of empire: Ottoman westernization and social change. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
• Greeno, J. G., & Hall, R. B. (1997). Practicing representation: Learning with and about representation forms. Phi Delta Kappan, 79, 361-367.
• Günergun, F. (1993). Eski Fransız ve metre Osmanlı ölçü ve tartılarının sistemlerindeki eşdeğerleri: İlk karşılaştırmalar ve çevirme cetvelleri [Equivalent in the system of former French and Ottoman meter size and weight: The first comparison and conversion table]. Osmanlı Bilimi Araştırmaları, 2, 23-68.
• Hanna, G. (2000). Proof, explanation and exploration. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44 (1-2), 5-23.
• Hegarty, M., Mayer, R., & Monk, C. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems: A comparison of successful and unsuccessful problem solvers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(1), 18-32.
• Hiebert, J. (2013). Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics. New York, NY: Routledge.
• İhsanoglu, E. (2002). Ottoman educational and scholarly-scientific institutions. History of the Ottoman State and Society and Civilisation, 2, 361-512.
• İhsanoglu, E., Chatzis, K., &Nicolaidis, E. (2003). Multicultural science in the Ottoman Empire. Turnhout: Brepols Publishers.
• İzgü, C. (1997). Osmanlı medreselerinde ilim [Science in Ottoman maktabs]. İstanbul, Turkey: İz yayıncılık.
• Jung, M., Kloosterman, P., & McMullen, M. B. (2007). Young children’s intuition for solving in mathematics. Young Children, 62(5), 50-57.
• Kari, A., & Anderson, C. (2003). Opportunities to develop place value through student dialogue. A Teacher`s Journal, 10(78), 78-82.
• Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1995). Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
• Kazamias, A. M. (1969). Education and the quest for modernity in Turkey. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
• Lehrer, R. (2003). Developing understanding of measurement. In J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin, & D. Schifer (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 179-192). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Lewis, B. (1968). The emergence of modern Turkey (2nd ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
• Lewis, B. (2001). The emergence of modern Turkey (3rd ed.). London: Oxford University Press.
• Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
• Lithner, J. (2000). Mathematical reasoning in task solving. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 41(2), 165-190.
• Mardin, S. (1960). The mind of the Turkish reformer, 1700-1900. The Western Humanities Review, 14, 413-436.
• Mayer, R. E. (2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory into practice, 41(4), 226-232.
• McCulloch, G. (2005). Documentary research in education, history and the social sciences. London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
• McIntosh, A., Reys, B., & Reys, R. (1992). A proposed framework for examining number Sense. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(3), 25-31.
• Nikoloska, A. (2009). Development of the cardinality principle in Macedonian children. Psihologija, 42(4), 459-475.
• Özdemir, A.Ş. & Ceylan; S. (2017). Considering Miftahü’l-Hisab, teaching operations with algebraic expressions at Enderun Schools. Paper presented at the 3rd International Conference on Social Sciences & Education Research. Rome, Italy.
• Pimm, D. (1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Powell, A. B., Borge, I. C., Fioriti, G. I., Kondratieva, M., Koublanova, E., & Sukthankar, N. (2009). Challenging tasks and mathematics learning. In Challenging mathematics in and beyond the classroom (pp. 133-170). New Jersey: Springer US.
• Pumala, V. A., & Klabunde, D. A. (2005). Learning measurement through practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 10(9), 452-460.
• Resnick, L. B. (1983). A developmental theory of number understanding. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 109-151). New York, NY: Academic Press.
• Rittle-Johnson, B., &Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(1), 175-189.
• Şanal, M. (2003). Osmanlı Devleti’nde medreselere ders programlari, öğretim metodu, olçme ve degerlendirme, ogretimde ihtisaslasma bakimindan genel bir bakis [The general insight of the madrasas in Ottoman Empire in terms of syllabus, teaching method, measurement and evaluation, specialization in teaching]. Erciyes Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 1, 149-168.
• Schissler, H. (1990). Limitations and priorities for international social studies textbook research. International Journal of Social Education, 4(3), 81-89.
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-370). New York: MacMillan.
• Somel, A. S. (2001). The modernization of public education in the Ottoman Empire,1839-1908: Islamization, autocracy, and discipline. Koln: Brill.
• Sönmez, S. (2013). Primary education system in Ottoman Empire. International Journal of Humanities & Social Science, 3(5), 163.
• Star, J. R., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2008). Flexibility in problem solving: The case of equation solving. Learning and Instruction, 18(6), 565-579.
• Taşkın, U. (2008). Klasik dönem Osmanlı eğitim kurumları [Ottoman educational foundations in classical terms]. Uluslararası Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 1, 343-366.
• Thompson, T. D., & Preston, R. V. (2004). Measurement in the middle grades: Insights from NAEP and TIMSS. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 9(9), 514-519.
• Thornton, C., & Toohey, M. (1985). Basic mathematics facts: Guidelines for teaching and learning. Learning Disabilities Focus, 1, 44-57.
• Van de Walle, J., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2010). Elementary and middle school mathematics (7th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
• Walker, R & Horsley, M (2006). Textbook pedagogy: A sociocultural analysis of effective teaching and learning. In D.M. McInerney, M. Dowson & S. Van Etten (Eds) Effective Schools. Information Age Publishing.
• Yel, N, (2010). Hulasat al-Hisap adlı eserin geometri öğretimi açısından incelenmesi ve yeni müfredat ile karşılaştırılması [The examination of the book named Hulasat al-Hisap in terms of teaching geometry and comparing it with the new curriculum]. Unpublished Master’s Dissertation, Marmara Universitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İlkögretim Matematik Ögretmenliği Bilim Dalı.
• Yilmaz, Z. & Ozyigit, S. E (2017). Analysis of real world problems in mathematics textbooks of early 20th an 21st Century of Turkish Education: Political and social reflections. Journal of the British Society for the History of Mathematics. 32(2), 171-182. DOI: 10.1080/17498430.2016.1247323