Research in Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구)

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

DOI QR Code

The Textbook Analysis on Probability: The Case of Korea, Malaysia and U.S. Textbooks

  • Han, Sun-Young (Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture, Texas A&M University) ;
  • Rosli, Roslinda (Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture, Texas A&M University) ;
  • Capraro, Robert M. (Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture, Texas A&M University) ;
  • Capraro, Mary M. (Department of Teaching, Learning and Culture, Texas A&M University)
  • Received : 2011.04.23
  • Accepted : 2011.06.02
  • Published : 2011.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

"Statistical literacy" is important to be an effective citizen ([Gal, I. (2005). Towards "probability literacy" for all citizens: Building blocks and instructional dilemmas. In: G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 39-63). New York: Springer]). Probability and statistics has been connected with real context and can be used to stimulate students' creative abilities. This study aims at identifying the extent that textbooks in three countries include experimental probability concepts and non-routine, open-ended, application and contextual problems. How well textbooks reflect real application situations is important in the sense that students can employ probability concepts when solving real world problems. Results showed that three textbook series did not mention experimental probability. Furthermore, all of text-books had more routine, close-ended, knowing, and non-contextual problems.

Keywords

References

  1. Altbach, P. G. & Kelly, G. P. (1988). Textbooks in the third world: An overview. In: P. G. Altbach & G. P. (Eds.), Textbooks in the third world: Policy, content and context (pp. 3-17). New York: Garland.
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2000). Middle grade mathematics textbooks: A benchmarks-based evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.project2061.org/publications/textbook/mgmth/report/intro.htm
  3. Baroody, A. J.; Ginsburg, H. P. & Waxman, B. (1983). Children's use of mathematical structure. J. Res. Math. Educ. 14(3), 156-168. ME 1983x.00042 ERIC EJ280018 https://doi.org/10.2307/748379
  4. Bragg, L. & Nicol, C. (2008). Designing open-ended problems to challenge preservice teachers' views on mathematics and pedagogy. In: Figueras, O. Sepulveda, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of the 32nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education and the North American Chapter Vol 2 (pp. 256-270). Morelia, Michoacaan, Mexico: PME.
  5. Cai, J.; Lo, J. J. & Watanabe, T. (2002). Intended treatments of arithmetic average in U.S. and Asian school mathematics. Sch. Sci. Math. 102(8), 391-404. ME 2003d.03097 ERIC EJ659903 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17891.x
  6. Carlson, M. (1998). A cross-sectional investigation of the development of the function concept. In: E. Dubinsky, A. H. Schoenfeld & J. J. Kaput (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education, Vol. 7 (pp. 114-162). Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society. ME 1998d.02840
  7. Chen, J. C. (2006). How are textbooks used in the middle schools? Science and Mathematics. Journal in Republic of China 241, 692-698.
  8. Capraro, M. M.; Kulm, G. & Capraro, R. M. (2005). Middle grades: Misconceptions in statistical thinking. Sch. Sci. Math. 105(4), 165-174. ME 2007e.00427 ERIC EJ711953 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18156.x
  9. Carpenter, T. P.; Corbitt, M. K.; Kepner, H. J.; Lindquist, M. M. & Reys, R. E. (1981). Decimals: Results and implications from the second NAEP mathematics assessment. Arithmetic Teacher, 28(8), 34-37. ME 1982d.06546 ERIC EJ243023
  10. Carter, T. A. & Capraro, R. M. (2005). Stochastic misconceptions of pre-service teachers. Academic Exchange Quarterly 9, 105-111.
  11. Charles, R. I. (2008). Mathematics Course 3. Upper Saddle River. NJ: Prentice Hall.
  12. Conners, F. A.; Mccown, S. M. & Roskos-Ewoldsen, B. (1998). Unique challenges in teaching undergraduate statistics. Teach. Psychol. 25(1), 40-42. ME 1998f.04373 ERIC EJ558912 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2501_12
  13. Fast, G. R. (1997). Using analogies to overcome student teachers' probability misconceptions. J. Math. Behav. 16(4), 325-344. ME 1998e.03669 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(97)90011-0
  14. Franklin, C.; Kader, G.; Mewborn, D.; Moreno, J.; Peck, R.; Perry, M. & Scheaffer, R. (2007). Guidelines for assessment and instruction in statistics education (GAISE) report. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.
  15. Gal, I. (2005). Towards "probability literacy" for all citizens: Building blocks and instructional dilemmas. In: G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 39-63). New York: Springer. ME 05564360
  16. Garfield, S. L. (1989). Giving up on child psychotherapy: Who drops out? Comment on Weisz, Weiss, and Langmeyer. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 57(6), 168-169. ERIC EJ365790 https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.57.1.168
  17. Hake, S. (2007). Saxon math: Course 6. Orlando, FL: Saxon.
  18. Hirsch, L. S. & O'Donnell, A. M. (2001). Representativeness in statistical reasoning: Identifying and assessing misconceptions. Journal of Statistics Education 9(2), 61-82.
  19. Hock, L. S.; Her, K. S.; Chuan, C. G.; Subramaniam, P. & Hashim, S. (2005). Integrated curriculum for secondary schools: Mathematics form 4. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Darul Fikir.
  20. Hodges, J. L. & Lehmann, E. L. (1964). Basic concepts of probability and statistics. San Francisco: Holden-Day.
  21. Johansson, M. (2005). Mathematics textbooks: The link between the intended and the implemented curriculum? Paper presented at the The Mathematics Education into the 21st Century Project: Reform, Revolution and Paradigm Shifts in Mathematics Education. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.
  22. Kang, O. G.; Jung, S. Y. & Lee, H. C. (2009). 8-Na mathematics (in Korean 8-나 수학). Seoul, Korea: Doosan.
  23. Kulm, G. & Capraro, R. M. (2008). Textbook use and student learning of number and algebra ideas. In: G. Kulm (Ed.), Teacher knowledge and practice in middle grades mathematics (pp. 147-172). Rotterdam. The Netherlands: Sense.
  24. Kulm, G.; Roseman, J. E. & Treistman, M. (1999). A benchmarks-based approach to textbook evaluation. Science Books & Films 35(4), 147-153.
  25. Land, S. M. & Hannafin, M. J. (1996). A conceptual framework for the development of theoriesin- action with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development 44(3), 37-53. ERIC EJ532853 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300424
  26. Larson, N. (1991). Saxon math 6. Norman, OK: Saxon.
  27. Lee, J. Y.; Choi, B. L.; Kim, D. J.; Song, Y. J.; Yoon, S. H. & Hwang, S. M. (2009). Middle school mathematics (in Korean 수학). Seoul, Korea: Chunjae.
  28. Leech, N. L. & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2007). An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for qualitative data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly, 22(4), 557-584. ERIC EJ783248 https://doi.org/10.1037/1045-3830.22.4.557
  29. Metz, M. L. (2010). Using GAISE and NCTM standards as frameworks for teaching probability and statistics to pre-service elementary and middle school mathematics teachers. J. Stat. Educ. 18(3), 1-27. ME 05878549
  30. Molix-Bailey, R. J.; Day, R.; Frey, P.; McClain, K.; Ott, J. M.; Pelfrey, R.; Howard, A. C.; Willard, T. (2007). Texas mathematics: Course 1(Grade 6). Columbus, OH: Glencoe, McGraw-Hill.
  31. Mokros, J. & Russell, S. J. (1995). Children's concepts of average and representativeness. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 26(1), 20-39. ERIC EJ496903 https://doi.org/10.2307/749226
  32. Mullis, I.V.S.; Martin, M.O.; Ruddock, G.; O'Sullivan C.; Arora, A. & Erbeber, E. (2007). TTIMSS 2007 Assessment Frameworks. Chesnut Hill, MA: TIMMS and PIRLS International Study Centre. ERIC ED494654
  33. Reys, B. J.; Reys, R. & Chavez, O. (2004). Why mathematics textbooks matter. Educational Leadership 62(5), 61-66. ERIC EJ716725
  34. Shaughnessy, J. J. (1981). Memory monitoring accuracy and modification of rehearsal starategies. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 20, 216-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(81)90389-3
  35. Stein, M. K.; Remillard, J. & Smith M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In: Lester F. K. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 319-370). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
  36. Stohl, H. (2005). Probability in teacher education and development. In: G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 345-366). New York, NY: Springer. ME 05564372
  37. Watson, J. (2005). The probabilistic reasoning of middle school students. In: G. A. Jones (Ed.), Exploring probability in school: Challenges for teaching and learning (pp. 39-63). New York: Springer. ME 05564364
  38. Yan, Z. & Lianghuo, F. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from mainland China and the United States. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 4(4), 609-626. ME 2010f.00526 ERIC EJ924571 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-006-9036-9
  39. Yoong, C. C.; Moidunny, K. B.; Eng, K. P. & Cheng, Y. K. (2005). Mathematics Form 4. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Cerdik Publications.