The Awareness of Prospective Mathematics Teachers on the Mathematics Curriculum

Öz

This research aims to examine the pre-service mathematics teachers' awareness of the special aims, application principles, and learning areas of the mathematics course curriculum. In this study, which was conducted with 30 primary school mathematics teacher candidates selected by convenience sampling technique, the case study design, one of the qualitative research approaches, was preferred. The data of the research were collected with an opinion form that included three open-ended questions questioning the specific aims, application principles, and learning areas of the mathematics curriculum. Descriptive analysis was used in the analysis of the obtained data. As a result of the research, it was seen that the participant teacher candidates mostly emphasized the items related to the use of mathematics in daily life within the scope of the program's special objectives. It can be said that the candidates mostly care about taking into account the individual differences of students in mathematics teaching, the use of materials, and the principle from concrete to abstract in mathematics education. In addition, it has been determined that all participants have knowledge of the learning areas in the secondary school mathematics curriculum and at which grade levels these learning areas are taught. As a result, it can be said that the awareness of the teacher candidates who will be the implementers of the training programs is high.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• curriculum
• special purposes
• learning areas
• pre-service teacher

Kaynakça

1. Abdioğlu, C., & Çevik, M. (2018). School Administrators’ Opinions Towards Mathematics Curriculum Implemented in High Schools. Bayburt Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(26), 405-432.
2. Albayrak, E., & Çiltaş, A. (2017). Descriptive Content Analysis Of Mathematıcal Modeling Research Published In The Field Of Mathematıcs Education In Turkey. Uluslararası Türk Eğitim Bilimleri Dergisi, 2017(9), 258-283.
3. Altun, M. (2002). İlköğretim ikinci kademede (6, 7 ve 8. sınıflarda) matematik öğretimi [Teaching mathematics at the second level of primary education (6th, 7th and 8th grades).]. Alfa Basım Yayım Dağıtım.
4. Aslan, E., & Olkun, S. (2011). Elementary School Mathematics in the First Curricula of Turkish Republic. İlköğretim Online, 10(3), 991-1009.
5. Bal, A. P. (2016). The effect of the differentiated teaching approach in the algebraic learning field on students’ academic achievements. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16(63).
6. Bal, A. P. & Artut, D. P. (2013). Evaluation of primary school mathematics curriculum. Eğitim Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2(4), 164-171.
7. Baş, F. (2017). Mathematics Teachers’ Following Educational Researches and Attitudes towards Educational Research: An Example from Turkey. Eğitim ve Bilim, 42(189).
8. Başak, T. Ü. Z., & Saraçoğlu, M. (2022). The Evaluation of 9th Grade Mathematics Curriculum According to Cipp Evaluation Model by Teachers and Students. Ekev Akademi Dergisi, (91), 16-32.

9. Baykul, Y. (2002). İlköğretimde matematik öğretimi: 6.-8. sınıflar için [Mathematics teaching in primary education(6th, 7th and 8th grades)]. Pegem A. Yayıncılık
10. Budak M. & Okur, M. (2012). Teacher Views About Curriculum Of 2005 Elementary Level Mathematic Course 6-8. Classes. International Journal of New Trends in Arts, Sports & Science Education, 1(4), 8-22.
11. Bruner, J. S. (1977). The Process Of Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
12. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
13. Cansız Aktaş, M. (2008). Öğretmenlerin yeni ortaöğretim matematik öğretim programının ölçme değerlendirme boyutuna bakışlarının incelenmesi [Examination Teachers’ Views on the Measurement and Assessment Dimension of New Secondary School Mathematics Curriculum]. Unpublished Dissertation, Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi, Trabzon.
14. Catalano, T., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Understanding the language of the Occupy movement: A cognitive linguistic analysis. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(9), 664-673.
15. Çakır, S., & Kılınç, H. H. (2016). Teachers’ Views With Regard To The Elementary School 4th Grade Mathematics Lesson Curriculum. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, (39), 112-124.
16. Çetinkaya, S., & Tabak, S. (2019). Curriculum Literacy Efficiency of Preservice Teachers. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal of Education Faculty, 38(1), 296-309.
17. Dağdelen, S., & Menderes, Ü. (2017). Problems and Suggestions in Mathematics Teaching and Learning Process. Van Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(1), 483-510.
18. Demirel, Ö. (2015). Eğitimde program geliştirme[Curriculum development in education]. Pegem Akademi.
19. Erbilgin, E. (2014). Examining a program designed to improve supervisory knowledge and practices of cooperating teachers. Teaching Education, 25(3), 261-293.
20. Erdem, C., & Eğmir, E. (2018). Prospective Teachers’ Levels of Curriculum Literacy. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 20(2), 123-138.
21. Gündüz, Ş. & Odabaşı, F. (2004). The Importance Of Instructional Technologies And Material Development Course At Pre-Service Teacher Education In the Information Age. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 3(1), 43-48)
22. Güzel, İ., Karataş, İ. & Çetinkaya, B. (2013). A Comparison of Secondary School Mathematics Curriculum Guidebooks: Turkey, Germany, and Canada. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 1(3), 309-325.
23. Güzel, G. & Şahin, H. (2019). A qualitative study for the evaluation of the 1-4. classes' mathematics curriculum content in terms of the spiral program approach. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(2), 188-200.
24. Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2008). Learning from curriculum materials: Scaffolds for new teachers? Teaching And Teacher Education, 24(8), 2014-2026.
25. Huntly, M. A., Rasmussen, C. L., Villarubi, R. S. & Sangtong, J.-FEY, J. T. (2000), Effects of standards-based mathematics education: A study of the core-plus mathematics project algebra and functions strand. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(3), 328-361
26. İncikabı, L., Pektaş, M. & Süle, C. (2016). An Analysis of SSIPE Mathematics and Science Items in terms of PISA Problem Solving Framework. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Kırşehir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi (KEFAD), 17(2), 649-662.
27. Karasar, N. (1995). Bilimsel araştirma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık.
28. Konur, K., & Atlıhan, S. (2016). Teachers' Views on Secondary Mathematics Curriculum Content Organization. Cumhuriyet Uluslararası Eğitim Dergisi, 1(2), 82-96.
29. Lichtenfeld, S., Pekrun, R., Stupnisky, R. H., Reiss, K., & Murayama, K. (2012). Measuring students' emotions in the early years: the achievement emotions questionnaire-elementary school (AEQ-ES). Learning and Individual Differences, 22(2), 190-201.
30. Lutzer, C. V. (2005). Fostering mathematical literacy. Primus, 15(1), 1-6.
31. Malhotra, V. (2006). Methods of teaching mathematics. New Delhi, India: Crescent Publication.
32. McMillian, J. (2000). Importance of a standard methodology in computer forensics. Information Security Reading Room, 2.
33. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage.
34. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of Education] (2006). İlköğretim matematik dersi 6-8. sınıflar öğretim programı ve kılavuzu [Elementary math lesson 6-8. classes syllabus and guide]. MEB Yayınları.
35. Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı [Ministry of Education] (2018). Matematik dersi öğretim programı ve kılavuzu [Mathematics curriculum and guide]. MEB Yayınları.
36. Ornstein, A. C., & Hunkins, F. P. (2017). Curriculum: foundations, principles, and issues (7th ed.). Pearson.
37. Öksüz, C. (2015). Primary School Mathematics Curricula Evaluation Scale. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 37(37), 21-33.
38. Özkale, A., & Memiş, Y. (2022). The Examination Of Reflections Of The Spiral Approach In The Elementary Mathematics Curriculum Of Turkey. Milli Eğitim Dergisi, 51(234), 1031-1062.
39. Öztürk, A. & Özmantar, M., F. (2016). İlkokul matematik programlarında strateji, yöntem ve teknikleri. Reform ve değişim bağlamında ilkokul matematik öğretim programları[Strategies, methods and techniques in primary school mathematics programs. Primary school mathematics curriculum in the context of reform and change]. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık
40. Sağ, R. (2010). Multigrade Schools Course Wıth Richness Practıces Based Activity Theory Effect on Pre-Service Student Teachers’ Self-Efficacy. Eğitim ve Bilim, 35(158): 44- 57.
41. Sağ, R. & Sezer, R. (2012). Analysis of the Professional Needs of the Teachers of MultigradeClasses, İlköğretim Online, 11(2): 491-503.
42. Sezgin-Memnun, D. (2013). A General Aspect to the Elementary Mathematics Education Curriculum Programs belonging to the Republican Era in Turkey. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(25), 71-91.
43. Sırmacı, N. (2003). An Analysıs Of The Habits Of Study Of The Students In Maths Departments Given Different Varieties. Gazi Üniversitesi Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 11(2), 359-366.
44. Süral, S. (2013). İlköğretimde görev yapan öğretmenlerin öğretme stillerinin sınıf yönetimi yaklaşımları ve öğretmenlik mesleğine yönelik tutumları arasındaki ilişki [The relationship between primary school teachers' teaching styles with the attitudes towards the teaching profession and classroom management approaches]. Unpublished Dissertation, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi.
45. Ulusoy, M. İ. (2012). Yeni ortaöğretim matematik programı kapsamında, ortaöğretim matematik öğretmenlerinin çoklu zekâ kuramı uygulamalarına ilişkin görüşleri [Within the scope of new mathematics curriculum for secondary education, mathematics teachers' views about the multiple intelligence applications]. Unpublished Master's Thesis, İnönü Üniversitesi.
46. TTKB, (2013). Ortaokul matematik dersi (5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) öğretim programı [Middle school mathematics course (5, 6, 7 and 8th Grades) curriculum]. Ankara: MEB Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı Yay. [Online]: http://ttkb.meb.gov.tr/
47. Yıldırım A., ve Şimşek H. (2005). Sosyal Bilimlerde Nitel Araştırma Yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences] (5.Baskı), Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.
48. Yıldız Posluoğlu, Z. (2002). İlköğretim matematik dersinde problem çözme becerisinin kazandırılmasında işbirliğine dayalı öğrenme yaklaşımının etkililiği [The Effect of cooperative learning technique in teaching the skills of mathematical problem solving to the students of primary and secondary school]. Unpublished Master's Thesis, Gazi Üniversitesi.
49. Yin, R. K. (2003). Designing case studies. Qualitative research methods, 5(14), 359-386.
50. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
51. Wang, X., Lee, Y., Zhu, X., & Okur Ozdemir, A. (2022). Exploring the relationship between community college students’ exposure to math contextualization and educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 63(2), 309-336.
52. Zeybek, G., & Karataş, K. (2022). The First Step to Teaching Experience: Examining The Teaching Practice Process. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 11(3), 973-990.