Views of Classroom Teachers Regarding the Processes of 1st and 4th Graders Having Difficulty in Learning Mathematics

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 1, 66 - 86, 30.04.2020

Tahsin Fırat , Emrullah Erdem

https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.504004

Cited By: 2

Öz

This study aims at examining what kind of difficulties the students who have difficulty in mathematics learning experienced in the first and fourth grade of primary school in views of classroom teachers. The study was conducted with the participation of 47 classroom teachers working in schools in a province in Turkey. The data were collected using a semi-structured interview form consisting of five questions. The content analysis technique was used in the analysis of the data. The analysis showed that 62.5% of students who had difficulty in learning mathematics in the first grade continued to have difficulties in the fourth grade. These students were found to have difficulty in rhythm counting, learning some concepts, problem-solving, number knowledge and making the comparison in the 1st grade, while they were experiencing difficulties in rhythm counting, learning some concepts, operation knowledge, problem-solving, and about memory and emotional areas in the 4th grade. On the other hand, the lack of reading and number knowledge in the first grade has manifested itself as the inadequacy of reading comprehension and problem-solving in the fourth grade. It was also found that students had no difficulty in emotional areas in the first grade but had experienced mathematics anxiety and motivation problems in the fourth grade.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Difficulty in mathematics learning, 1st- and 4th-grade students, views of classroom teachers

Matematik Öğrenmede Güçlük Yaşayan İlkokul Öğrencilerinin 1. ve 4. Sınıftaki Süreçlerine İlişkin Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin Görüşleri

Öz

Bu araştırmada, matematik öğrenmede güçlük yaşayan öğrencilerin ilkokul birinci ve dördüncü sınıfta ne tür güçlükler yaşadıkları sınıf öğretmenlerinin görüşlerine göre incelenmiştir. Araştırma, Türkiye’deki bir il merkezindeki okullarda görev yapan 47 sınıf öğretmeninin katılımıyla yürütülmüştür. Veriler, beş sorudan oluşan yarı-yapılandırılmış görüşme formu kullanılarak toplanmıştır. Verilerin analizinde içerik analizi tekniği kullanılmıştır. Yapılan analizler, 1. sınıfta matematik öğrenmede güçlük yaşayan öğrencilerin %62,5’inin 4. sınıfta da güçlük yaşamaya devam ettiğini göstermiştir. Bu öğrencilerin 1. sınıfta ritmik saymada, bazı kavramları öğrenmede, problem çözmede, sayı bilgisinde ve karşılaştırma yapmada zorluk yaşadıkları belirlenmiştir. 4. sınıfta ise ritmik saymada, bazı kavramları öğrenmede, işlem bilgisinde, problem çözmede, bellekle ilgili ve duyuşsal alanda güçlük yaşadıkları tespit edilmiştir. Öte yandan, 1. sınıfta okuma ve sayı bilgisi kaynaklı eksiklik, 4. sınıfta ilerleyerek okuduğunu anlama ve problem çözmedeki yetersizlik olarak kendini göstermiştir. Ayrıca öğrencilerin 1. sınıfta duyuşsal alanlarda güçlük yaşamadıkları ancak 4. sınıfta matematik kaygısına sahip oldukları ve motivasyon problemi yaşadıkları ortaya çıkmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Matematik öğrenmede güçlük, ilkokul 1. ve 4. sınıf öğrencileri, öğretmenlerinin görüşleri

Kaynakça

• Ashcraft, M. H., & Krause, J. (2007). Working memory, math performance, and math anxiety. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 243-248.
• Bekdemir, M. (2010). The pre-service teachers’ mathematics anxiety related to depth of negative experiences in mathematics classroom while they were students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 75(3), 311-328.
• Bender, W. N. (2014). Changing definitions of learning disabilities. learning disabilities, characteristics, identification, and teaching strategies. Allyn & Bacon: Pearson Inc.
• Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education: An Introduction to theory and methods (5th Ed.). Boston: Pearson Education.
• Brian, T., Bay, M., Lopez-Reyna, N., & Donahue, M. (1991). Characteristics of students with learning disabilities: A summary of the extant database and its implications for educational programs. In J.W. Lloyd, N. Nirbhay,&A.C. Repp (Eds.), The regular education initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 113–131). Sycamore, IL: Sycamore.
• Bryant, D. P., Smith, D. D., & Bryant, B. R. (2008). Teaching students with special needs in inclusive classrooms. Boston: Pearson.
• Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2000). Research methods in education. London and New York: Routledge Falmer. Crosnoe, R., Morrison, F., Burchinal, M., Pianta, R., Keating, D., Friedman, S. L., & Clarke-Stewart, K. A. (2010). Instruction, teacher–student relations, and math achievement trajectories in elementary school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 407–417.
• Erdem, E. (2016). Matematiksel muhakeme ile okuduğunu anlama arasındaki ilişki: 8. sınıf örneği. Necatibey Eğitim Fakültesi Elektronik Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Dergisi, 10(1), 393-414.
• Erdem, E. (2017). A current study on grade/age and gender-related change in math anxiety. European Journal of Education Studies, 3(6), 396-413.
• Fuchs, L. (2005). Prevention research in mathematics: Improving outcomes, building identification models, and understanding disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 350-352.
• Fuchs, D., Mock, D., Morgan, P. L., & Young, C. L. (2003). Responsieness-tointervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities label. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 157-171.
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Prentice, K. (2004). Responsiveness to mathematical problem-solving instruction: Comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with and without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(4), 293-306.
• Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99.
• Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Bryant, J. D., Hamlett, C. L., & Seethaler, P. M. (2007). Mathematics screening and progress monitoring at first grade: Implications for responsiveness to intervention. Exceptional Children, 73(3), 311-330.
• Garrett, A. J., Mazzocco, M. M., & Baker, L. (2006). Development of the metacognitive skills of prediction and evaluation in children with or without math disability. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 21(2), 77-88.
• Geary, D. C. (1990). A componential analysis of an early learning deficit in mathematics. Journal of experimental child psychology, 49(3), 363-383.
• Geary, D. C., Hamson, C. O., & Hoard, M. K. (2000). Numerical and arithmetical cognition: A longitudinal study of process and concept deficits in children with learning disability. Journal of experimental child psychology, 77(3), 236-263.
• Geary, D. C. (2003). Learning disabilities in arithmetic: Problem solving differences and cognitive deficits. In H. L. Swanson, K. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 199–212). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
• Geary, D. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of learning disabilities, 37(1), 4-15.
• Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd-Craven, J., & DeSoto, M. C. (2004). Strategy choices in simple and complex addition: Contributions of working memory and counting knowledge for children with mathematical disability. Journal of experimental child psychology, 88(2), 121-151.
• Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd‐Craven, J., Nugent, L., & Numtee, C. (2007). Cognitive mechanisms underlying achievement deficits in children with mathematical learning disability. Child development, 78(4), 1343-1359.
• Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Nugent, L., & Bailey, D. H. (2012). Mathematical cognition deficits in children with learning disabilities and persistent low achievement: A five-year prospective study. Journal of educational psychology, 104(1), 206.
• Gersten, R., Jordan, N. C., & Flojo, J. R. (2005). Early identification and interventions for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of learning disabilities, 38(4), 293-304.
• Gresham, F. M. (2005). Response to intervention: An alternative means of identifying students as emotionally disturbed. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 328-344.
• Hanich, L. B., Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., & Dick, J. (2001). Performance across different areas of mathematical cognition in children with learning difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 615-626.
• Hartman, P. A. (2007). Comparing students with mathematics learning disabilities and students with low mathematics achievement in solving mathematics word problems (Doctoral Dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3294280)
• Hornung, C., Schiltz, C., Brunner, M., & Martin, R. (2014). Predicting first-grade mathematics achievement: The contributions of domain-general cognitive abilities, nonverbal number sense, and early number competence. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(272), 1–18.
• Jordan, N. C., & Hanich, L. B. (2000). Mathematical thinking in second-grade children with different forms of LD. Journal of learning disabilities, 33(6), 567-578.
• Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., & Hanich, L. B. (2002). Achievement growth in children with learning difficulties in mathematics: Findings of a two-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(3), 586-597.
• Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., Nabors Oláh, L., & Locuniak, M. N. (2006). Number sense growth in kindergarten: A longitudinal investigation of children at risk for mathematics difficulties. Child development, 77(1), 153-175.
• Jordan, N. C., Glutting, J., & Ramineni, C. (2010). The importance of number sense to mathematics achievement in first and third grades. Learning and individual differences, 20(2), 82-88.
• Jordan, N. C., Glutting, J., Ramineni, C., & Watkins, M. W. (2010). Validating a number sense screening tool for use in kindergarten and first grade: Prediction of mathematics proficiency in third grade. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 181-195.
• Jordan, N. C., & Levine, S. C. (2009). Socioeconomic variation, number competence, and mathematics learning difficulties in young children. Developmental disabilities research reviews, 15(1), 60-68.
• Kumaş, Ö. A., & Ergül, C. (2017). Examination of addition and subtraction performances of students with and without learning disabilities. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 9(3), 806-820.
• Lembke, E. S., Hampton, D., & Beyers, S. J. (2012). Response to intervention in mathematics: Critical elements. Psychology in the Schools, 49(3), 257-272.Locuniak, M. N., & Jordan, N. C. (2008). Using kindergarten number sense to predict calculation fluency in second grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(5), 451-459.
• Mazzocco, M. M., & Myers, G. F. (2003). Complexities in identifying and defining mathematics learning disability in the primary school-age years. Annals of dyslexia, 53(1), 218-253.
• Mazzocco, M. M. (2005). Challenges in identifying target skills for math disability screening and intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(4), 318-323.
• Mazzocco, M. M. (2007). Defining and differentiating mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities. In D. B. Berch & M. M. Mazzocco (Eds.), Why is math so hard for some children? The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities (pp. 29–48). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
• Mazzocco, M. M., & Räsänen, P. (2013). Contributions of longitudinal studies to evolving definitions and knowledge of developmental dyscalculia. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 2(2), 65-73.
• Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: qualitative data analysis (2nd Editon). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Montague, M., & Bos, C. S. (1990). Cognitive and metacognitive characteristics of eighth grade students' mathematical problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 2(3), 371-388.
• Mundia, L. (2012). The assessment of math learning difficulties in a primary grade-4 child with high support needs: Mixed methods approach. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4(2), 347-366.
• Pape, S. J. (2004). Middle school children's problem-solving behavior: A cognitive analysis from a reading comprehension perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(3), 187-219.
• Passolunghi, M. C., & Siegel, L. S. (2001). Short-term memory, working memory, and inhibitory control in children with difficulties in arithmetic problem solving. Journal of experimental child psychology, 80(1), 44-57.
• Passolunghi, M.C., & Pazzaglia, F. (2005). A comparison of updating processes in children good or poor in arithmetic word problem-solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 15(4), 257–269.
• Price, G. R., & Ansari, D. (2013). Dyscalculia: Characteristics, causes, and treatments. Numeracy, 6(1), 2-16.
• Robinson, C. S., Menchetti, B. M., & Torgesen, J. K. (2002). Toward a two‐factor theory of one type of mathematics disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 81-89.
• Rosenzweig, C., Krawec, J., & Montague, M. (2011). Metacognitive strategy use of eighth-grade students with and without learning disabilities during mathematical problem solving: A think-aloud analysis. Journal of learning disabilities, 44(6), 508-520.
• Sasanguie, D., Van den Bussche, E., & Reynvoet, B. (2012). Predictors for mathematics achievement? Evidence from a longitudinal study. Mind, Brain, and Education, 6(3), 119-128.
• Siegel, L. S., & Ryan, E. B. (1989). The development of working memory in normally achieving and subtypes of learning disabled children. Child development, 973-980.
• Swanson, H. L. (1993). Working memory in learning disability subgroups. Journal of experimental child psychology, 56(1), 87-114.
• Swanson, H. L. (2012). Cognitive profile of adolescents with math disabilities: Are the profiles different from those with reading disabilities? Child Neuropsychology, 18(2), 125-143.
• Swanson, H. L., & Jerman, O. (2006). Math disabilities: A selective meta-analysis of the literature. Review of educational Research, 76(2), 249-274.
• Van Der Heyden, A. M., Witt, J. C., & Gilbertson, D. (2007). A multi-year evaluation of the effects of a response to intervention (RTI) model on identification of children for special education. Journal of School Psychology, 45(2), 225-256.
• Van Garderen, D., & Montague, M. (2003). Visual‐spatial representation, mathematical problem solving, and students of varying abilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(4), 246-254.
• Vaughn, S. & Fuchs, L. S. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning disabilities research & practice, 18(3), 137-146.
• Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (8. Baskı). Ankara: Seçkin Yayınları.
• Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: The Guilford Press.