Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Evaluation of Enriched Learning Environment in the Context of Mathematical Reasoning from the Perspective of the Students and their Teacher Cover

Evaluation of Enriched Learning Environment in the Context of Mathematical Reasoning from the Perspective of the Students and their Teacher

Open Access
|Dec 2020

References

  1. Algani, Y. M., & Eshan, J. (2019). Reasons and suggested solutions for low-level academic achievement in mathematics. International e-Journal of Educational Studies (IEJES), 3(6), 181–190. doi: 10.31458/iejes.60488410.31458/iejes.604884
  2. Çetin, Y., & Mirasyedioglu, Ş. (2019). Teknoloji destekli probleme dayalı öğretim uygula-malarının matematik başarısına etkisi [The effects of the technology supported problem-based learning activities on students’ achievement in mathematics]. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 7(13), 13–34. doi: 10.18009/jcer.49490710.18009/jcer.494907
  3. Dovis, S., Van der Oord, S., Wiers, R. W., & Prins, P. J. (2013). What part of working memory is not working in ADHD? Short-term memory, the central executive and effects of reinforcement. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 41(6), 901–917.10.1007/s10802-013-9729-9
  4. Erdem, E., Fırat, T., & Gürbüz, R. (2019). Improving mathematical reasoning and mathematics attitude of disadvantaged children in rural regions. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 7(14), 673–697. doi: 10.18009/jcer.62874210.18009/jcer.628742
  5. Erdem, E. (2015). Zenginleştirilmiş öğrenme ortamının matematiksel muhakeme ve tutuma etkisi [The effect of enriched learning environment on mathematical reasoning and attitude]. (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Atatürk University, Erzurum.
  6. Erdem, E., Gürbüz, R., & Duran, H. (2011). An investigation of mathematics used in daily life from past to present: Theory out practice in. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 2(3), 232–246.
  7. Ertem-Akbaş, E. (2019). Eğitim bilişim ağı (EBA) destekli matematik öğretiminin 5. sınıf kesir konusunda öğrenci başarılarına etkisi [The impact of EIN (educational informatics network) assisted mathematics teaching in 5th grade fractions on students’ achievements]. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 7(13), 120–145. doi: 10.18009/53195310.18009/jcer.531953
  8. Gencel, İ. E. (2007). Kolb’ün deneyimsel öğrenme kuramına dayalı öğrenme stilleri envanteri–III’ü Türkçeye uyarlama çalışmasi [Inventory of learning styles based on the experiential learning theory of Kolb – a study of adapting III to Turkish]. Dokuz Eylul University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 9(2), 120–139.
  9. Gök, M. (2020). Sınıf öğretmeni adayları.nın bir mobil oyun deneyimi: aritmetiğin temel teoremi [A mobile game experience of pre-service elementary teachers: The fundamental theorem of arithmetic]. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 8(15), 41–74. doi: 10.18009/jcer.64373210.18009/jcer.643732
  10. Heasly, B., Lindner, J., Iliško, Dz., & Salīte, I. (2020). From initiatives, to insights, to implementation of the sustainability and securitability Agenda for 2030. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 11(1), 1–4.10.2478/dcse-2020-0001
  11. Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77–87.10.1080/0305569032000159750
  12. Kasmer, L., & Kim, O. K. (2011). Using prediction to promote mathematical understanding and reasoning. School Science and Mathematics, 111(1), 20–33.10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00056.x
  13. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). The Kolb learning style inventory-Version 3.1: 2005 technical specifications. Boston, MA: Hay Resources Direct.
  14. Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning style inventory-version 3.1. Boston: Hay Group.
  15. Kramarski, B., & Zeichner, O. (2001). Using technology to enhance mathematical reasoning: Effects of feedback and self-regulation learning. Educational Media International, 38(2–3), 77–82.10.1080/09523980110041458
  16. Kramarski, B., & Zoldan, S. (2008). Using errors as springboards for enhancing mathematical reasoning with three metacognitive approaches. The Journal of Educational Research, 102(2), 137–151.10.3200/JOER.102.2.137-151
  17. Kramarski, B., Mevarech, Z. R., & Lieberman A. (2001). Effects of multilevel versus unilevel metacognitive training on mathematical reasoning. Journal of Educational Research, 94(5), 292–300.10.1080/00220670109598765
  18. Kükey, E., Aslaner, R., & Tutak, T. (2019). Matematiksel düşünmenin varsayımda bulunma bileşeni kapsamında ortaokul öğrencilerinin kullandıkları problem çözme stratejilerinin incelenmesi [An investigation of the problem solving strategies used of middle school students for of the assumption component of mathematical thinking]. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 7(13), 146–170.10.18009/jcer.535610
  19. Merriam, S. M. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Fransisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  20. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  21. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2015). Ortaokul matematik dersi (5, 6, 7 ve 8. sınıflar) öğretim programı [Secondary school mathematics lesson (grades 5–8) curriculum]. Ankara: TTKB.
  22. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018a). Matematik dersi öğretim programı (İlkokul ve ortaokul 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar) [Mathematics curriculum (primary and secondary school grades 1–8)]. Ankara: TTKB.
  23. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018b). 2018 Liselere geçiş sistemi (LGS): Merkezi sınavla yerleşen öğrencilerin performansı. Eğitim analiz değerlendirme raporları serisi [2018 high school transition system (LGS): Performance of students settled by central exam. Education analysis evaluation reports series]. Ankara.
  24. Naksutthi, K., & Chidmongkol, S. (2017). Effect of organizing mathematics learning activities using proof mapping technique to write geometric proofs on geometric reasoning ability of eighth grade students. An Online Journal of Education, 12(2), 18–31.
  25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: Virginia.
  26. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University.10.1017/CBO9781139173469
  27. Ok, G. (2020). The impact of the contents of educational informatics network on classroom participation of students in teaching the subject of the musculoskeletal system. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 8(15), 224–240. doi: 10.18009/jcer.68436210.18009/jcer.684362
  28. Özgen, K., & Alkan, H. (2014). The effects of learning activities corresponding with students’ learning styles on academic success and attitude within the scope of constructivist learning approach: The case of the concepts of function and derivative. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 5(1), 1–38. doi: 10.16949/turcomat.3529910.16949/turcomat.35299
  29. Pape, S. J., Bell. C. V., & Yetkin, I. E. (2003). Developing mathematical thinking and self-regulated learning: A teaching experiment in a seventh-grade mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 53, 179–202.10.1023/A:1026062121857
  30. Pijls, M., Dekker, R., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. (2007). Reconstruction of a collaborative mathematical learning process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65, 309–329. doi: 10.1007/s10649-006-9051-310.1007/s10649-006-9051-3
  31. Polaki, M. V. (2002). Using instruction to identify key features of Basotho elementary students’ growth in probabilistic thinking. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 4(4), 285–313.10.1207/S15327833MTL0404_01
  32. Salīte, I. (2008). Educational action research for sustainability: Constructing a vision for the future in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 10, 5–16.10.2478/v10099-009-0021-6
  33. Salīte, I., Fjodorova, I., Meihami, H., Ivanova, I., Iliško, Dz., & Gholami, J. (2020). JTES approaches to sustainability: Current practices and new perspectives for a more sustainable world. Journal of Teacher Education for Sustainability, 21(2), 1–4.10.2478/jtes-2019-0012
  34. Topuz, F., & Birgin, O. (2020). Yedinci sınıf “çember ve daire” konusunda geliştirilen geogebra destekli öğretim materyaline ve öğrenme ortamına ilişkin öğrenci görüşleri [Students’ views about geogebra-supported teaching material and learning environment developed for “circle and disc” subject at the 7th grade]. Journal of Computer and Education Research, 8(15), 1–27. doi: 10.18009/jcer.63814210.18009/jcer.638142
  35. Tum, A., & Kutluca, T. (2019). Matematiksel muhakeme bağlamında tam sayılar ve kesirler konularına yönelik zenginleştirilmiş öğrenme etkinlikleri [Enriched learning activities for integers and fractions in the context of mathematical reasoning]. In Proceedings Book 8th Eurasian Conference on Language and Social Sciences (p. 47–70), October 18–20, Antalya, Turkey. doi: 10.35578/eclss.52775
  36. Yıldırım, A., & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştirma yöntemleri (10. Baskı) [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.
Language: English
Page range: 85 - 105
Published on: Dec 31, 2020
Published by: Daugavpils University
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year

© 2020 Tamer Kutluca, Ali Tum, Ali İhsan Mut, published by Daugavpils University
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.