Evaluation of 5th Grade Mathematics Textbook in terms of Visual and Content

Öz

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the 5th-grade mathematics textbook prepared with a student-centred and skill-oriented approach in line with the Turkish Century Education Model in terms of visual and content elements. In the research, which was designed based on the case study model, the data were collected through systematic document analysis and analyzed with a content analysis approach. Within the scope of the analysis, the order of themes, the comparison of the time allocated in the textbook and the curriculum, the distribution of task types, the appropriateness of visual elements, the distribution of questions according to mental areas and the use of instructional technologies were discussed in detail. The findings show that 5th grade mathematics textbooks were prepared skills-based and the number of pages increased. However, in some themes, inconsistencies were found between the time allocated in the program and the time allocated in the textbook. When the types of mathematical tasks were examined, it was determined that the most frequently used task type was examples. Still, it was emphasized that problems that support higher-order thinking skills and are related to daily life should be increased. In terms of instructional technologies, the most commonly used tools were found to be QR codes and e-content. It was also found that it is important to consider the cognitive and physiological needs of students in the selection and design of visual elements. The findings indicate that the textbooks do not fully comply with international standards, but an approach that focuses on mathematical skills is adopted. In the future, updating mathematics textbooks and similarly analyzing other grade levels may contribute to future studies in mathematics education.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Mathematics Education
• Mathematics textbook
• Curriculum

5.Sınıf Matematik Ders Kitabının Görsel ve İçerik Açısından Değerlendirmesi

Öz

Bu araştırmanın amacı, Türkiye Yüzyılı Maarif Modeli doğrultusunda öğrenci merkezli ve beceri odaklı bir yaklaşımla hazırlanan 5. sınıf matematik ders kitabını görsel ve içerik unsurları açısından değerlendirmektir. Durum çalışması modeli temelinde desenlenen araştırmada, veriler sistematik doküman incelemesi yöntemiyle toplanmış ve içerik analizi yaklaşımıyla incelenmiştir. Analiz kapsamında, temaların sıralanışı, ders kitabında ve öğretim programında ayrılan sürelerin karşılaştırılması, görev türlerinin dağılımı, görsel öğelerin uygunluğu, zihinsel alanlara göre soru dağılımı ve öğretim teknolojilerinin kullanımı detaylı bir şekilde ele alınmıştır. Bulgular, 5. sınıf matematik ders kitaplarının beceri temelli olarak hazırlandığını ve sayfa sayısının arttığını göstermektedir. Ancak, bazı temalarda programda öngörülen sürelerle ders kitabında ayrılan süreler arasında uyumsuzluklar tespit edilmiştir. Matematiksel görev türleri incelendiğinde, en sık kullanılan görev türünün örnekler olduğu belirlenmiş, ancak üst düzey düşünme becerilerini destekleyen ve günlük yaşamla bağlantılı problemlerin artırılması gerektiği vurgulanmıştır. Öğretim teknolojileri açısından en yaygın kullanılan araçların QR kodlar ve e-içerikler olduğu saptanmıştır. Ayrıca, görsel öğelerin seçimi ve tasarımında, öğrencilerin bilişsel ve fizyolojik ihtiyaçlarının dikkate alınmasının önemli olduğu ortaya konmuştur. Elde edilen bulgular, ders kitaplarının uluslararası standartlara tam olarak uyum sağlamadığını ancak matematiksel becerilere odaklanan bir yaklaşım benimsendiğini göstermektedir. Gelecekte, matematik ders kitaplarının güncellenmesi ve diğer sınıf seviyelerinin de benzer şekilde analiz edilmesi, matematik eğitimi alanında yapılacak çalışmalara katkı sağlayabilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Matematik Eğitimi
• Matematik ders kitabı
• Öğretim programı

Kaynakça

1. Amit, M., & Fried, M. (2002). Research, reform and times of change. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 355-382). LEA Publishers.
2. Arslan, S., & Özpınar, İ. (2009). Evaluation of 6th grade elementary mathematics textbooks in line with teacher opinions. Dicle University Ziya Gökalp Education Faculty Journal, (12), 97-113. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/zgefd/issue/47955/606752
3. Başaran, İ. E. (2007). Eğitim psikolojisi [Educational psychology]. Nobel Publishing.
4. Başer, N. (2012). Elementary teachers' ways of using mathematics textbooks and their views about students' ways of using mathematics textbooks and mathematics textbooks (Publication No. 321085) [Master's thesis, Bursa Uludağ University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
5. Bingölbali, E., & Özdiner, M. (2022). Examination of primary and secondary school mathematics textbook activities in terms of real-life connections. Afyon Kocatepe University Journal of Social Sciences, 24(1), 45-65. https://doi.org/10.32709/akusosbil.885878
6. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain. David McKay Company.
7. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics: Didactique des mathématiques, 1970–1990 (N. Balacheff, M. Cooper, R. Sutherland, & V. Warfield, Eds. & Trans.). Kluwer Academic.
8. Clark, R. C., & Lyons, C. (2010). Graphics for learning: Proven guidelines for planning, designing, and evaluating visuals in training materials. John Wiley & Sons.

9. Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
10. Cuoco, A. (2000). Meta-problems in mathematics. College Mathematics Journal, 31(5), 373-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/07468342.2000.11974176
11. Çakır, İ. (2009). Evaluation of fifth grade elementary mathematics textbooks in line with teacher and student opinions (Publication No. 228935) [Master's thesis, Çukurova University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
12. Demirel, Ö. (2009). Eğitimde program geliştirme: Kuramdan uygulamaya [Curriculum development in education: From theory to practice]. Pegem Academic Publishing.
13. Dursun, F., & Eşgi, N. (2008). Evaluation of 4th and 5th-grade social studies textbooks according to visual design principles. Gazi University Journal of Industrial Arts Education, 22, 21-34. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/cusosbil/issue/32277/353146
14. Engström, L. (2004, July). Examples from teachers' strategies using a dynamic geometry program in upper secondary school. Paper presented at ICME-10, Copenhagen, Denmark.
15. Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: Development status and directions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45, 633-646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0539-x
16. Floden, R. E. (2002). The measurement of opportunity to learn. In A. C. Porter & A. Gamoran (Eds.), Methodological advances in cross-national surveys of educational achievements (pp. 231-266). National Academy Press.
17. Ginsburg, A., & Leinwand, S. (2005, November 11–13). Singapore math: Can it help close the U.S. mathematics learning gap? Paper presented at CSMC's First International U.S. Conference on Mathematics Curriculum, Chicago, IL.
18. Güder, Y., & Tutak, T. (2012). Views and thoughts of 5th grade elementary teachers about mathematics textbook. Dicle University Ziya Gökalp Education Faculty Journal, 19, 16-28. https://izlik.org/JA68DD42YL
19. Güzel, M., Bozkurt, A., & Özmantar, M. (2021). Examination of mathematics teachers' evaluations and interventions in activity design and implementation processes. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 9(18), 513-545. https://doi.org/10.18009/jcer.880304
20. Ildırı, A. (2009). Examination of problems in fifth grade elementary mathematics textbook and student workbook and determination of teacher opinions regarding these problems (Publication No. 241522) [Master's thesis, Çukurova University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
21. Incikabi, L. (2011). Analysis of grades 6 through 8 geometry education in Turkey after the reform movement of 2004 [Doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University].
22. Işık, C. (2008). Factors affecting mathematics teachers' use of mathematics textbooks and their expectations in elementary second level. Kastamonu Education Journal, 16(1), 163-176. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefdergi/issue/49101/626569
23. Korkutan, E., & Oflaz, G. (2024). Analysis of topics in geometry and measurement learning areas in secondary school textbooks according to realistic mathematics education principles. Journal of Uludag University Faculty of Education, 37(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.19171/uefad.1302294
24. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, (30), 73-84. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1427
25. Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
26. Merriam, S. B. (2018). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (S. Turan, Trans.). Nobel Publishing. (Original work published 2009)
27. Mersin, N., & Karabörk, M. A. (2021). The comparison of math textbooks in Turkey and Singapore in terms of technology integration. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(1), 552-573. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1285814
28. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage.
29. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2009). Elementary mathematics curriculum. Komisyon.
30. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2023). Century of Turkish Education Model: Mathematics domain skills. https://tymm.meb.gov.tr/beceriler/matematik-alan-becerileri
31. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2024). Century of Turkish Education Model: Common text. MoNE Publications. https://hoshaberio.meb.k12.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/76/01/721342/dosyalar/2024_06/11231346_2024programortakmetinonayli.pdf
32. Mullis, I. V. S., & Martin, M. O. (Eds.). (2017). TIMSS 2019 Assessment Frameworks. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/frameworks/
33. Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
34. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2020). Catalyzing change in early childhood and elementary mathematics: Initiating critical conversations.
35. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
36. Sak, R., Şahin Sak, İ. T., Öneren Şendil, Ç., & Nas, E. (2021). Document analysis as a research method. Kocaeli University Journal of Education, 4(1), 227-256. https://doi.org/10.33400/kuje.843306
37. Semerci, Ç., & Semerci, N. (2004). A general evaluation of elementary (1st-5th grade) mathematics textbooks. National Education Journal, 162, 1-5. https://dhgm.meb.gov.tr/yayimlar/dergiler/Milli_Egitim_Dergisi/162/semerci.htm
38. Severin, E., & Capota, C. (2011). The use of technology in education: Lessons from South Korea. Inter-American Development Bank.
39. Sevimli, E., & Kül, Ü. (2015). Evaluation of mathematics textbook contents in terms of technological suitability: Secondary school example. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(1), 308-331. https://doi.org/10.17522/nefefmed.11253
40. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2000). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development. Teachers College Press. Sweller, J., Ayres, P., & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Cognitive load theory. Springer.
41. Thomson, S., & Fleming, N. (2004). Summing it up: Mathematics achievement in Australian schools in TIMSS 2002. Australian Council for Educational Research.
42. Toptaş, V., Elkatmış, M., & Karaca, T. (2012). Examination of learning areas of the 4th-grade elementary mathematics curriculum and mental areas of questions in the mathematics student workbook according to TIMSS. Ahi Evran University Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty , 13(1), 17-29. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/kefad/issue/59493/855089
43. Törnroos, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn and student achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.11.005
44. Tuna, A., & Biber, A. Ç. (2017). Comparative analysis of learning areas in secondary school mathematics books according to Bloom's taxonomy. Ondokuz Mayıs University Journal of Education Faculty, 36(1), 161-174. https://doi.org/10.7822/omuefd.327396
45. Ubuz, B., Erbağ, A. K., Çetinkaya, B., & Özgeldi, M. (2010). Exploring the quality of the mathematical tasks in the new Turkish elementary school mathematics curriculum guidebook: The case of algebra. ZDM Mathematics Education, 42, 483-491. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-010-0258-5
46. Yeğit, H. (2020). Examination and comparison of mathematics textbooks taught in Turkey and Germany in terms of mathematical literacy (Publication No. 640256) [Master's thesis, Bursa Uludağ University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
47. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2013). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in social sciences] (9th ed.). Seçkin Publishing.
48. Zhu, Y., & Fan, L. (2004, July 4–11). An analysis of the representation of problem types in Chinese and US mathematics textbooks. Paper presented at ICME-10 Discussion Group 14, Copenhagen, Denmark.