-

Öz

In this study, eighth-grade students’ spatial anxiety, geometry self-efficacy, and geometry achievement were examined based on gender. The roles of spatial anxiety, geometry self-efficacy and gender in predicting the geometry achievement were also investigated. Spatial Anxiety Scale, Geometry Self-Efficacy Scale and Geometry Achievement Test were administered to eighth-grade students of nine different elementary schools. Results indicated that spatial anxiety and geometry achievement levels of the students were low but geometry self-efficacy level was medium. Besides, there was a significant difference between males and females in terms of spatial anxiety levels favoring males. Moreover, only geometry self-efficacy was found to be a significant predictor of geometry achievement. At the same time, it was found that spatial anxiety and gender did not predict geometry achievement significantly

Anahtar Kelimeler

• spatial anxiety, geometry self-efficacy, geometry achievement, gender, multiple regression

Uzamsal Kaygı, Geometri Öz-Yeterlik Algısı ve Cinsiyet Değişkenlerinin Geometri Başarısını Yordamadaki Rolleri

Öz

Bu çalışmada, sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin uzamsal kaygı, geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algısı ve geometri başarı düzeylerinin cinsiyetleri de dikkate alınarak incelenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Ayrıca; uzamsal kaygı, geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algısı ve cinsiyet değişkenlerinin geometri başarısını yordamadaki rolleri araştırılmıştır. Çalışma kapsamında, araştırmaya katılan 9 farklı ilköğretim okulunun sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerine Uzamsal Kaygı Ölçeği, Geometriye Yönelik Öz-Yeterlik Ölçeği ve Geometri Başarı Testi uygulanmıştır. Yapılan incelemeler sonucunda, öğrencilerin uzamsal kaygı seviyelerinin ve geometri başarılarının düşük, geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algılarının orta seviyede olduğu ortaya koyulmuştur. Bununla birlikte, kız ve erkek öğrenciler arasında ise yalnızca uzamsal kaygı seviyesi açısından erkeklerin lehine anlamlı bir fark olduğu belirlenmiştir. Ayrıca, geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algısı değişkeninin geometri başarısı üzerinde anlamlı bir yordayıcı olduğu sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Aynı zamanda, uzamsal kaygı ve cinsiyet değişkenlerinin geometri başarısını anlamlı derecede açıklamadığı anlaşılmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• uzamsal kaygı, geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik algısı, geometri başarısı, cinsiyet, çoklu regresyon

Kaynakça

1. Akkoyunlu, B., Orhan, F., ve Umay, A. (2005). Bilgisayar öğretmenleri için “Bilgisayar öğretmenliği öz-yeterlik 1-8.
2. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215.
3. Battista, M. T. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In F. Lester (Eds) Second Handbook of Research in Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 843-908). Charlotte, NC: NCTM/Information Age Publishing.
4. Battista, M. T. (1990). Spatial visualization and gender differences in high school geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(1), 47-60.
5. Battista, M. T., Wheatley, G. H., & Talsma, G. (1982). The importance of spatial visualization and cognitive development for geometry learning in pre service elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13(5), 332-340.
6. Ben-Chaim, D., Lappan, G., & Houang, R. T. (1989). Adolescents’ ability to communicate spatial information: Analyzing and effecting students’ performance. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20, 121-146.
7. Boulter, D. R. (1992). The effects of instruction on spatial ability and geometry performance. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Queen’s University, Ontario.
8. Cantürk-Günhan, B., ve Başer, N. (2007). The development of self-efficacy scale toward geometry. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 33, 68-76.

9. Coluccia, E., & Louse, G. (2004). Gender differences in spatial orientation: A review. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 329-340.
10. Çağırgan-Gülten, D., ve Soytürk, İ. (2013). İlköğretim 6. sınıf öğrencilerinin geometri öz- yeterliklerinin akademik başarı not ortalamaları ile ilişkisi. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi dergisi, 25, 55-70.
11. Dursun, Ö. (2010). The relationships among preservice teachers’spatial visualization ability, geometry self-efficacy, and spatial anxiety. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.
12. Erdogan, A., Baloglu, M., ve Kesici, S. (2011). Gender differences in geometry and mathematics achievement and self-efficacy beliefs in geometry. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 43, 91-106.
13. Ethington, C. A. (1992). Gender differences in a psychological model of mathematics achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 166-181.
14. Frankel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (2006). How to design and evaluate research in education. New York: McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.
15. Halat, E. (2008). In-service middle and high school mathematics teachers: Geometric reasoning stages
16. and The Mathematics Educator, 18(1), 8-14. gender.
17. Hannafin, R. D., Truxaw, M. P., Vermillion, J. R. & Liu, Y. (2008). Effects of spatial ability and instructional program on geometry achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(3), 148-156.
18. Kaufman, S. B. (2007). Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial visualization ability: Can they be accounted for by differences in working memory capacity? Intelligence, 35, 211-223.
19. Lawton, C. A. (1994). Gender differences in way-finding strategies: relationship to spatial ability and
20. spatial Sex Roles, 30(11/12), 765-779. anxiety.
21. Lawton, C. A. (1996). Strategies for indoor wayfinding: The role of orientation. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 137-145.
22. Lawton, C., & Kallai, J. (2002). Gender differences in wayfinding strategies and anxiety about wayfinding: A cross-cultural comparison. Sex Roles, 47, 389-401.
23. Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 56, 1479-1498.
24. Lloyd, J. E. V., Walsh, J., & Yailagh, M. S. (2005). Sex differences in performance attributions, self- efficacy, and achievement in mathematics: If I'm so smart, why don't I know it? Canadian Journal of Education, 28(3), 384-408.
25. Ma, X. (1999). A meta-analysis of the relationship between anxiety toward mathematics and achievement in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(5), 520-540.
26. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Fierros, E. G., Goldberg, A. L., & Stemler, S. E. (2000). Gender differences in achievement, IEA’s third international mathematics and science study. Boston: International Study Centre, Boston College.
27. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy,P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in
28. mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA, USA: TIMSS and PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College.
29. NCTM (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
30. Olkun, S. (2003). Comparing computer versus concrete manipulatives in learning 2D geometry. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22, 43-56.
31. Postma, A., Jager, G., Kessels, R. P. C., Koppeschaar, H. P. F., & van Honk, J. (2004). Sex differences for selective forms of spatial memory. Brain and Cognition 54, 24-34.
32. Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and selfregulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40.
33. Randhawa, B. S., Beamer, J. E., & Lundberg, I. (1993). Role of mathematics self-efficacy in the structural model of mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85(1), 41- 48.
34. Schmitz, S. (1997). Gender-related strategies in environmental development: Effects of anxiety on wayfinding in and representation of a three-dimensional maze. Journal of Environmental Psychology 17, 215-228.
35. Sherard, W. H. (1981). Math anxiety in the classroom. The Clearing House 55, 106-110.
36. Stage, F. K., & Kloosterman, P. (1995). Gender, beliefs, and achievement in remedial college-level mathematics. Journal of Higher Education, 66, 294-311.
37. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics (5th Ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
38. Turgut, M. (2007). İlköğretim II. kademede öğrencilerin uzamsal yeteneklerinin incelenmesi. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İzmir, Türkiye.
39. Ural, A., Umay, A., ve Argün, Z. (2008). The effect of students teams-achievement divisions method based instruction on mathematics academic achievement and self-efficacy. Hacettepe Üniversitesi
40. Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 35, 307-318.
41. Ünlü, M. ve Aydıntan, S. (2011). İşbirlikli öğrenme yönteminin sekizinci sınıf öğrencilerinin matematik dersi “Permütasyon ve Olasılık” konusunda akademik başarı ve kalıcılık düzeylerine etkisi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12(3), 1-16.
42. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis.
43. Developmental Review, 12, 265-310.
44. Yenilmez K., ve Uygan C. (2010). Yaratıcı drama yönteminin ikögretim 7. sınıf ögrencilerinin geometriye yönelik öz-yeterlik inançlarına etkisi. Kastamonu Egitim Dergisi, 18(3), 931-942.