Effect of Teaching of Algebra through Social Constructivist Approach on 7th Graders’ Learning Outcomes in Sindh (Pakistan)

Öz

It is a bitter reality that the curricula and traditional pedagogy prevailing in public schools of Pakistan in general and Sindh in particular do not incorporate the algebraic concepts properly. Both the content and the presentation therein cannot be considered up to the mark, thereby making “Algebra” a tough and dry subject. This quasi-experimental study focused to find out the effect of teaching algebra through social constructivism on the students learning outcomes of 7th graders in public schools of District Jamshoro Sindh. For this purpose two existing in-tact sections of grade 7 (7th A, and 7th B) of a government high school of district Jamshoro were selected as quasi control and treatment groups. The pre and posttest analyses were carried out. The first pattern t-test analysis revealed that both groups were parallel, however, the latter posttest analysis revealed that treatment group that was taught through social constructivist approach excelled in achieving statistically significant learning outcomes than that of control group that was taught through traditional one-way teaching

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Social Constructivism, Scaffolding, Traditional Teaching, Algebra, Variables, Algebraic Operations, Equations

Effect of Teaching of Algebra through Social Constructivist Approach on 7th Graders’ Learning Outcomes in Sindh (Pakistan)

Öz

-

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

Kaynakça

1. Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad (2011). The Best Method. English
2. Compulsory, Units 1-9, B. Ed, Course Code No. 651. Islamabad: Allama Iqbal Open University Press. "Algebra." UXL Encyclopedia of Science. 2002; Retrieved on November 27, 2011 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3438100033.html ;
3. Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S., and Mewborn, D. (2001).
4. Alyas Q. T. (2010). Contrustivism as Instructional Model of Science Teaching. Journal of Educational Research, Department of Education IUB, Pakistan, 13(1), 6-19.
5. Bhutto, M. I. (2011). Effects of Social Reinforcers on Students’ Learning Outcomes at
6. Secondry School Level. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 1 (2), 71-86. Retrieved from http://hrmars.com/index.php?page=vol1iss2&CAT=1 . Boudourides Moses A. (1998). Constructivism and education: A shopper’s guide.
7. Contributed Paper at the International Conference on the Teaching of Mathematics, Samos, Greece, July 3-6, 1998. Retrieved from http://www.math.upatras.gr/~mboudour/articles/constr.html .
8. Cobb, P. (1996). Constructivism and learning. In E. De Corte and F. E Weinert. (Eds).

9. International Encyclopaedia of Developmental and Instructional Psychology, pp. 338341, Pergamon Press.
10. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1986). On narrative method, personal philosophy, and narrative unities in the story of teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 283-310.
11. Demby, A. (1997). Algebraic procedures used by 13-15 year-olds. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33, 45-70.
12. Elbaz, F. (1983). Teacher thinking: A study of practical knowledge. New York: Nichols.
13. Franke, E., & Kazemi, E. (2001). Learning to teach mathematics: Focus on student thinking. Theory in Practice, 40 (2), 102-109.
14. Fox, R. (2001). Constructivism Examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27 (1), 23-35.
15. Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology.
16. American Psychologist, 40 (3), 266-175. Government of Pakistan (2006). National Curriculum of Mathematics. Ministry of Education, Islamabad.
17. Government of Pakistan, (2009b). National Education Policy 2009, Ministry of Education, Islamabad.
18. Government of Pakistan, (2009a). National Professional Standards for Teachers in
19. Pakistan. Policy & Planning Wing (in collaboration with UNESCO), Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan Islamabad. GraphPad QuickCalcs t-test calculator used online on Dec 05, 2011 from: http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/ttest1.cfm?Format=C .
20. Hill, H., & Ball, D. L. (2004). Learning mathematics for teaching: Results from
21. California’s mathematics professional development institutes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 524-549. Hussain Shafqat, et al., (2011). The Effectiveness of Teaching Physics through Project
22. Method on Academic Achievement of Students at Secondary Level: A Case Study. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(8), 23-34. Johri, P. K. (2005). Educational Thought. New Delhi, India: Anmol Publications.
23. Dangel, J. R. (2011). An Analysis of Research on Constructivist Teacher Education. In
24. Education, Journal of University of Regina, 17(2), retrieved from: http://ineducation.ca/article/analysis-research-constructivist-teacher-education . Katz V. J. (2007). Stages in the History of Algebra with Implications for Teaching.
25. Educational Studies In Mathematics, 66: 185–201. Kieran, C. (1992). The learning and teaching of school algebra. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, New York, NY: Macmillan. 390-419.
26. Lee, L. & Wheeler, D. (1989). The arithmetic connection. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 41-54.
27. Maddux, C. D. et al., (2001). Educational computing: Learning with tomorrow's technologies (3rd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
28. Mason, J. (1996). Expressing generality and roots of algebra. In N. Bednarz, C. Kieran, & L. Lee (Eds.), Approaches to algebra: Perspectives for research and teaching
29. (pp. 65-86). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; (2000). Principles and Standards for
30. School Mathematics, Reston, VA: NCTM. National Education Policy (2009). Ministry of Education, Government of Pakistan.
31. Islamabad: retrieved from, http://www.moe.gov.pk/nepr/new.pdf . Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: the many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24 (7), 5-12.
32. Pedagogy and Practice: Teaching and Learning in Secondary Schools, Leadership guide (2004). (Crown Copyright); Unit 20, Classroom Management; p. 21, September, 2004; retrieved from: http://www.swtrainingschool.co.uk/www.swtrainingschool.co.uk
33. /Leading_in_Learning_files/pedagogy%20and%20practice.pdf . Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers’ mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.). New York: Macmillan. Reynolds, D., and Muijs, D. (2001). Effective teaching: evidence and practice; Sage (Paul Chapman)
34. Rupani, C. M. & Bhutto M. I. (2011). Evaluation of Existing Teaching Learning
35. Process on Bloom’s Taxonomy; International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Vol. 1, August 2011, (Special Issue), 119-128. Retrieved from http://www.hrmars.com/index.php?page=arbss%20cur%20iss&CAT=1 .
36. Solangi, G. M. et al., (2008). The Effect of Constructivist Teaching Approach on the Achievement of Mathematics Students at Secondary Level. Journal of Educational
37. Research Dept of Education, IUB, Pakistan 11( 2), 35-46. Téllez, K. (2007). Have conceptual reforms in preservice teacher education improved the education of multicultural, multilingual children and youth? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(6), 543-564.
38. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, p57; as cited in Social Development Theory (Online); retrieved on June 6, 2011 from: http://tip.psychology.org/vygotsky.html.
39. Wilson, S. M. et al., (1987). “150 different ways of knowing”: Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teaching thinking (pp. 1040124). Sussex: Holt, Rinehart, and Wilson.