AN EXAMİNATİON OF PRESERVİCE MATHEMATİCS TEACHERS’ REALİSTİC APPROACHES WİTH DİVİSİON WİTH REMAİNDER (DWR) PROBLEMS

Öz

The purpose of this study was to investigate preservice mathematics teachers’ realistic approaches during problem solving and posing.  In advance of this study, pilot study had been implemented to see its necessity. According to findings of pilot study, the current study was required. The current study is a case study of qualitative research methods. 40 mathematics teacher candidates, who study at a state university in Istanbul, participated in this study. Questions were developed by Chen et al. (2005) were used in the study. Descriptive statistics and percent frequency methods were used in data analyzing. As a result, the study was of high importance for preservice teachers to recognize realistic problems.

Key Words: Problem solving, problem posing, realistic approaches, preservice mathematics teachers, division-with-remainder.

 

Kaynakça

1. Albayrak, M., İpek, A.S. ve Işık, C. (2006). Temel işlem becerilerinin öğretiminde problem kurma-çözme çalışmaları. Erzincan Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 8(2), 1-11.
2. Arikan, E. E., & Unal, H. (2014). Development of the structured problem posing skills and using metaphoric perceptions. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 155-166
3. Arslan, S. (2006). Matematik öğretimi. H. Gür (Ed.), Matematik öğretiminde teknoloji kullanımı, (ss. 347–380) İstanbul: Lisans Yayıncılık.
4. Bekdemir, M., Işık, A. ve Çıkıcı, Y. (2004). Matematik kaygısını oluşturan ve arttıran öğretmen davranışları ve çözüm yolları. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16, 88–94
5. Brown, S. I., & M. I. Walter, 2005. The art of problem posing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
6. Cai, J. (1998). An investigation of US and Chinese students’ mathematical problem posing and problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 37-50.
7. Chen, L., Van Dooren, W., Chen, Q., & Verschaffel, L. (2011). An investigation on Chinese teachers’realistic problem posing and problem solving ability and beliefs. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(4), 919-948.
8. Cohen, L.& Manion, L. (1994). Research methods in education, London: Routledge.

9. Greer, B. (1993). The mathematical modeling perspective on world problems. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 12(2), 239–250.
10. Hegarty, M., Mayer, R. E., & Monk, C. A. (1995). Comprehension of arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 18-32.
11. Inoue, N. (2005).The realistic reasons behind unrealistic solutions: The role of interpretive activity in word problem solving. Learning and Instruction, 15, 69-83.
12. Işık, A., Çiltaş, A., & Baş, F. (2010). Öğretmen yetiştirme ve öğretmenlik mesleği. Atatürk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 14(1), 53-62
13. Jonassen, D. H. (2010). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-
14. solving learning environments. New York: Routledge.
15. Kayan, F., & Çakıroğlu, E. (2008). İlköğretim matematik öğretmen adaylarının matematiksel problem çözmeye yönelik inançları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35(35), 218-226.
16. Korkmaz, E., Gür, H. ve Ersoy, Y. (2004). Problem kurma ve çözme yaklaşımlı matematik öğretimi-II: Öğretmen adaylarının alışkanlıkları ve görüşleri, Matematikçiler Derneği Bilim Köşesi. 20.07. 2014 tarihinde http://www.matder.org.tr/Default.asp?id=132 adresinden ulaşılmıştır
17. Li, Y., & Silver, E.A. (2000). Can younger students succeed where older students fail? An examination of third graders’ solutions of division-with-remainder (DWR) problem. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 233-246.
18. Merriam, S.B. (1988). Case study research in education a qualitative approach, USA: Jossey-Bass Publishers,
19. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
20. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it, 2nd ed. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22. Rodríguez, P., Lago, M. O., Hernández, M. L., Jiménez, L., Guerrero, S., & Caballero, S. (2009). How do secondary students approach different types of division with remainder situations? Some evidence from Spain. European journal of psychology of education, 24(4), 529-543.
23. Salman E., (2012). İlköğretim matematik öğretiminde problem kurma çalışmalarının öğrencilerin problem çözme başarısına ve tutumlarına etkisi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Erzincan Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Erzincan.
24. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition,
25. and sense making in mathematics. Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. In: D. Grows (Ed) New York: Mac Millan.
26. Seferoğlu, S. S. (2004). Öğretmen adaylarının öğretmenliğe yönelik tutumları. XII. Eğitim Bilimleri Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı, 413–423.
27. Tertemiz, N. İ., Çakmak, M. (2004). Problem çözme. Ankara: Gündüz Eğitim ve Yayıncılık
28. Toluk, Z., & Olkun, S. (2002). Türkiye’de matematik eğitiminde problem çözme: ilköğretim 1.-5. sınıflar matematik ders kitapları. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri, 2(2), 567-581.
29. Verschaffel, L., De Corte. E., & Lasure, S. (1994). Realistic considerations in mathematical modeling of school arithmetic word problems. Learning and Instruction, 4. 273-294.
30. Wood, P. K. (1983). Inquiring systems and problem structure: Implications for cognitive development. Human Development, 26 (5), 249–265.
31. Xin, Z., Lin, C., Zhang, L. & Yan, R. (2007). The performance of Chinese primary school students on realistic arithmetic word problems. Educational Psychology in Practice, 23, 145–159.
32. Yazgan, Y., ve Bintaş, J. (2005). İlköğretim dördüncü ve beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin problem çözme stratejilerini kullanabilme düzeyleri: Bir öğretim deneyi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28, 210-218.
33. Yoshida, H., Verschaffel, L., ve De Corte, E. (1997). Realistic considerations in solving problematic word problems: do Japanese and Belgian children have the same difficulties? Learning and Instruction, 7, 329-338.