PRESERVICE MIDDLE SCHOOL MATHEMATICS TEACHERS’ CONCEPTION OF AUXILIARY ELEMENTS OF TRIANGLES

Year 2017, Volume: 6 , 68 - 72, 04.08.2017

Tugba Uygun , Didem Akyuz

Abstract

In
the literature, there have been research examining different grade levels of
students’ understanding of geometric shapes such as triangles and their main
elements as well as their auxiliary elements. The purpose of the current study
is to investigate preservice middle school mathematics teachers’ (PMSMT)
conception of auxiliary elements of triangles. In order to achieve this, the
activity sheets about definitions, constructions, and properties of auxiliary
elements of triangles were designed and conducted to 23 junior PMSMT. The PMSMT
engaged in these activity sheets. The data were collected through their written
works and it was analyzed based on the content analysis which is a type of
qualitative data analysis technique. It was found that, the PMSMT could
effectively define auxiliary elements of triangles. However, they had
difficulty in the properties and related theorems about auxiliary elements.

Keywords

Auxiliary elements, conception, triangles

References

• Alatorre, S., & Saiz, M. (2009). Teachers and triangles. Proceedings of Congress of Educational Research in Mathematics Education. 28 January- 1 February, Lyon; France. Cherowitzo, B. (2006). Geometric constructions. [Online] Retrieved on 18-August-2012., at URL http://www-math.cudenver.edu/~wcherowi/courses/m3210/lecchap5.pdf. Cheung, L. H. (2011). Enhancing students’ ability and interest in geometry learning through geometric constructions. Unpublished master’s thesis. The University of Hong Kong, China. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Damarin, S. K. (1981). What makes a triangle? Arithmetic Teacher. 22(1), 39-41. Erduran, A. & Yeşildere, S. (2010). The use of a compass and straightedge to construct geometric structures. Elementary Education Online, 9(1), 331–345. Gutierrez, A. & Jaime, A. (1999). Pre-service primary teachers’ understanding of the concept of altitude of a triangle. Journal of Mathematics Teacher of Education, 2(3), 253-275. Han, H. (2007). Middle school students’ quadrilateral learning: a comparison study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota, Minnessota, USA. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 534-549. Hoffer, A. (1981). Geometry more than proof. Mathematics Teacher, 74(1), 11-18. Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Napitupulu, B. (2001). An exploration of students’ understanding and van hiele levels of thinking on geometric constructions. Unpublished master’s thesis, Simon Fraser University, Indonesia. Olkun, S. & Toluk, Z. (2004). Teacher questioning with an appropriate manipulative may make a big difference. IUMPST: The Journal, 2, 1-11. Uygun, T. (2016). Preservice middle school mathematics teachers’ understanding of altitudes of triangles. Uluslararası Çağdaş Eğitim Araştırmaları Kongresi, 29 Eylül- 2 Ekim, Muğla, Türkiye. Vinner, S., & Hershkowltz, R. (1980). Concept images and common cognitive paths in the development of some simple geometrical concepts. In Karplus (Ed.), Proceedings of the Psychology of mathematics education (pp. 177-184). PME. Wang, S. (2011). The van Hiele theory through the discursive lens: prospective teachers’ geometric discourses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Michigan State University, Michigan; ABD.