한국수학교육학회지시리즈D:수학교육연구 (Research in Mathematical Education)

  • 제19권4호
  • /
  • Pages.247-265
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 1226-6191(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-9943(eISSN)
한국수학교육학회 (Korean Society of Mathematical Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Design and Implementation of Mathematics Textbooks in Support of Effective Teaching for Secondary Schools: A Chinese Case

  • PENG, Aihui (Research Institute of Higher Education, Southwest University) ;
  • SONG, Naiqing (Research Center for Basic Education, Southwest University)
  • 투고 : 2015.07.15
  • 심사 : 2015.12.30
  • 발행 : 2015.12.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Mathematics textbook plays a significant role in shaping students' learning of mathematics. Logic, rigor and abstraction as typical features of the formalization of mathematics, dominate mathematics textbooks around the world, which is regarded as one of the important origins of students' learning difficulties in mathematics. An innovative series of Chinese mathematic textbooks is presented in this paper. Supported by the supplementary materials excerpts from the textbooks, it gives a comprehensive theoretical analysis of the principles of design and implementation of this series of mathematics textbooks. The effectiveness of this series of textbooks is demonstrated by student achievement and secondary research data. It shows that series of Chinese mathematic textbooks has largely decreased students' learning difficulties in mathematics and enhance classroom teaching efficiency. It suggests that prioritizing the essence of mathematics and reducing abstraction is an important notion for mathematics textbook design and implementation.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Ann, K. & Miroslav, L. (2009). Mathematics textbooks and their potential role in supporting misconceptions. Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 40(2), 173-181. ME 2009d.00563 https://doi.org/10.1080/00207390701691558
  2. Brinkmann, A. (2005). Building structure in mathematics within teaching and learning processes-A study on teachers' input and students' achievement. In: M. Bosch (Ed.), European Research in Mathematics Education IV: Proceedings of the Fourth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education held at Sant Feliu de Guixols, Spain; February 17-21, 2005 (pp. 290-299). Barcelona, Spain: Univeristat Ramon Llull - ERME.
  3. Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  4. Byers, V. & Erlwanger, S. (1984). Content and form in mathematics. Educ. Stud. Math. 15(3), 259-275. ME 1986j.05261 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00312077
  5. Byers, V. & Herscovics, N. (1977). Understanding school mathematics. Math. Teaching. 81, 24-27. ME 1978c.01190
  6. Chen, Z. & Song, N. (1993). Prioritize the essence of mathematics while de-focalize the presentation of forms. Journal of Mathematics Education 2, 2-4.
  7. Chen, Z. & Song, N. (1999a). Algebra (The first volume of the GX experimental textbooks). Chongqing, China: Southwest Normal University.
  8. Chen, Z. & Song, N. (1999b). Geometry (The third volume of the GX experimental textbooks). Chongqing, China: Southwest Normal University.
  9. Chen, Y.; Yan, Z. & Li, Z. (2003). On enhancing the quality of mathematics education at junior high schools in Li regions. Journal of Qiongzhou University 10, 63-66.
  10. Dreyfus, T. & Gray, E. (2002). Research Forum 1-Abstraction: Theories about the emergence of knowledge structures. In: A. D. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 26th Conference of International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol.1, pp. 113-138). Norwich, UK: University of East Anglia.
  11. Fan, L. (2013). Textbook research as scientific research: towards a common ground on issues and methods of research on mathematics textbooks. ZDM: Int. J. Math. Educ. 45(3), 765-777. ME 2013f.00223 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0530-6
  12. Friedlander, A.; Robinson, N. & Koren, M. (2011). Principles of textbook design for lowachieving middle-grade students. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on School Mathematics Textbooks (ICSMT 2011) held at Shanghai, China; October 12-14, 2011. Shanghai, China: East China Normal University.
  13. Hazzan, O. & Zazkis, R. (2005). Reducing abstraction: The case of school mathematics. Educ. Stud. Math. 58(1), 101-119. ME 2005c.00903 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-3335-x
  14. Kline, M. (1974). Why Johnny can't add: The failure of the New Math. Washington, DC: Vintage Books.
  15. Kounine, L.; Marks, J. & Truss, E. (2008). The value of mathematics. Reform. Retrieved from: http://195.134.81.187/data/articles/the_value_of_mathematics.pdf
  16. Ministry of Education in China (2013). Mathematics curriculum standards for senior high schools. Beijing, China: Beijing Normal University Press.
  17. Mitchelmore, M. & White, P. (2004). Abstraction in mathematics learning. In: Marit Hoines, et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the 28th international conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, PME 28, Bergen, Norway, July 14‒18, 2004. Part III (pp. 329-336). Bergen: Bergen University College. ME 2008b.00079
  18. O'Keeffe, L. & O'Donoghue, J. (2015). A role for language analysis in mathematics textbook analysis. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 13(3), 605-630. ME 2015e.00207 doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9463-3.
  19. O sterholm, M. (2006). Characterizing reading comprehension of mathematical texts. Educ. Stud. Math. 63(3), 325-346. ME 2008f.00117 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-9016-y
  20. Raychaudhuri, D. (2014). Adaptation and extension of the framework of reducing abstraction in the case of differential equations. Int. J. Math. Educ. Sci. Technol. 45(1), 35-57. ME 2014d.00752 https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2013.790503
  21. Simon, M. A. & Tzur, R. (2004). Explicating the role of mathematical tasks in conceptual learning: an elaboration of the hypothetical learning trajectory. Math. Think. Learn. 6(2), 91-104. ME 2004e.03943 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl0602_2
  22. Song, N. & Chen, Z. (1996). Re-visiting prioritize the essence of mathematics while de-focalize the presentation of forms. Journal of Mathematics Education 2, 15-18.
  23. Steen, L. A. (Ed.) (1990). On the shoulders of giants: new approaches to numeracy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. ME 1990j.01110
  24. The GX experiment group (1998). Theory and practice of the GX experiment. Chongqing, China: Southwest Normal University Press.
  25. Usiskin, Z. (2013). Studying textbooks in an information age-a United States perspective. ZDM, Int. J. Math. Educ. 45(5), 713-723. ME 2013f.00893 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0514-6
  26. Van Heijenoort, J. (1967). From Frege to Godel: a source book in mathematical logic, 1879-1931. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
  27. Weinberg, A. & Wiesner, E. (2011). Understanding mathematics textbooks through reader-oriented theory. Educ. Stud. Math. 76(1), 49-63. ME 2011b.00240 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9264-3
  28. Zeng, T. (1997). On the application of the GX principles in teaching of history. Bulletin of Mathematics Teaching 3, 3-6.
  29. Zeng, J. (1997). The GX textbook brings about a new situation to quality-oriented education. Bulletin of Mathematics Teaching 6, 5-7.
  30. Zhang, D. (1998). Prospects on mathematics education reform in the 21th century. Beijing, China: Beijing Normal University Press.
  31. Zhang, T. (2005). The GX experimental study on mathematics teaching in high school. Journal of Southwest Normal University (Natural Science Version) 2, 581-584.
  32. Zhang, Y. (2011). Review and prospects on the GX experiment. Chongqing, China: Southwest University Press.