SavedAdd your journal

Journals / IOJET / 2022 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2

COMPARISON OF PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE MULTIPLICATION OF FRACTIONS IN MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS: THE CASE OF SINGAPORE AND TURKEY

Nazan MERSİN
Elif Nur AKKAŞ
Journal
IOJET
Pages
930–954
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

When examined in terms of fraction types, it was concluded that there are no examples in the form of natural numbers × fractions in the Singapore books, but that there are more problems about fraction × fraction in Singapore.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, it is aimed to comparatively examine practice questions and sample solved questions about the multiplication of fractions in mathematics textbooks in Turkey and Singapore.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this direction, document analysis was used as a research method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:When examined in terms of fraction types, it was concluded that there are no examples in the form of natural numbers × fractions in the Singapore books, but that there are more problems about fraction × fraction in Singapore.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

In this study, it is aimed to comparatively examine practice questions and sample solved questions about the multiplication of fractions in mathematics textbooks in Turkey and Singapore. In this direction, document analysis was used as a research method. Descriptive analysis was used in the analysis and the questions in the books were examined in seven categories: the number of steps, contextual properties, representation type, model type, meaning of multiplication, fraction type, and cognitive expectation. From the results of the analysis, it was seen that there were more questions with pure mathematical context that were solved in one step in the books in both countries. However, all kinds of fraction models are used in the questions in the Singapore textbook, whereas the length model is not used in Turkey. In addition, in fraction multiplication, the repeated addition meaning of multiplication is used only in Turkey, whereas in Singapore the operator meaning is mostly used. When examined in terms of fraction types, it was concluded that there are no examples in the form of natural numbers × fractions in the Singapore books, but that there are more problems about fraction × fraction in Singapore. When the results are evaluated in general, it is observed that the books in both countries have advantages and disadvantages compared to each other, but in terms of the categories studied the distribution in the Singapore textbook is more balanced than it is in Turkey.

🔖

Cite This Article

MERSİN, N., AKKAŞ, E. N. (2022). COMPARISON OF PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE MULTIPLICATION OF FRACTIONS IN MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS: THE CASE OF SINGAPORE AND TURKEY. IOJET, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 2, 930–954. https://ajindex.com/articles/542128

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and instruction, 16(3), 183-198.
  2. Aksu, M. (1997). Student Performance in dealing with fractions. The Journal of Educational Research, 90(6), 375-380.
  3. Alajmi, A. H. (2012). How do elementary textbooks address fractions? A review of mathematics textbooks in the USA, Japan, and Kuwait. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2), 239-261.
  4. Behr, M. J., Wachsmuth, I., Post, T. R., & Lesh, R. (1984). Order and equivalence of rational numbers: A clinical teaching experiment. Journal for research in mathematics education, 15(5), 323-341.
  5. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research journal. Cooper, B., & Harries, T. (2003). Children’s use of realistic considerations in problem solving: Some English evidence. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(4), 449-463.
  6. Cramer, K. A., Post, T. R. & delMas, R. C. (2002). Initial fraction learning by forth-and fifithgrade students: A comparison for the effects of using commercial curricula with the effects of using the rational number project curriculum. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(2), 111–144.
  7. Ding, M., & Li, X. A. (2010). Comparative analysis of the distributive property in U.S. and Chinese elementary mathematics textbooks. Cognition and Instruction, 28(2), 146-180. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370001003638553
  8. English, L. D., & Halford, G. S. (1995).
  9. Mathematics education. Mahwah, NJ: LEA. Ervin, H. K. (2017). Fraction Multiplication and Division Models: A Practitioner Reference Paper. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 3(1), 258-279.
  10. Fan, L., & Zhu, Y. (2007). Representation of problem-solving procedures: A comparative look at China, Singapore, and US mathematics textbooks. Educational studies in Mathematics, 66(1), 61-75.
  11. Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: development status and directions. ZDM, 45(5), 633-646.
  12. Fuson, K. C., Stigler, J. W., & Bartsch, K. (1988). Brief report: Grade placement of addition and subtraction topics in Japan, mainland China, the Soviet Union, Taiwan, and the United States. Journal for research in mathematics Education, 19(5), 449-456. Gagatsis*, A., & Shiakalli, M. (2004). Ability to translate from one representation of the concept of function to another and mathematical problem solving. Educational psychology, 24(5), 645-657.
  13. Graeber, A. O., &