The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

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

DOI QR Code

A study of the elementary teachers' perception about the situation-contextual problem in mathematics education

수학 교과에서의 상황맥락적 문제에 대한 교사의 인식

  • Received : 2011.02.25
  • Accepted : 2011.04.21
  • Published : 2011.05.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to analyze the perception of elementary school teachers about situation-contextual problem and to show efforts on order to enable students to improve their problem solving ability and thinking skills. In this research, two hundred elementary school teachers in Seoul were surveyed and three elementary school teachers were interviewed to determine their perception and the status about situation-contextual problem. As a result, most of teachers replied that situation-contextual problem would be useful and applicable to improve students' problem solving and creative thinking skill.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

Supported by : 한국연구재단

References

  1. 강옥기 (1985). 수학 교육과 학습자료 개발 연구. 교육개발 7(1), 59-65.
  2. 강옥기 외 공저 (1985). 수학과 문제해결력 신장을 위한 수업방법 개선 연구. 한국교육개발원.
  3. 강지형 외 공저 (1999). 7차 교육과정에 의한 초등수학교육. 서울: 동명사.
  4. 교육부 (1998). 초등학교 교육과정 해설(IV): 수학, 과학, 실과. 교육부.
  5. 교육과학기술부 (2008). 초등학교 교육과정 해설(IV): 수학, 과학, 실과. 서울: 대한교과서 주식회사.
  6. 교육과학기술부 (2009). 창의와 배려의 조화를 통한 인재 육성-창의․인성 교육 기본 방안-. 교육과학기술부.
  7. 권미선.방정숙 (2009). 좋은 수학 수업에 대한 초등 교사의 인식조사. 한국수학교육학회지 시리즈 E <수학교육 논문집>, 23(2), 231-253.
  8. 김성동 (2001). PISA 2000 수학 평가 결과 분석 연구. 서울: 한국교육과정평가원.
  9. 김수환.박성택.신준식.이대현.이의원.이종영.임문규.정은실 (2009). 초등학교 수학과 교재연구. 서울: 동명사.
  10. 김영천 (2006). 질적연구방법론. 서울: 문음사.
  11. 김원경․백경호 (2004). 고등학교 확률과 통계영역에서 현실적 수학교육의 적용을 위한 문맥 연구. 한국수학교육학회 시리즈 E <수학교육논문집>, 18(1), 137-155.
  12. 남승인․류성림 (2004). 문제 해결 학습의 원리와 방법. 서울: 형설출판사.
  13. 박성익․임철일․이재경․최정임 (2008). 교육방법의 교육공학적 이해. 서울: 교육과학사.
  14. 송정화 (2010). 상황적 추상화 과정의 고찰: 함수의 변화율을 중심으로 한 사례연구. 이화여자대학교 대학원 박사학위논문.
  15. 장혜원 (2002). 수학 학습을 위한 상황문제의 활용. 대한수학교육학회지 <학교수학>, 4(3), 483-494.
  16. 최정임 (1996). 상황의 맥락성과 복잡성이 학업성취와 태도. 지식의 전이에 미치는 효과: 수학적 문제해결 능력을 중심으로. 교육공학연구 12(1), 213-230.
  17. 한국교육공학회 (2005). 교육공학 용어사전. 서울: 교육과학사.
  18. 한국교육과정평가원 (2004). 교사, 수업, 그리고 학생 성취: TIMSS 1999 결과를 중심으로. 서울: 선명인쇄주식회사.
  19. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. S., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
  20. Butts, T. (1980). Posing problem solving in school math. NCTM., Yearbook, 24-25.
  21. Charles, R. I., & Lester, F. K. (1982). Teaching problem solving-what, why & how. Palo alto, C. A.: Dale Seymour Publishing.
  22. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJ.
  23. Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Constructivism: New implications for instructional technology? Educational Technology, 31(5), 7-12.
  24. Freudental, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China Lectures. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  25. Gagne, E. D. (1985). The cognitive psychology of school learning. Boston, MA: Little, Brown Company.
  26. Goris, T., & Van der Kooij, H. (1998). Reform in secondary math education in the Netherlands: Co-operation of research and practice. CIEAEM 50, Neuchatel, Switzerland. Retrieved Feb 20, 2011 from http://www.fi.uu.nl/twin/en/presentations.
  27. Harley, S. (1993). Situated learning and classroom instruction. Educational Technology, 33(3), 46-51.
  28. Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (1995). Critical characteristics of situated learning: Implications for the instructional design of multimedia. Paper presented at the Twelfth annual ASCILITE-Australia Society for Computers in Tertiary Education Conference. Melbourne, VIC. Retrieved Feb 20, 2011 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne95/smtu/papers/herrington.pdf.
  29. Holmes, E. E. (1985). Children learning mathematics: A cognitive approach. Englewood. Cliffs. NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  30. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299613
  31. Krulik, S., & Rudnick, J. (1984). A source for teaching problem solving. Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
  32. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  33. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1980). An agenda for action: Recommendation for elementary teachers: A contemporary approach. Prentice Hall Inc.
  34. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  35. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  36. Rogoff, B. (1984). Introduction: Thinking and learning in social context. In B. Rogoff & J. Lave (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1-8.
  37. Treffers, A. (1987). Three dimensions: A model of goal and theory description in mathematics instruction: The Wiskobas Project. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.
  38. Treffers, A., & Goffree, F. (1985). Rational analysis of realistic mathematics education. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 97-121.
  39. Wiggns, G., & Mctighe, J. (2008). Understanding by Design. 강현석 외(역), 거꾸로 생각하는 교육과정 개발 - 교과에 대한 진정한 이해를 목적으로 -. 서울: 학지사.
  40. Young, F. M. (1993). Instructional design for situated learning. Educational Research Technology and Development, 40(1), 45-58.