Potential Factors That Explain the Difference Between Mathematics Achievement of Students in Korea and Turkey According to PISA 2018

Begüm Öztorun; Feyza Karagöz; Sevda Yerdelen-damar

doi:10.46778/goputeb.1346568

EN TR

Potential Factors That Explain the Difference Between Mathematics Achievement of Students in Korea and Turkey According to PISA 2018

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the difference between the potential factors (time spent using digital devices during mathematics lessons in a school week, perceived feedback, and competitiveness of students) influencing mathematics achievement of students in Korea and Turkey. The study sample was comprised of 13440 students who were 15 years old and in grade 7 (or above) in Korea and Turkey. As the data were obtained from the PISA 2018 dataset to compare independent variables at one single time, the design of the study was causal-comparative research. Students in Korea and Turkey were compared according to the variables by using independent sample t-tests. There was a significant difference between Turkey and Korea in each category. It was found that the time spent using digital devices during mathematics lessons in a school week of students in Turkey was higher than that of students in Korea. Students in Turkey were more competitive than those in Korea. However, the results showed that students in Korea perceived more feedback than students in Turkey. The current study also discusses the implications and recommendations based on the findings and literature.

Keywords

Math Achievement , Turkey , Korea , Competitiveness , Feedback , Technology

PISA 2018 Verilerine Göre Kore ve Türkiye'deki Öğrencilerin Matematik Başarısı Arasındaki Farkı Açıklayan Olası Faktörler

Öz

Bu çalışmanın amacı, Kore ve Türkiye'deki öğrencilerin matematik başarısını etkileyen potansiyel faktörler (bir okul haftasında matematik dersleri sırasında dijital cihazların kullanım süresi, algılanan geri bildirim ve öğrencilerin rekabetçiliği) arasındaki farkı incelemektir. Çalışmanın örneklemini Kore ve Türkiye'de 7. sınıfta (ya da daha üst sınıfta) okuyan 15 yaşındaki 13440 öğrenci oluşturmaktadır. Çalışma PISA 2018 verilerinin kullanıldığı nedensel karşılaştırmalı bir araştırmadır. Kore ve Türkiye'deki öğrenciler bağımsız örneklem t-testleri kullanılarak ilgili değişkenlere göre karşılaştırılmıştır. Çalışmanın sonuçlarında her kategoride Türkiye ve Kore arasında anlamlı bir fark bulunmuştur. Türkiye'deki öğrencilerin Kore'deki öğrencilere göre bir okul haftasında matematik derslerinde dijital cihazlarla geçirdikleri sürenin daha fazla olduğu ve daha rekabetçi oldukları tespit edilmiştir. Bununla birlikte, sonuçlar Kore'deki öğrencilerin Türkiye'deki öğrencilere göre daha fazla geri bildirim algıladığını göstermiştir. Mevcut çalışmada aynı zamanda elde edilen bulgulara ve literatüre dayalı olarak çıkarım ve öneriler ele alınmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Matematik Başarısı , Türkiye , Kore , Rekabetçilik , Geri Bildirim , Teknoloji

References

Ajello, A. M., Caponera, E., & Palmerio, L. (2018). Italian students’ results in the PISA mathematics test: Does reading competence matter? European Journal of Psychology of Education, 33(3), 505–520. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-018-0385-x
Aktaş, F., Yakıcı-Topbaş, E. S., & Dede, Y. (2019). The Elementary Mathematics Teachers’ Values Underlying Teacher noticing: The context of polygons. In ICME-13 monographs (pp. 209–222). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16892-6_15
Ammermueller, A. (2004). Pisa: What Makes the Difference? Explaining the Gap in Pisa Test Scores between Finland and Germany. Social Science Research Network. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.555954
Arıkan, S. (2014). A regression model with a new tool: IDB analyzer for identifying factors predicting mathematics performance using PISA 2012 indices. US-China Education Review, 4(10). https://doi.org/10.17265/2161-623x/2014.10a.004
Arıkan, S. (2017). TIMSS 2011 verilerine göre türkiye’deki ev ödevi ve matematik başarısı arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between homework and mathematics achievement in Turkey according to TIMSS 2011]. International Journal of Eurasia Social Sciences, 8(26), 256–276.
Arıkan, S., Van De Vijver, F. J. R., & Yağmur, K. (2017). PISA mathematics and reading performance differences of mainstream European and Turkish immigrant students. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29(3), 229–246. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-017-9260-6
Atmacasoy, A. (2017). K-12 Education in Germany: Curriculum and PISA 2015. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED577138
Baki, A. (2013, Ekim 21). Öğrenciler neden sayısal derslerde başarılı olamıyor? [Why are students not successful in numerical studies?] Hürriyet, http://www.hurriyet.com.tr.
Baek, Y., Jung, J., & Kim, B. (2008). What makes teachers use technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitation of technology with a Korean sample. Computers & Education, 50(1), 224–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.05.002
Battistich, V., Schaps, E., & Wilson, N. (2004). Effects of an elementary school intervention on students'“connectedness” to school and social adjustment during middle school. Journal of primary prevention, 24, 243-262.

Baumann, C., & Winzar, H. (2014). The role of secondary education in explaining competitiveness. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 36(1), 13–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2014.924387
Bulut, O., & Cutumisu, M. (2018). When technology does not add up: ICT use negatively predicts mathematics and science achievement for Finnish and Turkish students in PISA 2012. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 27(1), 25-42.
Bütüner, S. Ö., & Güler, M. (2017). Gerçeklerle yüzleşme: Türkiye’nin TIMSS matematik başarısı üzerine bir çalışma [Facing the Reality: A Study on TIMSS Mathematics Achievement of Turkey]. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(23), 161–184.
Carvalho, C., Santos, J., Conboy, J., & Martins, D. (2014). Teachers’ feedback: Exploring differences in students’ perceptions. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 159, 169-173.
Cheng-Huan C, Chiung-Hui C (2016) Employing intergroup competition in multitouch desing-based learning to foster student engagement, learning achievemet, and creativity. Comput Educ 103:99–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.007
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Cheung, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications for enhancing mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.01.001
Delen, E., & Bulut, O. (2011). The relationship between students’ exposure to technology and their achievement in science and math. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10(3), 311–317.
Delice, A., & Karaaslan, G. (2015). Dinamik geometri yazılımı etkinliklerinin öğrenci performansları bağlamında i̇ncelenmesi: Analitik düzlemde doğru denklemleri [Investigation of the effects of the dynamic geometry software tasks on students’ performance: Lineer equations]. Marmara Üniversitesi Atatürk Eğitim Fakültesi Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 41(41), 35. https://doi.org/10.15285/ebd.42152
Demir, İ., Kılıç, S., & Ünal, H. (2010). Effects of students’ and schools’ characteristics on mathematics achievement: findings from PISA 2006. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3099–3103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.472
Ding, H., & Homer, M. (2020). Interpreting mathematics performance in PISA: Taking account of reading performance. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 101566. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101566
Eickelmann, B., Gerick, J., & Koop, C. (2017). ICT use in mathematics lessons and the mathematics achievement of secondary school students by international comparison: Which role do school level factors play? Education and Information Technologies, 22(4), 1527–1551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9498-5
Ekici, S., & Yılmaz, B. (2013). FATİH projesi üzerine bir değerlendirme [An evaluation of FATIH project]. Türk Kütüphaneciliği, 27(2), 317–339.
Eyyam, R., & Yaratan, H. (2014). Impact of use of technology in mathematics lessons on student achievement and attitudes. Social Behavior and Personality, 42(1), 31S-42S. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.0.s31
Ferguson, P. (2011). Student perceptions of quality feedback in teacher education. Assessment & evaluation in higher education, 36(1), 51-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602930903197883
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2018). How to Design and Evaluate Research in education. McGraw-Hill Education.
Fyfe, E. R., Rittle-Johnson, B., & DeCaro, M. S. (2012). The effects of feedback during exploratory mathematics problem solving: Prior knowledge matters. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 1094.
Gambari, A. I., Shittu, A. T., Daramola, F. O., & James, M. (2018). Effects of video-based cooperative, competitive and individualized instructional strategies on the performance of senior secondary schools students in geometry. MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 4(4), 31-47.
Geesa, R. L., Izci, B., Song, H. S., & Chen, S. (2019). Exploring factors of home resources and attitudes towards mathematics in mathematics achievement in South Korea, Turkey, and the United States. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(9). https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/108487
Gutiérrez-Braojos, C., Montejo-Gamez, J., Marin-Jimenez, A., & Campaña, J. (2019). Hybrid learning environment: Collaborative or competitive learning?. Virtual Reality, 23, 411-423. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-018-0358-z
Guzeller, C. O., & Akin, A. (2014). Relationship between ICT variables and mathematics achievement based on PISA 2006 database: International evidence. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 13(1), 184-192.
Harks, B., Rakoczy, K., Hattie, J., Besser, M., & Klieme, E. (2014). The effects of feedback on achievement, interest and self-evaluation: the role of feedback’s perceived usefulness. Educational Psychology, 34(3), 269-290.
Hattie, J. (2008). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203887332
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
Heinze, A., Reiss, K., & Franziska, R. (2005). Mathematics achievement and interest in mathematics from a differential perspective. Zentralblatt Für Didaktik Der Mathematik, 37(3), 212–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-005-0011-7
Hossain, A., & Tarmizi, R. A. (2013). Effects of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and attitudes in secondary mathematics. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 93, 473-477.
Karim, Z. A., Rashid, R. A., & Mohamed, Z. (2019). Factors affecting students’ achievement in mathematics. Jurnal Intelek, 14(2), 198–207. https://doi.org/10.24191/ji.v14i2.235
Kennewell, S., Parkinson, J., & Tanner, H. (2002). Developing the ICT capable school. Routledge.
Koka, A., & Hein, V. (2005). The effect of perceived teacher feedback on intrinsic motivation in physical education. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 36(2), 91.
Lewis, M. A., & Cooney, J. B. (1987). Attributional and performance effects of competitive and individualistic feedback in computer-assisted mathematics instruction. Computers in human behavior, 3(1), 1-13.
Li, H. (2016). How is formative assessment related to students’ reading achievement? Findings from PISA 2009. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 23(4), 473-494. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2016.1139543
McLean, L., & Connor, C. M. (2018). Relations between third grade teachers’ depressive symptoms and their feedback to students, with implications for student mathematics achievement. School Psychology Quarterly, 33(2), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1037/spq0000225
Mohd, N., Mahmood, T. F. P. T. & İsmail, M. N. (2011). Factors that influence students in mathematics achievement. International Journal of Academic Research, 3(3), 49-54.
National Research Council (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10126.
NCEE. (May, 2021). NCEE.
OECD (2001), Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000, PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264195905-en
OECD (2004), Learning for tomorrow’s world first results from PISA 2003, PISA. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2007), Science competencies for tomorrow's world: Volume 1: Analysis, PISA. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2010), PISA 2009 results: Executive summary, PISA. OECD Publishing.
OECD (2014), PISA 2012 Results: What students know and can do – student performance in mathematics, reading and science (Volume I, Revised edition, February 2014), PISA, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264208780-en
OECD (2016), PISA 2015 results (Volume I): Excellence and equity in education, PISA, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264266490-en
OECD (2019), PISA 2018 results (Volume III): What school life means for students’ lives, PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en
OECD (2019), PISA 2018 results (Volume I, II & III): Combined executive summaries. PISA, OECD Publishing.
OECD (2020), PISA 2018 results (Volume VI): Are students ready to thrive in an ınterconnected world?, PISA, OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/d5f68679-en
OECD. (2022). Programme for international student assessment. OECD
Özkan, U. B. (2022). Predictors of mathematics achievement of students in Turkey: An analysis of the variables of information and communication technologies familiarity. Pamukkale Universitesi Egitim Fakultesi Dergisi, 54, 272-296.
Qin, Z., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Cooperative versus competitive efforts and problem solving. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 129–143. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543065002129
Papanastasiou, E., & Ferdig, R. E. (2006). Computer use and mathematical literacy: An analysis of existing and potential relationships. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(4), 361-371.
Plass, J. L., O’Keefe, P. A., Homer, B. D., Case, J. M., Hayward, E. O., Stein, M., & Perlin, K. (2013). The impact of individual, competitive, and collaborative mathematics game play on learning, performance, and motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1050–1066. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032688
Ravitz, J., Mergendoller, J., & Rush, W. (2002, April). What's school got to do with it? Cautionary tales about correlations between student computer use and academic achievement [Conference presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA, United States.
Roseth, C. J., Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Promoting early adolescents’ achievement and peer relationships: The effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures. Psychological Bulletin, 134(2), 223–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.134.2.223
Saritas, T., & Akdemir, O. (2009). Identifying factors affecting the mathematics achievement of students for better instructional design. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 6(12), 21-36.
Savaş, E., Taş, S., & Duru, A. (2010). Matematikte öğrenci başarısını etkileyen faktörler [Factors affecting mathematics achievement]. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11(1), 113-132.
Shewbridge, C., Ikeda, M., & Schleicher, A. (2006). Are students ready for a technology-rich world?: What PISA studies tell us. OECD.
Shin, J., Lee, H., & Kim, Y. (2009). Student and school factors affecting mathematics achievement. School Psychology International, 30(5), 520–537. https://doi.org/10.1177/0143034309107070
Sjøberg, S. (2015). PISA and Global Educational Governance – A Critique of the Project, its Uses and Implications. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2015.1310a
Smeets, E., & Mooij, T. (2001). Pupil‐centred learning, ICT, and teacher behaviour: observations in educational practice. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4), 403–417. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8535.00210
Son, J., Han, S. W., Kang, C., & Kwon, O. N. (2016). A Comparative Analysis of the Relationship among Quality Instruction, Teacher Self-efficacy, Student Background, and Mathematics Achievement in South Korea and the United States. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(7). https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1532a
Srijamdee, K., & Pholphirul, P. (2020). Does ICT familiarity always help promote educational outcomes? Empirical evidence from PISA-Thailand. Education and Information Technologies, 25(4), 2933-2970. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10089-z
Stankov, L., & Lee, J. (2017). Self-beliefs: Strong correlates of mathematics achievement and intelligence. Intelligence, 61, 11–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2016.12.001
Uysal, Ş. (2015). Factors affecting the Mathematics achievement of Turkish students in PISA 2012. Educational Research and Reviews, 10(12), 1670–1678. https://doi.org/10.5897/err2014.2067
Yaşar, C., & Akbaş, U. (2019). The effect of feedback timing on mathematics achievement. Ilkogretim Online, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2019.630657
Yildirim, S., & Yildirim, H. H. (2019). Predicting mathematics achievement: The role of perceived feedback, teacher support and self-beliefs. Turkish Journal of Education, 8(2), 71-85.
Vattøy, K. D., & Smith, K. (2019). Students' perceptions of teachers' feedback practice in teaching English as a foreign language. Teaching and Teacher Education, 85, 260-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.06.024
Velasquez, M. E. B. (2014). South Korea’s successful education system: lessons and policy implications for Peru. Korean Social Science Journal, 41(2), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40483-014-0019-0
Volante, L. (Ed.). (2017). The PISA effect on global educational governance. Routledge.
Vollmeyer, R., & Rheinberg, F. (2005). A surprising effect of feedback on learning. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 589–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2005.08.001
Zhang, Q., Barkatsas, T., Law, H. Y., Leu, Y. C., Seah, W. T., & Wong, N. Y. (2016). What primary students in the Chinese Mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan value in mathematics learning: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(5), 907-924.
Zhao, H., & Akiba, M. (2009). School expectations for parental involvement and student mathematics achievement: a comparative study of middle schools in the U.S. and South Korea. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 39(3), 411-428. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057920701603347

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Mathematics Education

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Begüm Öztorun ^*
0000-0002-3284-5839
Türkiye

Feyza Karagöz
0009-0004-5411-7957
Türkiye

Sevda Yerdelen-damar
0000-0002-5665-5140
Türkiye

Publication Date

March 29, 2024

Submission Date

August 20, 2023

Acceptance Date

December 13, 2023

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 12 Number: 1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.46778/goputeb.1346568

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA78ER97XN

APA

Öztorun, B., Karagöz, F., & Yerdelen-damar, S. (2024). Potential Factors That Explain the Difference Between Mathematics Achievement of Students in Korea and Turkey According to PISA 2018. International Journal of Turkish Education Sciences, 12(1), 157-186. https://doi.org/10.46778/goputeb.1346568

Potential Factors That Explain the Difference Between Mathematics Achievement of Students in Korea and Turkey According to PISA 2018

Abstract

Keywords

PISA 2018 Verilerine Göre Kore ve Türkiye'deki Öğrencilerin Matematik Başarısı Arasındaki Farkı Açıklayan Olası Faktörler

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite