The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

Korean Society of Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회)
권호 표지

The Effects of Time Allocation in Lecturing on the Mathematical Academic Achievement of Freshmen in Institute of Technologies

강의시간 배분이 공과대학 신입생의 대학수학 성취도에 미치는 영향

  • Published : 2009.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, we investigate the effects of the methods of time allocation in lecturing on the mathematical academic achievement of freshmen in institute of technologies. The subjects are 392 freshmen from three universities participated in ABEEK(Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea). They belong to three groups in accordance with the methods of time allocation in lecturing; 75 minutes twice a week(79 students) and 150 minutes continuously once a week(77 students) (university 1 of 156 students), 100 minutes twice a week(56 students) and 200 minutes continuously once a week(60 students) (university 2 of 116 students) and 50 minutes and 100 minutes separately once a week(62 students) and 150 minutes continuously once a week(58 students) (university 3 of 120 students). The results of this paper are summarized as follows: Firstly, the achievement of separate time-allocation groups is higher than that of continuous time-allocation groups. Secondly, the achievement of middle class students and low class students has higher effects when they are taught by using the methods of separate time-allocation in lecturing. Finally, the achievement of groups using 75 minutes twice a week is higher than that of using 50 minutes and 100 minutes separately once a week. In conclusion, this study suggests that the method of separate time allocation in lecturing using 75 minutes twice a week could be an advisable means to help those who achieve middle and low scores in the first college mathematics.

Keywords

References

  1. 고등교육법 시행령 (1999). (구)교육인적자원부
  2. 김성옥 (2005). 공학전공자를 위한 대학수학교육과정과 교수, 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집> 19(2),pp.409-416.
  3. 문수백.변창진 (2003), 실험설계 분석의 이해와 활용, 학지사.
  4. 서종진 (2007). 대학 교양수학에서 학습 방법에 따른 수학 성취도의 효과, 중등교육연구 55(2), pp.207-230.
  5. 안미란 역, 베레나 슈타이너 (2004), 전략적 공부기술, 들녘미디어.
  6. 이성호 (2004). 교수방법론, 학지사.
  7. 이춘호 (2003). 공학교육에서의 수학에 관하여, 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집> 15(1), pp.223-234.
  8. 전남대학교 신문방송사 (2008). http://www.mycong.com/ news/articleView.html?idxno=5175
  9. 정진우 (2007). 공학인증제도 안에서 공학윤리 무엇을 어떻게 교육해야 하나? 동서철학연구 43, pp.176-193.
  10. 정형찬.심재동.이경희 (1993). 공학기초과목으로서 수학교과과정 및 교육방법에 관한 연구: 한국기술교육대학의 경우를 중심으로, 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 A <수학교육> 32(3), pp.256-262.
  11. 최경미.장인식.정보현.정순모.양우석.조규남 (2007). 중위권 대학 신입생의 수학적 배경과 대학수학 성취도 사이의 관계, 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 A <수학교육> 46(1), pp.53-67.
  12. 충청투데이 (2008). http://www.cctoday.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=295503.
  13. 한국공학교육인증원 (2007). http://www.abeek.or.kr/.
  14. Black, S. (2000). A wake-up call on high-school starting times, American School Board Journal, pp.33-38.
  15. Bullough, T. (2003) Approaches to teaching for engineering and science. Maths for Engineering and Science, Birmingham: LTSN, p.8.
  16. Buzan, T. (1991), Use Both Sides of Your Brain:2, Dutton Adult, 3rd edition.
  17. Carroll, J. B. (1963). A model of school learning, Teaching College Record, 64, pp.723-733.
  18. Department for Education and Employment (1998). The Implementation of the National Numeracy Strategy: The Final Report of the Numeracy Task Force, London: DfEE.
  19. Finkel, D. L. (2000). Teaching with Your Mouth Shut, Boynton/Cook.
  20. Howson, A. G., Barnard, A. D., Crighton, D. G., Davies, N., Gardiner, A. D., & Jagger, J. M. (1995). Tackling the Mathematics Problem, London, UK:London Mathematical Society.
  21. Hackworth, R. D. (1992). Math Anxiety Reduction. Clearwater FL: H&H Publishing Company.
  22. Hawkes, T., & Savage, M. D.(eds.) (2000). Measuring the Mathematics problem, Engineering Council Report. London.
  23. Heibert, J. (2003). What research says about the NCTM standards. In J. Killpatrick, W. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  24. Jaworski, B. (2008), Helping engineers learn mathematics: a developmental research approach, Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 27(3), pp.160-166. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrn006
  25. Metje, N. (2007).Observing mathematics teaching in three different countries-less ons learut? Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 26(3), pp.145-154. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrm008
  26. Metje, N., Frank, H. L., & Croft, P. (2007). Can’t do mathematics - exploring different ways of teaching mathematics to a group of novices in a first year degree programme. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications (Accepted).
  27. Pike, R. W. (2003). Creative Training Techniques Handbook: Tips, Tactics, and How-To’s for Delivering Effective Training, Human Resource Development Press; 3 edition.
  28. Sutherland, R., & Pozzi, S. (1995). The Changing Mathematical Background of Undergraduate Engineers. London: Engineering Council.
  29. Symonds, R. J., Lawson, D. A., & Robinson, C. L. (2007). The effectiveness of support for students with non-traditional mathematics backgrounds. Teaching Mathematics and its Applications, 26(3), pp.134-144. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/hrm009
  30. Willoughby, S. S. (2000). Perspective on Mathematics Education. Learning Mathematics for a new Century, 2000 Yearbook. NCTM.
  31. Wolf, A. (1997). Mathematics for AII: The Teaching of Post-Compulsory Students in International Contest, Teaching Mathematics Applications, 16, pp.207-212. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/16.4.207