Problem Çözme Basamaklarına Dayalı Geliştirilen Bireyselleştirilmiş Web Tabanlı Matematik Öğrenme Ortamının Öğrencilerin Akademik Başarılarına Etkisi

Abstract

: Bu çalışmada, 9. Sınıf matematik müfredatında yer alan “Denklem ve eşitsizlikler ile ilgili uygulamalar” konusunun öğretimi için problem çözme basamaklarına dayalı olarak tasarlanan bireyselleştirilmiş web tabanlı öğrenme ortamının öğrencilerin akademik başarılarına etkisinin incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, 137 9. sınıf öğrencisi ile yürütülen bu çalışmada kontrol gruplu ön test ve son test araştırma deseni kullanılmıştır. Araştırmanın verileri güvenirlik katsayısı 0,742 olan “Başarı testi” ile toplanmıştır. Başarı testinden elde edilen veriler istatistiksel olarak analiz edilmiştir. Araştırmanın sonucunda deney ve kontrol grubu öğrencilerinin son-test başarı puanları arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir fark olduğu belirlenmiştir. Buradan genel olarak ProbSol öğrenme ortamı ile bireysel özelliklerine uygun öğrenim gören öğrencilerin geleneksel yöntem ile öğrenim gören öğrencilere göre daha başarılı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılabilmektedir.

Keywords

• Bireysel öğrenme,matematik eğitimi,problem çözme basamakları,uzman sistem,web tabanlı öğretim

The Effect Of Individualized Web Based Mathematics Learning Environment Developed Based On Problem Solving Steps On The Students' Academic Achievements

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to investigate the effect of individualized web based mathematics learning environment developed based on problem solving steps on the students' academic achievements in teaching “Applications related to equations and inequalities” subject in mathematics curriculum of 9th grade.  For this purpose, pre-test and post-test research design with control group was used in this study which was carried out with 137 students at 9th grade. The data of the study were collected by the "achievement test" which had a reliability coefficient of 0.742. The data obtained from the achievement test were analyzed statistically. As a result of the study, it was determined that there was a statistically significant difference between the post-test achievement scores of the experimental and control group students. It can be concluded that the students trained in ProbSol learning environment with learning environment with individual characteristics are more successful than students trained with traditional methods.

Keywords

• Individual learning,mathematics education,problem solving steps,expert system,web-based instruction

References

1. Alkan, C. (1997). Eğitim Teknolojisi. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
2. Alper, A., & Deryakulu, D. (2008). “Web ortamlı probleme dayalı öğrenmede bilişsel esneklik düzeyinin öğrenci başarısı ve tutumları üzerindeki etkisi”. Education and Science, 33(148), 49-63.
3. Arıcı, N., & Yekta, M. (2005). “Mesleki ve teknik eğitimde çoklu ortam araçları kullanılmış Web tabanlı öğretimin öğrenci başarısına etkisi”. Ticaret ve Turizm Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi,1, 144-153.
4. Bachari, E., Abelwahed, H., & Adnani, M. (2011). “E-learning personalization based ondynamic learners’ preference”. International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology (IJCSIT), 3(3), 200-216.
5. Baki, A. (2008). Kuramdan uygulamaya matematik eğitimi. Trabzon: Derya Kitabevi.
6. Baki, A., & Güveli, E. (2008). “Evaluation of a web based mathematics teaching material on the subject of functions”. Computers & Education, 51(2), 854–863.
7. Brown, E. (2007). The use of learning styles in adaptive hypermedia. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Nottingham, England.
8. Brusilovsky, P. (2001). “Adaptive hypermedia”. User Modeling and User Adapted Interaction, 11, 87-110.

9. Chang, C. (2003). “Towards a distributed Web based learning community”. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 40(1), 27-42.
10. Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Lin, S. F. (2006). “Computer-assisted learning for mathematical problem solving”. Computers & Education, 46, 140-151.
11. Chen, L. H. (2011). “Enhancement of student learning performance using personalized diagnostic and remedial learning system”. Computers & Education, 56, 289–299.
12. Chittaro, L. & Ranon, R. (2007). “Web 3D technologies in learning, education and training: motivations, issues, opportunities”. Computers & Education, 49, 3-18.
13. Çelik, U. (2006). Ağ tabanlı fen öğretiminin öğrencilerin problem çözme becerilerine ve fen’e yönelik tutumlarına etkisi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Bilgisayar ve Öğretim Teknolojileri Anabilim Dalı, İzmir.
14. Demirli, C. (2002). Web tabanlı öğretim uygulamalarına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri (F.Ü. Örneği). Uluslararası Katılımlı Açık ve Uzaktan Eğitim Sempozyumu, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir.
15. Ercan, O., Bilen, K. & Bulut, A. (2014). “The effect of web-based instruction with educational animationcontent at sensory organs subject on students' academic achievement and attitudes”. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 2430 – 2436.
16. Graf, S., Kinshuk & Liu, T.C. (2009). “Supporting teachers in identifying students'learning styles in learning management systems: An automatic student modelling approach”. Educational Technology & Society, 12(4), 3-14.
17. Gürsul, F., & Keser, H. (2009). “The effects of online and face to face problem based learning environments in mathematics education on student’s academic achievement”. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences,1, 2817–2824.
18. Hauptman, H., & Cohen, A. (2011). “The synergetic effect of learning styles on theinteraction between virtual environments and the enhancement of spatial thinking”. Computers & Education, 57, 2016-2117.
19. İspir, E., Furkan, H., & Çitil, M. (2007). “Lise fen grubu öğretmenlerinin teknolojiye ilişkin tutumları-Kahramanmaraş örneği”. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 9(1), 63-72.
20. Keleş, A., Ocak, R., Keles, A., & Gülcü, A. (2009). “ZOSMAT: Web-based intelligent tutoring system for teaching–learning process”. Expert Systems with Applications, 36, 1229–1239.
21. Kelly, R. M. & Jones, L. L. (2007). “Exploring how different features of animations of sodium chloride dissolution affect students’ explanations”. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 413–429.
22. Lewalter, D. (2003). “Cognitive strategies for learning from static and dynamic visuals”. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 177-189.
23. Lin, X. (2001). “Designing metacognitive activities”. Educational Technology Research & Development, 49(2), 23-40.
24. Lin, C. (2009). “A comparison study of Web-based and traditional instruction on preservice teachers’ knowledge of fractions”. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 257-279.
25. Lowe, R. K. (2003). “Animation and learning: Selective processing of information in dynamic graphics”. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 157-176.
26. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (MEB-TTKB), (2005). İlköğretim Matematik Programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
27. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (MEB-TTKB), (2013). Ortaokul Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
28. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Talim ve Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı (MEB-TTKB), (2013). Matematik Dersi 9-12. Sınıflar Öğretim Programı. Ankara: Milli Eğitim Basımevi.
29. Mustafa, Y. E. A., & Sharif, S. M. (2011). “An approach to adaptive e-learninghypermedia system based on learning styles(aehs-ls): Implementation and evaluation”. International Journal of Library and Information Science, 3(1), 15-28.
30. Neo, M., Neo, K. T. K., Lim T., Tand, H. Y. & Kwok, W. (2013). “Instructional relationships within a web based learning environment: Students’ perceptions in a Malaysian classroom”. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 103, 515-525.
31. Own, Z. (2006). “The application of an adaptive, web-based learning environment onoxidation reduction reactions”. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4, 73-96.
32. Özyurt, Ö., Özyurt, H., Baki, A., & Güven, B. (2012). “An individualized e-learning environment to the teaching of mathematics: student views of UZWEBMAT”. AWER Procedia Information Technology & Computer Science, 1, 523-527.
33. Özyurt, Ö. (2013). Uyarlanabilir zeki web tabanlı matematik ögrenme ortamının tasarlanması, uygulanması ve değerlendirilmesi. Yayımlanmış Doktora Tezi, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Trabzon.
34. Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it. Princeton: NJ Princeton University Press.
35. Saban, A., Özer, H. İ. & Tümer, A. E. (2010). “Students’ opinions about online course materials and online examination system”. Education Sciences, 5(4), 2238-2244.
36. Seters, J. R., Ossevoort, M. A., Tramper, J., & Goedhart, M. J. (2012). “The influence of student characteristics on the use of adaptive e-learning material”. Computers & Education, 58, 942-952.
37. Srisawasdi, N., Srikasee, S., & Panjaburee, P. (2012). Development of a constructivist web-based learning system with student personalized conceptual profile. Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computers in Education, Singapore: Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education, 44-50.
38. Tseng, J. C. R., Chu, H. C., Hwang, G. J., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). “Development of anadaptive learning system with two sources of personalization information”. Computers & Education, 51(2), 776-786.
39. Xu, D., & Wang, H. (2006). “Intelligent agent supported personalization for virtual learning environments”. Decision Support Systems, 42, 825-843.
40. Wang, T. H. (2011). “Implementation of web-based dynamic assessment in facilitating junior high school students to learn mathematics”. Computers & Education, 56, 1062–1071.
41. Yiğit, Y., Yıldırım, S., & Özden, M. Y. (2000). “Web-based internet tutorial: A case study”. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 19, 166-177.
42. Yükseltürk, E., & İnan, F. A. (2006). “Examining the factors affecting student dropout in anonline learning environment”. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 7(2), 76-88.
43. Zangyuan, O. (2006). “The application of an adaptive web-based learning environment on oxidation–reduction reactions”. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(1), 27–36.