한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구 (Research in Mathematical Education)

  • 제17권4호
  • /
  • Pages.291-307
  • /
  • 2013
  • /
  • 1226-6191(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-9943(eISSN)
한국수학교육학회 (Korean Society of Mathematical Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Piaget's Theory in the Development of Creative Thinking

  • Supratman, Ahman Maedi (Mathematics Education Courses and Pedagogy, Faculty of Education, University of Siliwangi Tasikmalaya)
  • 투고 : 2013.08.30
  • 심사 : 2013.12.27
  • 발행 : 2013.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Piaget's revolutionary study on the cognitive development of children has focused on the development of logic. Logical operations and a variety of classifications based on the set of accepted rules involve convergent thinking. Children and adults have logical and creative thinking which deal with a reality of thinking. This study aims to examine a cognitive structure of students, which is closely related to the Piaget's cognitive development theories of students when creative thinking. Students were given an open mathematical problem and were expected to be able to take advantage of sensitivity, fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration which can be seen as clearly of their structure cognitive.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Amabile, T. M. (1983). The Social Psychology of Creativity. New York: Springer Verlag.
  2. Anthony, G. (1996). Active learning in a constructivist framework. Educ. Stud. Math. 31(4), 349-369. ME 2002c.01837 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00369153
  3. Ashcroft, M. H. (1994). Human Memory and Cognition. New York: Harper Collins.
  4. Biggs, J. & Collis, K. (1982). Evaluating the Quality of Learning: the SOLO Taxonomy. New York: Academic Press.
  5. Biggs, J. & Collis, K. (1991). Multimodal learning and the quality of intelligent behaviour. In: H. Rowe (Ed.), Intelligence, Reconceptualization and Measurement (pp. 57-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erl-baum Assoc.
  6. Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
  7. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belkapp Press.
  8. Bybee, R. W. & Sund, R. B. (1982). Piaget for Educators 2nd ed. Colombus, OH: Charles E. Merri Publising Co.
  9. Czarnocha, B.; Dubinsky, E.; Prabhu, V. & Vidakovic, D. (1999). One theoretical perspective in undergraduate mathematics education research. In: O. Zaslavsky (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (PME-23) (Vol. 1, 95-110). Haifa, Israel. ME 2002a.00240
  10. Davis, R. B. (1984). Learning Mathematics: The cognitive science approach to mathematics education. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. ME 1985c.02123
  11. Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., & Conway, A. R. A. (1999). Working memory, short-term memory and general fluid intelligence: A latent variable approach. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 128(3), 309-331. Available from: http://psychology.gatech.edu/renglelab/1999/working-memory2c-short3dterm-memory2c-and-general-fluid-intelligence.pdf https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.128.3.309
  12. Evans, J. R. (1991). Creative Thinking in the Decision and Management Sciences. Cincinnati, Ohio: South Western Publishing Co.
  13. Fisher, R. (1995). Teaching Children to Learn. London, UK: Blackwell/Simon & Schuster/Stanley Thornes.
  14. Forbus,K. D.; Gentner, D. & Law, K. (1995). MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cognitive Science 19(2), 141-205. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog1902_1
  15. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy. Cognitive Science 7(2), 155-170. Available from: http://axon.cs.byu.edu/-dan/673/papers/gentner.pdf https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0702_3
  16. Gentner, D. & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Language in Mind Advances in the Study of Language and Thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  17. Gray, E. & Tall, D. (1994). Duality, ambiguity, and flexibility: a 'proceptual' view of simple arithmetic. J. Res. Math. Edu. 25(2), 116-140. ME 1995c.01407 https://doi.org/10.2307/749505
  18. Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In: N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  19. Hadamard, J. W. (1945). Essay on the psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Page references are to Dover edition, New York 1954).
  20. Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: A perspective on intuitive judgment and choice. In: T. Frangsmyr (Ed.), Les Prix Nobel: The Nobel Prizes 2002 (pp. 449-489). Stock-holm: Nobel Foundation. Retrieved December 27, 2013 at http://www. nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/2002/kahnemann-lecture.pdf
  21. Kamii, C. & Ewing, J. (1996). Basing teaching on Piaget's constructivism. Childhood Education, 72(5), 260-264. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.1996.10521862
  22. Krulik, S.; Rudnick, J. & Milou, E. (2003). Teaching Mathematics in Middle School. Boston, MA: Allin and Bacon.
  23. Kyllonen, P. C. (2002). Knowledge, speed, strategies, or working memory capacity? A systems perspective. In: R. J. Sternberg & E. L. Gigorenko (Eds.), The general factor of intelligence: How general is it? (pp. 415-445). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  24. Lakoff, G. & Nunez, R. (2000). Where Mathematics Comes From. How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York, NY: Basic Books. ME 2002f.04631
  25. Lave, J. & Wenger E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  26. Morra, S.; Gobbo, C.; Marini, Z. & Sheese, R. (2009). Cognitive Development Neo-Piagetian Per-spectives. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
  27. Morrison R. G.; Doumas L. A. A. & Richland, L. E. (2010). A computational account of chil-dren's analogical reasoning: balancing inhibitory control in working memory and relational representation. Developmental Science 14(3), 516-529. Available from: http://learninglab.uchicago.edu/Publications_files/morrison_etal_DS_2010.pdf
  28. Oxford, R. (1997). Constructivism: shape-shifting, substance, and teacher education applications. Peabody Journal of Education 72(1), 35-66. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327930pje7201_3
  29. Padget, S. (2012).Creativity and critical thinking. London, UK: Routledge Taylor and Francis Group.
  30. Parkins, D. N. (1984). Creativity by Design. Educational Leadership 42(1), 18-25.
  31. Pegg, J. (2003). Assessment in Mathematics: a developmental approach. In: J. M. Royer (Ed.), Advances in Cognition and Instruction (pp. 227-259). New York: Information Age Publishing Inc.
  32. Piaget, J. & Garcia, R. (1983). Psychogenèse et Histoire des Sciences. Paris: Flammarion.
  33. Sfard, A. (1991). On the Dual Nature of Mathematical Conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educ. Stud. Math. 22(1), 1-36.
  34. Subanji (2007). Kovariasionalpseudoreasoningprocessof constructingthe graphfunction, incidence ofcontrastdynamics. Ph. D. Dissertation. Malang, Indonesia: University of Malang.
  35. Supratman, A. (2013). Piaget's Theory in the Development of Creative Thinking. In: Y. H. Choe, O. N. Kwon & B. E. Suh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2013 Joint International Conference on Mathematics Education held at Seoul National University, Seoul 151-742, Korea; November 1-2, 2013 (pp. 559-573). Seoul, Korea: Korean Society of Mathematical Education.
  36. van Someren M. W.; Barnard Y. F. & Sandberg J. A. C. (1994). The Think Aloud Method: A Prac-tical Guide to Modelling Cognitive Processes. London, UK: Academic Press. Retrieved Octo-ber 21, 2013, from ftp://akmc.biz/ShareSpace/ResMeth-ISSpring2012/Zhora_el_Gauche/Reading%20Materials/Someren_et_alThe_Think_Aloud_Method.pdf
  37. Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich.