Effect of Personalisation of Instruction on Students’ Motivation to learn Mathematics Word Problems in Nigeria

Yıl 2016, Cilt: 7 Sayı: 3, 486 - 509, 05.12.2016

Adeneye Olarewaju Awofala

https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.267339

Cited By: 2

Öz

This
study investigated the effect of personalisation of instruction on the
motivation to learn mathematics word problems of 450 senior secondary students
in Nigeria within the blueprint of quasi-experimental research of Solomon Four
non-equivalent control group design. It also examined the influence of gender
on motivation to learn mathematics word problems and personalisation was
accomplished by incorporating selected information with students’ personal
preferences into their mathematics word problems. Motivation to learn
mathematics word problems was measured by the mathematics word problems
motivation questionnaire and data collected for the study were analysed using the independent samples t-test and one way ANOVA.
The results showed significant main effect of personalization of instruction on
students’ motivation to learn mathematics word problems whereas no significant
main effect of gender was found on the dependent measure.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Personalisation of instruction, motivation, mathematics, gender

Kaynakça

• Akinsola, M. K., & Awofala, A. O. A. (2008). Effects of problem context and reasoning complexity on mathematics problem solving achievement and transfer of secondary school students. European Journal of Scientific Research, 20(3), 641-651.
• Akinsola, M. K., & Awofala, A. O. A. (2009). Effect of personalisation of instruction on students’ achievement and self-efficacy in mathematics word problems. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 40(3), 389-404.
• Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 261-271.
• Anand, P. G., & Ross, S. M. (1987). Using computer-assisted instruction to personalise arithmetic materials for elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(1), 72-78.
• Anderman, L. H., & Anderman, E. M. (1999). Social predictors of changes in students’ achievement goal orientations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 21-37.
• Anderman, L. H., & Midgley, C. (1997). Changes in personal achievement goals and the perceived classroom goal structures across the transition to middle level school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 22, 269-298.
• Anzelmo-Skelton, N. (2006). Learning style, strategy use, personalisation of mathematical word problems and responses of students with learning disabilities. International Journal of Special Education, 21(1), 1-10.
• Awofala, A. O. A. (2002). Cognitive style, concept mapping and problem solving paradigm and achievement in secondary school mathematics. Unpublished M.Ed Project, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
• Awofala, A. O. A. (2010). Impact of personalised instruction on senior secondary school students’ learning outcomes in mathematics word problems (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Ibadan, Nigeria.
• Awofala, A. O. A. (2011). Effect of personalized, computer-based instruction on students’ achievement in solving two-step word problems. International Journal of Mathematics Trends and Technology, 2(2), 5-10.
• Awofala, A. O. A. (2014). Examining personalisation of instruction, attitudes toward and achievement in mathematics word problems among Nigerian senior secondary school students. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 2(4), 273-288.
• Awofala, A. O. A., Balogun, T. A., & Olagunju, M. A. (2011). Effects of three modes of personalisation on students’ achievement in mathematics word problems in Nigeria. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Retrieved 4 February 2012 from http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/journal/awofala.pdf.
• Awofala, A. O. A., Fatade, A. O., & Olaoluwa, S. A. (2013). Improving students' interest in solving mathematics word problems through personalization of instruction. Indian Streams Research Journal, 3(1), 1-11.
• Ball, D. L., Lubienski, S. T., & Mewborn, D. S. (2001). Research on teaching mathematics: The unsolved problem of teachers' mathematical knowledge. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed., pp. 433-456). New York: Macmillan.
• Barron, K. E., Harackiewicz, J. M., & Tauer, J. M. (2001, April). The interplay of ability and motivational variables over time: A 5 year longitudinal study of predicting college student success. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
• Bates, E. T., & Wiest, L. R. (2004). Impact of personalisation of mathematical word problems on student performance. The Mathematics Educator, 14(2), 17-26.
• Bomia, L., Beluzo, L., Demeester, D., Elander, K., Johnson, M., & Sheldon, B. (1997). The impact of teaching strategies on intrinsic motivation. Champaign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 418 925).
• Choi, J–I., & Hannafin, M. (1997). The effects of instructional context and reasoning complexity on mathematics problem-solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 43-55.
• Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: beneficial effects of contextualisation, personalization, and choice. Journal of Education Psychology, 88(4), 715-730.
• Davis-Dorsey, J. K. (1989). The role of context personalisation and problem rewording in the solving of math word problems (Doctoral dissertation). Memphis State University, USA.
• Davis-Dorsey, J. Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (1991). The role of rewording and context personalisation in the solving of mathematical word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 61-68.
• Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. M. (1989). Stage-environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for young adolescents. In C. Ames, & R. Ames (Eds.), Research on Motivation in Education, vol. 3 (pp. 139–186). San Diego: Academic Press.
• Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., Harold, R. D., & Blumenfeld, P. (1993). Age and gender differences in children’s self and task perceptions during elementary school. Child Development, 64, 830-847.
• Ensign, J. (1997). Linking life experiences to classroom math. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
• Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
• Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Education research-an introduction (6th ed.). White plains N.Y: Longman.
• Glynn, S. M., & Koballa, T. R. Jr. (2006). Motivation to learn college science. In J. J. Mintzes & W. H. Leonard (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching (pp. 25-32). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.
• Gustafson, K. L. (1995). Instructional design models. International Encyclopedia of Education. Husen and T. N. Postlethwaite. Eds. 2nd ed. Vol.5.
• Harriet, J. V., Monique, B., & Gerard, S. (2000). Motivational and gender differences: sixth-grade students’ mathematical problem-solving behaviour. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(2), 308-315.
• Hart, J. M. (1996). The effect of personalised word problems. Teaching Children Mathematics, 2(8), 504-505.
• Jacobs, J. E., Lanza, S., Osgood, D. W., Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield , A. (2002). Changes in children’s self-competence and values: gender and domain differences across grades one through twelve. Child Development, 73(2), 509-527.
• Ku, H-Y., & Sullivan, H. J. (2002). Student performance and attitudes using personalised mathematics instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(1), 21-33.
• Ku, H-Y., & Sullivan, H. J. (2000). Personalisation of mathematics word problems in Taiwan. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 49-59.
• Lopez, C. L. (1989). Levels of personalisation and the achievement and attitudes of Hispanic students (Doctoral dissertation). Arizona State University, USA.
• Lopez, C. L., & Sullivan, H. J. (1992). Effect of personalization of instruction context on the achievement and attitudes of Hispanic students, Education Technology Research and Development, 40(4), 5-13.
• Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Md.Yunus, S. & Ali, W. Z. W. (2009). Motivation in the learning of mathematics. European Journal of Social Sciences, 7(4), 93-101.
• Middleton, J., & Spanias, P. (1999). Motivation for achievement in mathematics: Findings, generalisations, and criticisms of the research. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 65-88.
• Montgomery, D. C. (2013). Design and analysis of experiments (8th ed.). Wiley.
• Murphy, L. O., & Ross, S. M. (1990). Protagonist gender as a design variable in adapting mathematics story problems to learner interests. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 38(3), 27-37.
• Polya, G. (1945/1973). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematics (2nd ed.) New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
• Ryan, A. M., Hicks, L., & Midgley, C. (1997). Social goals, academic goals, and avoiding seeking help in the classroom. Journal of Early Adolescence, 17, 152–171.
• Ryan, A. M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in adolescents' motivation and engagement during middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 437-460.
• Seegers, G., & Boekaerts, M. (1993). Task motivation and mathematics achievement in actual situations. Learning and Instruction, 3, 133-150.
• Seidman, E., Allen, L., Aber, J. L., Mitchell, C., & Feinman, J. (1994). The impact of school transitions in early adolescence on the self-system and perceived social context of poor urban youth. Child Development, 65, 507-522.
• Shihusa, H., & Keraro, F. N. (2009). Using advance organizers to enhance students’ motivation in learning biology. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(4), 413-420.
• Şimşek, N., & Çakır, Ö. (2009). Effect of personalisation on students' achievement and gender factor in mathematics education. International Journal of Social Sciences, 4(4), 278-282.
• Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Cox, K. E., Logan, C., DiCintio, M., & Thomas, C. T. (1998). Creating contexts for involvement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 730-745.
• Urdan, T., Pajares, F., & Lapin, A. Z. (1997, March). Achievement goals, motivation, and performance: A closer look. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
• Verschaffel, L., DeCorte, E., & Vierstraete, H. (1999). Upper elementary school pupils’ difficulties in modeling and solving nonstandard additive word problems involving ordinal numbers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(3), 265-285.
• Verschaffel, L., Greer, B., & De Corte, E. (2000). Making sense of word problems. Taylor & Francis.
• Watt, H. M. G. (2004). Development of adolescents’ self-perceptions, values and task perceptions according to gender and domain in 7th through 11th grade Australian students. Child Development, 75(5), 1556-1574.
• Wiersma, W. & Jurs, S. G. (2005). Research methods in education. An introduction 8th Edition. Boston Pearson Publications.
• Wiest, L. R. (2002). Aspects of word-problem context that influence children’s problem-solving performance. Retrieved 4 February 2012 from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0nvc/is_2_24/ Ai_93211025.
• Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Mac Iver, D., Reuman, D. A., & Midgley, C. (1991). Transitions during early adolescence: Changes in children’s domain-specific self-perceptions and general self-esteem across the transition to junior high school. Developmental Psychology, 27, 552-565.