Geometric thinking levels among college of education students

Abstract

Geometry is a key area of math. Reviewing the curriculum of primary and secondary school indicates that geometry is one of the major academic subjects, and it is consider one of the most difficult areas of mathematics to pupils. Quite a few studies conducted in recent decades reported the difficulties encountered by pupils that learning geometry. One of the main reasons for these difficulties is the gap between the level of teaching and learning abilities to the level of pupils understanding. The pupils are low-leveled geometric thinking, while the teachers are trying to provide them their high-leveled knowledge. Students that received in the mathematics department at academic college specialize elementary and junior high School curriculums are committed to studying various courses in geometry. Our experience at college of education, meet us with students that have difficulty at learning geometry. In order to make teaching more effective and efficient, we conducted a study that examining the level of geometric thinking of the students who want to be math teachers and come to learn in college of education. To this end, a questionnaire was comprised of 15 questions that examine the first three levels of geometric thinking by Van Hiele theory. The questionnaire was given to students who specialize in mathematics program primary and secondary school (N=84). The conclusion obtained from the study is that a significant proportion of the students received in the mathematics department at academic college control only at the lowest level. In order to qualify students to the third level, at least, we need to teach them geometric during the first semester of learning.

Keywords

• geometry
• Van Hiele theory
• geometric thinking
• levels of thinking.

Thanks

We thank you very much

References

1. Barbash, M. (2003). Euclidean geometry as a basis of didactic teaching at primary school. A national conference: Training of mathematics teachers in primary school. Oranim College.
2. Burger, W.F. & Shaughnessy, J.M. (1986). Characterizing the Van Hiele Leevels of Development in Geometry, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17, 31-48.
3. Clements, D.H. & Sarama, J. (2000). Young Children's Ideas about Geometric Shapes. Teaching Children Mathematics, 6(8), 482-488.
4. Crowley, M.L. (1987). The Van Hiele Model of the Development of Geometry Thoughts. NCTM Yearbook (pp.1-16). NCTM.
5. David, H. (2007). Using the errors of students as a lever to improve learning and deepen mathematical knowledge. AL"H=Newsletter for math teachers, 37, 81-92.
6. Hershkovitz, R. (1992). Cognitive aspects of teaching and learning Geometry, Part II. AL"H=Newsletter for math teachers, 10, 20-27.
7. Hershkovitz, R. (1991). Cognitive aspects of teaching and learning Geometry, Part I. AL"H=Newsletter for math teachers, 9, 28-34.
8. Hershkovitz, R. (1987). The theory of Van Hiele learning geometry. In A. Friedlander (Ed.), Teaching Geometry – A collection of sources and methodology lessons Activities. Weizmann Institute of Science.

9. Hershkovitz, R. & Vinner, S. (1984). Children’s concept in Elementary Geometry: A Reflection of Teacher’s Concepts? In B. Southwell, R. Eyland, M. Cooper, J. Conroy & K. Collis (Eds.), Eichth International Conference for the P.M.E. (pp. 63-69). Mathematics Association of New South Wales.
10. Lester, F. (Ed.). (2007). Second handbook of research in mathematics learning and teaching. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
11. Patkin, D. (1990). The effect of computer use at self-learning in individual learning system or couples about perception and understanding of Euclidean geometry concepts at different thinking levels among high school students. Doctoral thesis. Tel Aviv University.
12. Patkin, D. (1994). The effect of computer use on geometric thinking levels, AL"H=Newsletter for math teachers, 15, 29-36.
13. Reis, R., Van Dormoln-Brahmi, N. & Patkin, D. (1997). To do math: The Van Hiele theory and teaching of geometry. Tomorrow, 98 - a model to promote mathematics education, secondary school. Technion.
14. Senk, S.L. (1984). Research a Curriculum Development Based on the van Hiele Model of Geometric Thought. Prepared for the Working Group on Geometry, Spatial Awareness and Visualization. Fifth International Congress on Mathematics Education, Adelaide.
15. Skemp, R. (1978). Relational Understanding and Instrumental Understanding. Arithmetic Teacher, 26(3), 9-15.
16. Tepper, A. (1986). Color effects and computer-oriented teaching impact on the understanding of Euclidean geometry concepts. MA thesis. School of Education, Tel Aviv University.
17. Thomas, B.F. (2000). Implications of Research on Children Understands of Geometry. Teaching Children Mathematics, 6(9), 572-576.
18. Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele Levels and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry (Final Report). University of Chicago.
19. Usiskin, Z., & Senk, S. (1990). Evaluating a test of van Hiele levels: A response to Crowley and Wilson. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21(3), 242-45.
20. Vinitzky, G. & Reiss, R. (2003). Perceptions of concepts in geometry math teachers. A national conference: Training of mathematics teachers in primary school. Oranim College.
21. Vinner, S. (1993). The teaching of mathematics - Thoughts and phenomena from the diary of a teacher researcher. AL"H=Newsletter for math teachers, 12, 23-27.
22. Vinner, S. (1991). The Role of Definitions in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. In D. Tall (Ed.), Advanced Mathematical Thinking (pp. 65-81). Kluwer.
23. Vinner, S. & Hershkovitz, R. (1983). On concept formation in geometry. Zentralblatt feur didacttik der mathematik,