İlköğretim Matematik Öğretmen Adaylarının Matematik Öğretimi Yeterliklerine İlişkin Görüşleri

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, ilköğretim matematik öğretmen adaylarının matematik öğretimi yeterliklerine ilişkin görüşlerinin belirlenmesidir. Araştırma verilerinin toplanması için “Matematik öğretimi yeterlikleri” ölçeği kullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın örneklemini 3 farklı üniversitenin ilköğretim matematik öğretmenliği bölümü son sınıfında okumakta olan 300 öğretmen adayı oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma tarama modelinde betimsel bir çalışmadır. Araştırma verilerinin analizi için betimsel istatistik yöntemleri kullanılmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları öğretmen adaylarının kendilerini problem çözme, iletişim, ilişkilendirme ve akıl yürütme yeterlikleri bakımından genel olarak yeterli gördüklerini ortaya koymuştur. Sonuçta araştırma bulgularına dayalı olarak öğretmen adaylarının matematik öğretimi yeterliklerini geliştirmeye yönelik önerilerde bulunulmuştur

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İlköğretim Matematik Öğretimi, Öğretmen Adayları, Matematik Öğretimi Yeterliği, Öğretmen Yeterliği.

Pre-service Elementary Math Teachers’ Opinions About Mathematics Teaching Competencies

Öz

The purpose of this study is to determine pre-service elemantary math teachers’ opinions about mathematics teaching competence. To collect research data, ‘Matematics teaching competencies’ instrument was used. The sample of the study consisted of 300 preservice elemantary mathematics teachers, whom were their last year to graduate, from 3 different university in Turkey. Research was a descriptive study which was a survey model. Descriptive statistic methods was used to analyze the research data. Research results indicated that Pre-service mathematics teachers found themselves sufficient in terms of problem solving, communication, associating and reasoning competencies. As a result of this study suggestions were developed towards improving teacher candidates’ mathematics teaching competency

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Elementary Mathematics Teaching, Pre-service Teachers, Mathematics Teaching, Teacher Competency

Kaynakça

1. Ashton, P. T. (1985). Motivation and the teacher’s sense of efficacy. In C. Ames & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education: Vol. 2. The classroom milieu (pp. 141-174). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
2. Ashton, P.T., & Webb, R. B. (1986). Making a difference: Teachers’ sense of efficacy and student achievement. New York: Longman.
3. Altun, M. & Arslan, Ç. (2006). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Problem Çözme Stratejilerini Öğrenmeleri Üzerine Bir Çalışma. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, XIX(1): 1-21.
4. Ball, D., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2009). Content knowledge for teaching. What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389–407.
5. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychology Review, 84, 191-215.
6. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148.
8. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.

9. Baykul, Y. (2009). İlköğretimde matematik öğretimi: 6.-8. sınıflar. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık.
10. Berman, P., & McLauglin, M. (1977). Federal programs supporting education change: Vol. 7. Factors affecting implementation and continuation (Report No. R-1589/7-HEW). Santa Monica, CA: Rand. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 140 432).
11. Boaler, J. (2002). Learning from teaching: Exploring the relationship between reform curriculum and equity. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 239-258.
12. Bright, G. W. (1999). Helping elementary and middle grades preservice teachers understand and develop mathematical reasoning. Developing Mathematical Reasoning in Grades K-12, (Lee V. Stiff, 1999 editor), NCTM, Reston: Virginia.
13. Briscoe, C., & Stout, D. (2001). Prospective elementary teachers' use of mathematical reasoning in solving a lever mechanics problem. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5), 228-235.
14. Brown, C. A., & Borko, H. (1992). Becoming a mathematics teacher. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 209-239). New York, NY: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
15. Bursal, M. (2010). Turkish preservice elementary teachers’self-efficacy beliefs regarding mathematics and science teaching. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(4), 649-666.
16. Burton, L. (1984). Mathematics thinking: The struggle for meaning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 15(1), 35-49.
17. Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö.E., Karadeniz, Ş. ve Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri (13.baskı). Ankara: Pegem.
18. Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
19. Cai, J., Jakabcsin, M. S., & Lane, S. (1996). Assessing students' mathematical communication. School Science and Mathematics, 96(5), 238-246.
20. Cantrell P, Young S., & Moore A. (2003). Factors affecting science teaching efficacy of pre-service elementary teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14: 177-192.
21. Capacity Building Series (CBS). (2010). Communication in the mathematics classroom. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research /CBS_Communication_Mathematics.pdf adresinden 31 Aralık 2013 tarihinde ulaşılmıştır.
22. Cockcroft, W. H. (1982). Mathematics counts. Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Teaching of Mathematics in Schools under the Chairmanship of Dr. W. H. Cockcroft. London: HMSO
23. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research Methods in Education, 6th edition. New York, NY: Routledge.
24. Cooney, T. J. (1985). A beginning teacher's view of problem solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 324-336.
25. Council, A. E. (1990). A National Statement on Mathematics for Australian Schools. A Joint Project of the States, Territories and the Commonwealth of Australia Initiated by the Australian Education Council. ERIC Clearinghouse.
26. Çelik, D. & Sağlam-Arslan, A. (2012). Öğretmen Adaylarının Çoklu Gösterimleri Kullanma Becerilerinin Analizi. Ilkogretim Online, 11(1).
27. De Bock, D., Verschaffel, L., & Janssens, D. (1998). The predominance of the linear model in secondary school students' solutions of word problems involving length and area of similar plane figures. Educational Studies in Mathematics,35(1), 65-83.
28. De Corte, E., & Somers, R. (1982). Estimating the outcome of a task as a heuristic strategy in arithmetic problem-solving-a teaching experiment with 6th-graders. Human learning, 1(2), 105-121.
29. Downing, J. E., Filer, J. D., & Chamberlain, R. A. (1997). Science Process Skills and Attitudes of Preservice Elementary Teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 11(2), 57-64.
30. European Comission. (2013). Supporting teacher competence development for better learning outcomes. Thematic Working Group ‘Teacher Professional Development’, http://ec.europa.eu/education/schooleducation/doc/teachercomp_en.pdf adresinden 31 Aralık 2013 tarihinde ulaşılmıştır.
31. Even, R. (1998). Factors involved in linking representations of functions. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 17(1), 105-121.
32. Fennema, E., & Franke, M. L. (1992). Teachers' knowledge and its impact. In A.D. Grouws (Ed), (1992). Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. , (pp. 147-164). New York, NY, England: Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc.
33. Fitzgerald, J. F. (1996). Proof in mathematics education. Journal of Education. Vol. 178, No. 1, 35-45.
34. Hacıömeroğlu, G. (2013). Sınıf Öğretmeni Adaylarının Matematik Öğretimine İlişkin Yeterlik ve Sınıf Yönetimi İnançları. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 26(1), 1-18.
35. Harper, N. W., & Daane, C. J. (1998). Causes and reduction of math anxiety in preservice elementary teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 19(4), 29- 38.
36. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 524-549.
37. Hiebert, J. (1992). Reflection and communication: Cognitive considerations in school mathematics reform. International Journal of Educational Research,17(5), 439-456.
38. Hiebert, J., & Carpenter, T. P. (1992). Learning and teaching with understanding. In Grouws, D. A. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning (pp. 65-97). New York: Macmillan.
39. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural Equation Modelling: Guidelines for Determining Model Fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6(1), 53-60.
40. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55.
41. Janssen, R., De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., Knoors, E., & Colémont, A. (2002). National assessment of new standards for mathematics in elementary education in Flanders. Educational Research and Evaluation, 8(2), 197- 225.
42. Karasar, N. (2004). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.
43. Keller, B. A., & Hirsch, C. R., (1998). Student Preferences for Representations of Functions. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 29( 1), 1-17.
44. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, Third Edition. New York: The Guilford Press.
45. Kuran, K. (2002). Öğretmenlik Mesleği. Öğretmenlik Mesleğine Giriş (ed. Türkoğlu, A.). Mikro Yayıncılık. Ankara.
46. Leitzel, J. R. (1991). A Call for Change: Recommendations for the Mathematical Preparation of Teachers of Mathematics. An MAA Report. Mathematical Association of America, 1529 18th Street NW, Washington, DC 20036..
47. Lester, F. K., Garofalo, J., & Kroll, D. L. (1989). Self-confidence, interest, beliefs, and metacognition: Key influences on problem-solving behavior. In Affect and mathematical problem solving (pp. 75-88). Springer New York.
48. Marshall, J. C., Horton, R., Igo, B. L., & Switzer, D. M. (2009). K-12 science and mathematics teachers’ beliefs about and use of inquiry in the classroom.International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 575-596.
49. McDonnell, L., Pascal, A., Pauly, E., Zellman, G., Sumner, G., & Thompson, V. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading programs in selected Los Angeles minority schools (Report No. R-2007- LAUSD). Santa Monica, CA: RAND. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 130 243).
50. M.E.B. (2005). İlköğretim Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programı ve Kılavuzu: 6-8. Sınıflar. Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.
51. M.E.B. (2008a). Öğretmenlik mesleği genel yeterlikleri. Ankara: MEB Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Eğitimi Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.
52. M.E.B. (2008b). Matematik öğretmeni özel alan yeterlikleri. Ankara: MEB Öğretmen Yetiştirme ve Eğitimi Genel Müdürlüğü. Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.
53. Mji, A., & Arigbabu, A. A. (2012). Relationships Between and among Pre-service Mathematics Teachers’ Conceptions, Efficacy Beliefs and Anxiety. Int J Edu Sci, 4(3), 261-270.
54. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NTCM]. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
55. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NTCM]. (1991).Professional standarts for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
56. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NTCM]. (2000).Principles and Standarts for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
57. Pajares, F., & Kranzler, J. (1995). Self-efficacy beliefs and general mental ability in mathematical problem-solving. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 20(4), 426-443.
58. Pajares, F. & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of Self-Efficacy and Self-Concept Beliefs in Mathematical Problem Solving: A Path Analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193-203.
59. Philippou, G. N., & Christou, C. (1998). The effects of a preparatory mathematics program in changing prospective teachers' attitudes towards mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 35, 189-206.
60. Philippou, G., & Christou, C. (2003). A Study of the Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Beliefs of Primary Teachers. In G. Leder, E. Pehkonen ve G.
61. Törner (Eds.), Beliefs: A Hidden Variable in Mathematics Education? (Vol. 31, pp. 211-231): Springer Netherlands.
62. Piez, C. M., & Voxman, M. H. (1997). Multiple representations—Using different perspectives to form a clearer picture. The Mathematics Teacher, 90(2), 164-166.
63. Putney, L. D. & Cass, M. (1998.), Preservice teacher attitudes toward mathematics: Improvement through manipulative approach. College Student Journal, 32(4), 626-633.
64. Reid, D. A., (2002). Describing reasoning in early elementary school mathematics. Teaching Children Mathematics, 234-237.
65. Romberg, T. A. (1992). Perspectives on scholarship and research methods. In D.
66. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 49-64). New York: Macmillan.
67. Rule, A. C., & Harrell, M. H. (2006). Symbolic drawings reveal changes in preservice teacher mathematics attitudes after a mathematics methods course.School Science and Mathematics, 106(6), 241-258.
68. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). A framework for the analysis of mathematical behavior. In D. B. McLeod and V. M. Adams (eds.), Aspects of Mathematical Thinking: A Theoretical Overview, pp. 11-45.
69. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-371). New York: Macmillan.
70. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1994). Reflections on doing and teaching mathematics. In A.
71. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking andproblem solving (pp. 53- 70). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
72. Schuck, S., & Grootenboer, P. J. (2004). Affective issues in mathematics education. In B. Perry, C. Diezmann, ve G. Anthony (Eds.), Review of mathematics education in Australasia 2000–2003 (pp. 53–74). Sydney: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
73. Silver, E. A., & Smith, M. S. (1996). Building discourse communities in mathematics classrooms. Communication in mathematics K–12 and beyond.
74. Snoek, M., & Wıelenga, D. (2003). XI. Teacher Education in the Netherlands: Changing Gears1. Studies on Higher Education, 245.
75. Stanic, G., & Kilpatrick, J. (1989). Historical perspectives on problem solving in the mathematics curriculum. The teaching and assessing of mathematical problem solving, 3, 1-22.
76. Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American educational research journal, 33(2), 455-488.
77. Sternberg, R. J. (1999). The nature of mathematical reasoning. In Lee V. Stiff (Ed.), Developing mathematical reasoning in grades K-12 / 1999 yearbook. Reston, Virginia: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
78. Swars, S. (2005). Examining perceptions of mathematics teaching effectiveness among elementary preservice teachers with differing levels of mathematics teacher efficacy. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 32(2), 139-146.
79. Swars, S. L., Daane, C. J., & Giesen, J. (2006). Mathematics anxiety and mathematics teacher efficacy: What is the relationship in elementary preservice teachers? School Science and Mathematics, 106, 306–15.
80. Swars, S., Hart, L. C., Smith, S. Z., Smith, M. E., & Tolar, T. (2007). A Longitudinal Study of Elementary Pre‐service Teachers' Mathematics Beliefs and Content Knowledge. School Science and Mathematics, 107(8), 325-335.
81. Şeker, H., Deniz, S., & Görgen, İ. (2005). Tezsiz Yüksek Lisans Öğretmen Adaylarının Öğretmenlik Yeterlikleri Üzerine Değerlendirmeleri. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Yönetimi Dergisi, 42, 237-253.
82. Thompson, A. (1992). Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: A synthesis of the research. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 127-146). New York: Macmillan. Treffers, A., De Moor, E., & Feijs, E. (1989). Het rekenrek 1 ve 2.
83. Tschannen-Moran, M., Woolfolk Hoy, A., & Hoy, W.K. (1998). Teacher Efficacy: Its Meaning and Measure. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 202- 248.
84. Utley, J., Moseley, C., & Bryant, R. (2005). Relationship between science and mathematics teaching efficacy of preservice elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(2), 82-87.
85. Van Essen, G. (1991). Heurictics and arithmetic word problems. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, State University Amsterdam, Amsterdam.
86. Van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap, M. (1997). Ruimtelijk Structuurplan Vlaanderen. Brussel: Ministerie van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap.
87. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., Lasure, S., Van Vaerenbergh, G., Bogaerts, H., ve Ratinckx, E. (1999). Learning to solve mathematical application problems: A design experiment with fifth graders. Mathematical thinking and learning, 1(3), 195-229.
88. Wilson, S., & Thornton, S. (2007). The factor that makes us more effective teachers”: Two preservice primary teachers’ experience of bibliotherapy.Mathematics Teacher Education and Development, 9, 21- 35.
89. Xenofontos, C., & Andrews, P. (2008). Teachers’ beliefs about mathematical problem solving, their problem solving competence and the impact on instruction: A case study of three Cypriot primary teachers. Article presented at the 11th International Congress on Mathematical Education, under Topic Study Group 19. Research and development in problem solving in mathematics education.