Journals / Research on Education and Psychology / 2023 / Cilt: 7 Sayı: Special Issue 2 - Education and Psychology Research in the 100th Anniversary of the Republic

Opinions of Mathematics Teachers about Mathematics Literacy Proficiency Level Table

Pages
160–193
Publication Date
2023-10-25
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)

The research was concluded by giving suggestions to the people who will do similiar ones in this field.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this study is to determine the opinions of mathematics teachers about the mathematical literacy proficiency level table and their knowledge about the proficiency levels.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In the sample of the study, there are 201 mathematics teachers working in various secondary and high schools in 56 provinces across Türkiye.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The research was concluded by giving suggestions to the people who will do similiar ones in this field.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Mathematical literacy · Mathematics teacher · Proficiency level table

Abstract

The aim of this study is to determine the opinions of mathematics teachers about the mathematical literacy proficiency level table and their knowledge about the proficiency levels. In line with the purpose of the research, case study was used as a method. In the sample of the study, there are 201 mathematics teachers working in various secondary and high schools in 56 provinces across Türkiye. The data collection instruments employed in this study encompassed a demographic information questionnaire, a proficiency level opinion form, and proficiency level determination questions. Of the educators who actively engaged in this research, 103 individuals were identified as male participants, while the remaining 98 were designated as female participants. 179 of them work in public schools and 22 of them work in private schools. Again, the working years of the teachers who mainly participated in the research are between 6 and 10 years. These teachers mainly teach 11th graders and work in Anatolian high schools. As a result of the findings obtained from the research, it is seen that although the teachers found the proficiency level table to be understandable in general, they emphasized the need to explain through more examples. In addition, when the teachers asked them to level the questions according to the proficiency level table, it was seen that they could not accurately level the questions according to the table. The research was concluded by giving suggestions to the people who will do similiar ones in this field.

🔖

Cite This Article

SÖNMEZ, D., YILMAZ, G. K. (2023). Opinions of Mathematics Teachers about Mathematics Literacy Proficiency Level Table. Research on Education and Psychology, Cilt: 7 Sayı: Special Issue 2 - Education and Psychology Research in the 100th Anniversary of the Republic, 160–193. https://ajindex.com/articles/969732

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Akgündüz, D. (2018). STEM eğtiminin kuramsal çerçevesi ve tarihsel gelişimi [Theoretical framework and historical development of STEM education]. In D. Akgündüz (Ed.). Okul öncesinden üniversiteye kuram ve uygulamada STEM eğitimi [STEM education in theory and practice from preschool to university] (pp. 19-50).
  2. Ankara, Türkiye: Anı Yayıncılık. Aksu, N. (2019). Farklı ülkelerden PISA sınavına katılan öğrencilerin matematik okuryazarlığını etkileyen faktörlerin tahmin edilmesi [Estimation of factors affecting mathematical literacy of students from different countries participating in PISA exam] (Master’s thesis). Aydın Adnan Menderes University, Aydın, Türkiye. Altun, M. (2020). Matematik okuryazarlığı el kitabı: Yeni nesil soru yazma ve öğretim düzenleme teknikleri [Mathematical literacy handbook: Next generation question writing and instructional editing techniques]. Bursa, Türkiye: Aktüel Yayıncılık. Amit, M., & Fried, M. N. (2002). High-stakes assessment as a tool for promoting mathematical literacy and the democratization of mathematics education. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, (21), 499-514. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(02)00147-5
  3. Anderson, J. O., Chiu, M. H., & Yore, L. D. (2010). First cycle of PISA (2000-2006)-International perspectives on successes and challenges: Research and policy directions. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 373-388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-010-9210-y
  4. Asar, E. (2019). PISA 2015 matematik okur-yazarlığı testinin farklı dilleri konuşan ülkeler arasında ölçme değişmezliğinin incelenmesi [An investigation of the measurement of the measurement between speaking countries of different languages of the PISA 2015 mathematics literact test] (Master’s thesis). Akdeniz University, Antalya, Türkiye. Aşkar, P., & Olkun, S. (2005). PISA 2003 sonuçları açısından okullarda bilgi ve iletişim teknolojileri kullanımı [The use of ICT in schools based on PISA 2003 data]. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, (19), 15-34.
  5. Aydoğdu-İskenderoğlu, T., & Baki, A. (2011). İlköğretim 8. sınıf matematik ders kitabındaki soruların PISA matematik yeterlik düzeylerine göre sınıflandırılması [Classification of the questions in an 8th grade mathematics textbook with respect to the competency levels of PISA]. Eğitim ve Bilim [Education and Science Journal], 36(161), 287-301.
  6. Aydoğdu-İskenderoğlu, T., Erkan, İ., & Serbest, A. (2013). 2008-2013 yılları arasında SBS matematik sorularının PISA matematik yeterlik düzey