Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 461 Download : 217

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Main Article Content

Abstract

This research aims to determine the metaphorical perceptions of gifted and normally developing students attending primary education regarding solving mathematical problems. In the research, the qualitative research method was employed. In the 2022-2023 academic year, 206 students studying at the primary school level in Turkey were determined according to the convenience sampling method. Students were given a sentence such as “In my opinion, solving mathematical problems is like .........., because; ........” and they were asked to develop a metaphor about mathematical problem solving and explain their reasoning. The research data were categorized using qualitative data analysis methods, and content analysis was performed. In addition, the categories related to the metaphors created and the distribution of the students according to their gender, whether they are gifted or not, and gender were analyzed. From the analysis of the data, seven categories and 84 metaphors emerged. As a result of the data analysis showed that male students were more likely than female students, and gifted students were more likely to produce metaphors than students with normal development. In the seven conceptual categories for mathematical problem solving, 37 metaphors were developed in the conceptual category containing positivity, 16 in the conceptual category containing negativity, and 8 in the conceptual categories containing and developing necessity. Besides, it was seen that 15 metaphors were developed in conceptual categories of Drug Therapeutic, Goal or Result Attainment, Nature, and Natural Phenomena.

Keywords

Gifted Students Metaphor Middle School Problem Solving Special Talent

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite
Er, Z., & Dinç Artut, P. . (2023). Metaphorical perceptions of gifted and normally developing students on the concept of solving mathematical problems. Journal on Mathematics Education, 14(4), 627–646. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.v14i4.pp627-646
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Allen, B., & Shiu, C. (1997). Learning mathematics is like...’-views of tutors and students beginning a distance taught undergraduate course. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 8-11.
  2. Altun, S. (2015). The effect of cooperative learning on students’ achievement and views on the science and technology course. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(3), 451-468. https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/91/89
  3. Anilan, B. (2017). Fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarının kimya kavramına ilişkinin metaforik algıları. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 5(2), 7-27. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/366466
  4. Arıkan, E. E. (2014). Ortaokulöğrencilerininmatematikproblemiçözme-kurmabecerilerininve problem kurmaileilgilimetaforikdüşüncelerininincelenmesi. [Doctoral dissertation, Yıldız Teknik University]. http://localhost:6060/xmlui/handle/1/1824
  5. Arslan, Ç., & Altun, M. (2007). Learning to solve non-routine mathematical problems. Elementary Education Online, 6(1), 50-61. https://ilkogretim-online.org/fulltext/218-1596621184.pdf?1692178180
  6. Arslan, M. M., & Bayrakci, M. (2006). Metaforik düşünme ve öğrenme yaklaşımının eğitim-öğretim açısından incelenmesi. Milli Egitim, 35(171), 100-108.
  7. Ayvaz Can, A. (2021). İlkokul dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerinin matematik problemi çözmeye ilişkin algılarının metaforlar yoluyla analizi. Uşak Üniversitesi Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 7(1), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.29065/usakead.882143
  8. Balci, F. A. (2011). Metaphorical images of school: School perceptions of primary education supervisors. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research (EJER), (44). 51-70.
  9. Baykul, Y. (2009). İlköğretimdematematiköğretimi 6-8. sınıflar. Ankara: Pegem Akademi.
  10. Bjalkebring, P. (2019). Math anxiety at the university: What forms of teaching and learning statistics in higher education can help students with math anxiety?. Frontiers in Education, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00030
  11. Cassel, D., & Vincent, D. (2011). Metaphors reveal preservice elementary teachers' views of mathematics and science teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 111(7), 319- 324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00094.x
  12. Choi, H. H., & Kim, M. J. (2016). The potential of reasoning methods as a teaching strategy supporting students' creative thinking in architectural design. ArchNet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 10(3), 6.
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  14. Dayı, E., Acikgoz, G., & Elci, A., (2020). Metaphorical perceptions of preservice teachers of fine arts education towards students with special needs (The case of Gazi University). Ankara Unıversıty Faculty of Educatıonal Scıences Journal of Specıal Educatıon, 21(1), 95-122. https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.616520
  15. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 1–43). Sage Publications, Inc.
  16. Dickmeyer, N. (1989). Metaphor, model, and theory in education research. Teachers College Record, 91(2), 151-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146818909100204
  17. Edwards, S. M. (2001). The technology paradox: Efficiency versus creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13(2), 221-228. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326934CRJ1302_9
  18. Eker, C. &Sıcak, A. (2016). Sınıf öğretmeni adaylarının birleştirilmiş sınıflı öğretime ilişkin. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(37), 133-153. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/maeuefd/issue/19410/206389
  19. Eraslan, L. (2011). Sosyolojikmetaforlar. Akademikbakışdergisi, 27(1), 1-22.
  20. Feist, G. J., & Barron, F. X. (2003). Predicting creativity from early to late adulthood: Intellect, potential, and personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(2), 62-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00536-6
  21. Fitzpatrick, C. C. (1994). Adolescent mathematical problem-solving: The role of mathematics knowledge, gender, metacognition, strategies, and beliefs. Columbia University.
  22. Gagné, F. (2004) Transforming gifts into talents: the DMGT as a developmental theory. High Ability Studies, 15(2), 119-147, https://doi.org/10.1080/1359813042000314682
  23. Gail, M. (1996). Problem solving about problem solving: framing a research agenda. Proceedings of the Annual National Educational Computing Conference, Minnesota, 17, 255-261. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED398890.pdf
  24. Gür, H., & Korkmaz, E. (2003). İlköğretim 7. Sinif öğrencilerinin problem ortaya atma becerilerinin belirlenmesi. Matematikçiler Derneği Bilim Köşesi. www.matder.org.tr
  25. Işık, C., Kar, T., Yalçın, T., & Zehir, K. (2011). Prospective teachers’ skills in problem posing with regard to different problem posing models. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 485-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.127
  26. Kačer, T. (2021). Tom stoppard’s science plays: Metaphor and experiment. Świat i Słowo, 36(1), 77-89. https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0014.7963
  27. Kiliç, D., & samanci, O. (2005). İlköğretim okullarinda okutulan sosyal bilgiler dersinde problem çözme yönteminin kullanilişi. Atatürk Üniversitesi Kazım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 11, 100-112. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/31421
  28. Krulik, S., & Reys, R. E. (1980). Problem solving in school mathematics: 1980 yearbook. National council of teachers of mathematics.
  29. Krulik, S., & Rudnick, J. A. (1985). Activities: Developing Problem-Solving Skills. The Mathematics Teacher, 78(9), 685-698. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.78.9.0685
  30. Lakatos, I. (1976). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes (pp. 205-259). Springer Netherlands.
  31. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (2005). Metaforlar Hayat, Anlamve Dil. (Çev: G. Y. Demir). İstanbul: Paradigma
  32. Latterell, C. M., & Wilson, J. L. (2016). Math is like a lion hunting a sleeping gazelle: Preservice elementary teachers' metaphors of mathematics. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(3), 283-292. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/9470
  33. Lesh, R., & Zawojewski, J. (2007). Problem solving and modeling. Second Handbook of Research on Teaching and Learning, 2, 763-804.
  34. Levine, P. M. (2005). Metaphors and images of classrooms. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 41(4), 172-175.
  35. Mayer, R. E. (2002). Invited reaction: Cultivating problem‐solving skills through problem‐based approaches to professional development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 13(3), 263-269. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1030
  36. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in Education: Evidence-Based Inquiry, MyEducationLab Series. Pearson.
  37. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
  38. Ministry of National Education [MoNE]. (2018). Mathematics curriculum (primary and secondary school grades 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8). Ankara: MoNE, by the Ministry of National Education in January 2017.
  39. Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2019). Bilsem yönergesi [Science and art center directive. Directive]. Tebliğler Dergisi, Ankara. 390-427.
  40. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics, Reston, VA: NCTM.
  41. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, Va.: NCTM.
  42. Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving (Vol. 104, No. 9). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall.
  43. Nikitina, L., & Furuoka, F. (2008). " A Language Teacher is Like...": Examining Malaysian Students' Perceptions of Language Teachers through Metaphor Analysis. Online Submission, 5(2), 192-205.
  44. Oğuz, A. (2009). Öğretmen Adaylarına Göre Ortaöğretim Öğretmenlerini Temsil Eden Metaforlar. Milli Eğitim, 38(182), 36-56.
  45. Orton, A., & Wain, G. (1994). Issues in Teaching Mathematics. New York: Cassell.
  46. Özsoy, G. (2005). Problem çözme becerisi ile matematik başarısı arasındakiilişki. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 25(3), 179-190. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/gefad/issue/6755/90832
  47. Palmquist, R. A. (2001). Cognitive style and users’ metaphors for the web: An exploratory study. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 27(1), 24-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-1333(00)00205-6
  48. Pesen, C. (2003). Matematiköğretimi. Ankara: Nobel YayınDağıtım
  49. Polya, G. (2004). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method (No. 246). Princeton university press.
  50. Polya, G. (2006). From the 1950s: Mathematics as a subject for learning plausible reasoning. The Mathematics Teacher, 100(5), 36-39. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.100.5.0036
  51. Posamentier, A. S., & Krulik, S. (2016). Strategy games to enhance problem-solving ability in mathematics (Vol. 5). World Scientific.
  52. Renzulli, J. S. (1978). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180. https://doi.org/10.1177/003172171109200821
  53. Rubinstein, G. (2003). Authoritarianism and its relation to creativity: A comparative study among students of design, behavioral sciences and law. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(4), 695-705. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00055-7
  54. Saban, A. (2004). Prospective classroom teachers’ metaphorical images of selves and comparing them to those they have of their elementary and cooperating teachers. International Journal of Educational Development, 24(6), 617-635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2004.03.003
  55. Saka, E., & Durmuş, M. (2021). Sinif öğretmeni adaylarinin matematiksel problem çözmeye yönelik inançlarinin ve metaforik algilarinin incelenmesi. Ekev Akademi Dergisi, 25(85), 129-150. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/2568258
  56. Schinck, A. G., Neale, H. W., Pugalee, D. K., & Cifarelli, V. V. (2008). Using metaphors to unpack student beliefs about mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 108(7), 326-333. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2008.tb17845.x
  57. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2014). Mathematical problem solving. Elsevier.
  58. Senemoğlu, N. (2005). Gelişim Öğrenmeve Öğretim Kuramdan Uygulamaya. Ankara: Gazi Kitabevi.
  59. Sezgin Memnun, D. (2015). Secondary school students' metaphors about mathematical problem and change of metaphors according to grade levels. Necatibey Faculty of Education Electronic Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 9(1), 351-374. http://www.nef.balikesir.edu.tr/~dergi/makaleler/yayinda/18/EFMED_MTE215.pdf
  60. Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. Zdm, 3(29), 75-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-997-0003-x
  61. Silverman, K. (2000). World spectators. Stanford University Press.
  62. Skagerlund, K., Östergren, R., Västfjäll, D., &Träff, U. (2019). How does mathematics anxiety impair mathematical abilities? Investigating the link between math anxiety, working memory, and number processing. PloS One, 14(1), e0211283. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0211283
  63. Solomon, C., & Grimley, M. (2011). Metaphors used by year 5 and 6 children to depict their beliefs about maths. Paper presented at the 34th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia and the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers, Alice Springs.
  64. Sterenberg, G. (2008). Investigating teachers’ images of mathematics. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11, 89-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9062-8
  65. Taylor, W. (1984). Metaphors of Education, Heineman Educational Books Ltd, London.
  66. Ülgen, G. (2001). Kavramgeliştirme: Kuramlarveuygulamalar (3. Baskı) Ankara: Pegem-A Yayıncılık.
  67. Uygun, T., Gökkurt, B., & Usta, N. (2016). Üniversite öğrencilerinin matematik problemine ilişkin algılarının metafor yoluyla analiz edilmesi. Bartın University Journal of Faculty of Education, 5(2), 536-556. https://doi.org/10.14686/buefad.v5i2.5000187677
  68. Uzun, A., Özdemir, B. G., Çetinöz, E. E., & Şahan, G. (2022). Hafif düzeyde zihinsel yetersizliği olan bir öğrenciye sesli düşünme yöntemi ile çikarma işleminin öğretimi. EĞİTİM VE BİLİM, 47(210), 321-356. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2022.10491
  69. Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2016). Elementary and middle school mathematics. London: Pearson Education UK.
  70. Vordermann, C., Porkess, R., Budd, C., Dunne, R., & Rahman-Hart, P. (2011). A world-class mathematics education for all our young people. London: The Conservative Party.
  71. Winner, E. (1997). Giftedness vs. creativity in the visual arts. Gifted and Talented International, 12(1), 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.1997.11672861
  72. Yazgan, Y. (2007). Dördüncü ve beşinci sınıf öğrencilerinin rutin olmayan problem çözme stratejileriyle ilgili gözlemler. İlköğretim Online, 6(2), 249-263. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/91012
  73. Yee, S. P. (2017). Students’ and teachers’ conceptual metaphors for mathematical problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 117(3-4), 146-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12217
  74. Yee, S. P., & Bostic, J. D. (2014). Developing a contextualization of students’ mathematical problem solving. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 36, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2014.08.002
  75. Yetim Karaca, S. & Ada, S. (2018). Öğrencilerin Matematik Dersineve Matematik Öğretmenine Yönelik Algılarının Metaforlar Yardımıyla Belirlenmesi. Kastamonu Eğitim Dergisi, 26(3), 789-800. https://dx.doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.413327
  76. Yıldırım, A., Hacıhasanoğlu, R., Karakurt, P., &Türkleş, S. (2011). Problem solving skills and influential factors in high school students. Journal of Human Sciences, 8(1), 905–921. https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/1134
  77. Yildirim, A., & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık, Ankara, 446.
  78. Yildizlar, M. (2012). Öğretmen adaylarının öğrenme stratejileri üzerine bir çalışma. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 42(42), 430-440. http://efdergi.hacettepe.edu.tr/yonetim/icerik/makaleler/342-published.pdf
  79. Zheng, H. B., & Song, W. J. (2010). Metaphor analysis in the educational discourse: A critical review. US-China Foreign Language, 8(9), 42-49. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED514704.pdf