Research in Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Inquiry of Students' Attitude towards Group Discussion and Presentation in a Course of Mathematics Education

  • Kim, Seong-A (Department of Mathematics Education, Dongguk University)
  • Received : 2014.11.11
  • Accepted : 2014.12.23
  • Published : 2014.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This research is a survey study on students' attitude toward a class employing small group discussion and presentation by the method of free-listing. Participants in this study were students who registered in the course of Mathematical Logics and Writing during 2011 and 2014. Senior students who took the course of theory of mathematics education previously usually registered the course. The class for this course used to be designed as a class adopting group discussion and presentation. Main theme of this research is not to demonstrate some theories or hypothesis on teaching and learning, but rather to inquire students' attitude toward a class employing the constituents first and then through analyzing the results of this study to find practical ideas and strategy for design and implementation of a class which brings cultivation of students' understanding, communication and moreover writing in mathematics. Since the survey was given in the $8^{th}$ week of this class, participants of this research could be expected to have more concrete idea for positive or negative aspects of the classes employing these constituents. We compared both research results of 2011 and 2014 to view any changes in students' attitude. Research results are follows. Students began to think that group discussions and presentation bring out better learning to them. Not to give students psychological burden of discussion and presentation, instructors need to provide comfortable atmosphere through arranging suitable grouping and enough time for discussion. Moreover, simple evaluations criteria for group discussions and presentation should be well structured and more concrete guides for them are required to make students to feel comfortable and to concentrate on the given subject for discussion.

Keywords

References

  1. Ball, D. L.; Thames, M. H. C. & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education 59(5), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
  2. Chalice, D. R. (1995). How to teach a class by the modified Moore method. Am. Math. Mon. 102(4), 317-321. ME 1996b.00994 https://doi.org/10.2307/2974951
  3. Chung, H. & Chung, K. (2003). Development of program for the ability of educational activity on gender. Research Report 2003-220-13 (in Korean). Seoul: Korean Women's Development Institution (KWDI).
  4. Chung, H.; Yoo, J. E. & Kim, M. Y. (2009). Current Situation in Secondary Coeducational Schools and the Future Tasks for Gender-Equal Coeducation (in Korean). Seoul: Korean Women's Development Institution (KWDI).
  5. Cohen, D. W. (1982). A Modified Moore Method for teaching undergraduate mathematics. Am. Math. Mon. 89(7), 473-490. ME 1983x.00083 https://doi.org/10.2307/2321385
  6. Dressler, W. W. (2004). Cognitive anthropology. In: M. Lewia-Beck, A. Bryman & T. F. Liao (Eds.), The Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Method, 139-140. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  7. Fennema, E. & Franke, L. M. (1992). Teachers' knowledge and its impact. In: D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 147-164). New York: Macmillan. ME 1993f.01809
  8. Flinn, J. (1998). Freelists, ratings, averages, and frequencies: Why so few students study anthropology. In: V. C. de Munck & E. J. Sobo (Eds.), Using Method in the Field: A Practical Introduction and Casebook (pp. 85-96). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.
  9. Freudenthal, H. (1991), Revisiting mathematics education, China lectures. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher. ME 1991l.01100
  10. Kim, S. A. (2012). A Case of Teaching-Learning for Pre-sevice Math Teacher through Small Group Discussion. In: Sung Je Cho (ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME 12), COEX, Seoul, Korea; July 8-15, 2012 (e-edition, p. 7350). Seoul, Korea: ICME 12.
  11. Kim, S. A. & Choi, J. (2012). A study on cognitive development of scientifically talented students toward definition and theorem in the course of Multivariable Calculus. J. Korean Soc. Math. Ed. Ser. D, Res. Math. Educ. 16(3), 195-206. ME 2013b.00401
  12. Kim, S. A. & Kim, S. O. (2010). A change in the students' understanding of learning in the multivariable calculus course implemented by a modified Moore method. J. Korean Soc. Math. Ed. Ser. E: Communications of Mathematical Education 24(1), 257-280.
  13. Kim, S. K.; Kim, E. J.; Kwean, H. J. & Han, H. (2012). A case study on the effects of mathematically gifted creative problem solving model in mathematics learning for ordinary students. J. Korean Soc. Math. Ed. Ser. A, Math. Educ. 51(4), 351-375. ME 2013a.00447
  14. Kwon, O. N. (2005). An inquiry-oriented approach to differential equations: Contributions to teaching university mathematics through teaching experiment methodology. J. Korean Soc. Math. Ed. Ser. E: Communications of Mathematical Education 19(4), 733-767.
  15. Kwon, O. N. (2007). Towards inquiry-oriented mathematics instruction in the university. In: Ki Hyoung Ko et al. (Eds.), Enhancing university mathematics. Proceedings of the first KAIST international symposium on teaching, Daejeon, Korea; May 12-16, 2005. CBMS Issues in Mathematics Education 14, (pp. 87-96). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS). ME 2008a.00162
  16. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (1991). Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM. ME 1991e.00332
  17. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM] (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM. ME 1999f.03937 for discussion draft (1998)
  18. Shin, H. (2003). A study on development of curriculum and teaching-learning method for department of mathematics education at teacher training universities. J. Korean Soc. Math. Ed. Ser. A, Math. Educ 42(4), 431-452. ME 2004b.00925
  19. Shin, H. J.; Kim, S. A. & Shim, K. B. (2011). The effects of pair assistant collaborative learning on academic achievement of second year middle school students in the areas of probability and figures. J. Korean Soc. Math. Ed. Ser. E: Communications of Mathematical Education 25(1), 261-288.
  20. Sinha, R. (2003). Beyond cardsorting: Free-listing methods to explore user categorizations. Boxes and Arrows: The Design behind the Design. Retrieved from: http://www.boxesandarrows.com.
  21. Quinlan, M. (2005). Considerations for collecting freelists in the field: Examples from ethnobotany. Field Methods 17(3), 219-234. http://libarts.wsu.edu/anthro/pdf/Considerations%20for%20Collecting.pdf https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05277460
  22. Weller, S. C. & Romney, A. K. (1988). Systematic Data Collection. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.