Journal of Science Education (과학교육연구지)

Science Education Research Institute Kyungpook National University (경북대학교 과학교육연구소)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Error Analysis of 6th Grade Elementary Students in Problem Solving in the Measurement Domain

측정 영역의 문제해결 과정에서 나타나는 초등학교 6학년 학생의 오류 분석

  • Received : 2017.10.17
  • Accepted : 2017.12.07
  • Published : 2017.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study analyzed the errors of 6th graders of elementary school in problem solving process of the measurement domain. By analyzing the errors that students make in solving difficult problems, this study tried to draw implications for teaching and learning that can help students reach their achievement standards. First, though the students were given enough time to deal with problems, the fact that about 30~60% of students, based upon the problems given, can't solve them show that they are struggling with a part of measurement domain. Second, it was confirmed that students' understanding of the unit of measurement, such as relationship between units, was low. Third, the students have a low understanding in terms of the fact that once the base is set in a triangle then the height can be set accordingly and from which multiple expressions, in obtaining the area of the triangle, can be driven.

본 연구는 측정 영역의 문제해결 과정에서 나타나는 초등학교 6학년 학생의 오류를 분석하였다. 초등 5~6학년군의 내용에서 학생들이 어려워하는 부분에 대한 오류를 분석함으로써 학생들의 성취기준 도달을 도울 수 있는 교수 학습에서의 시사점을 도출하고자 하였다. 첫째, 문제를 해결할 수 있는 충분한 시간을 학생들에게 제공했음에도 불구하고 풀이과정을 바르게 쓰지 못한 학생이 문항에 따라 약 30~60%에 이르렀다는 점은 학생들이 측정 영역의 일부에서 어려움을 겪고 있음을 시사한다. 둘째, 단위 사이의 관계에 대한 불충분한 이해 등 측정 단위에 대한 학생들의 이해가 낮은 것을 확인하였다. 셋째, 학생들은 삼각형에서 밑변이 정해지면 그에 따라 높이가 결정되고 이로부터 삼각형의 넓이를 구하는 여러 개의 식을 도출할 수 있다는 것에 대한 이해가 낮은 것으로 나타났다.

Keywords

References

  1. Ball, D. L., Thames, M. H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content knowledge for teaching: What makes it special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59(5), 389-407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108324554
  2. Choe, S. (2007) The research on pedagogical content knowledge mathematics teaching (RRI 2007-3-2). Seoul: Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
  3. Fiori, C., & Zuccheri, L. (2005). An experimental research on error patterns in written subtraction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60(3), 323-331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-005-7530-6
  4. Hong, M., Park, S., Baek, K., Byun, H., Yang, Y., Yang, J., Lee, K., Lee, M., & Han, H. (2012). Research and development of achievement standards and achievement levels based on the national curriculum revised in 2009-Ananalysis of the national curriculum and development of achievement standards (CRC 2012-1). Seoul: Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
  5. Jeong, G., & Yim, J. (2011). Children’s understanding of relations in the formulas for the area of rectangle, parallelogram, and triangle. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 21(2), 181-199.
  6. Jin, K., Kim, S., Choi, Y., Kang, T., & Kim, D. (2015). Monitering elementary school students' completion of Korean language, mathematics and English curriculum and enhancing students' learning for normalization of public education(I) (RRI 2015-7). Seoul: Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
  7. Jin, K., Kim, S., Choi, Y., & Kang, T. (2016). Monitering elementary school students' completion of Korean language, mathematics and English curriculum and enhancing students' learning for normalization of public education(II) (RRI 2016-8). Seoul: Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation.
  8. Ju, Y., & Kim, S. (2009). A Study of underachieving students’ error factors and teaching methods in measurement domain. Journal of Research in Curriculum & Instruction, 13(4), 717-736. https://doi.org/10.24231/rici.2009.13.4.717
  9. Kang, H., & Choi, E. (2015). Elementary mathematically gifted students’ understanding of Pi. Communications of Mathematical Education, 29(1), 91-110. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmee.2015.29.1.91
  10. Kang, J., Jeong, S., & Roh, E. (2014). Didactic transposition about unit usage to help recognize meaning of calculation results. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 17(3), 231-251. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2014.17.3.231
  11. Kim, B. (2004). Cognitive psychological approaches on analysing students’ mathematical errors. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 14(3), 239-266.
  12. Kim, B. (2005). Cognitive psychological approaches for classification of students’ mathematical errors on the basis of experiential structuralism. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 15(4), 461-488.
  13. Kim, J., & Kim, A. (2011). Analysis and comparison on measurement characteristics for elementary students with and without mathematics difficulties. The Journal of Special Education : Theory and Practice, 12(4), 235-268.
  14. Kim, M., & Kang, W. (2008). An analysis on the repeated error patterns in division of fraction by elementary students. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 11(1), 1-19.
  15. Kim, S. (2003). A Study on developing the teachers’ guide book for diagnosis and prescription of students' mathematical errors. School Mathematics, 5(2), 209-221.
  16. Kim, S. (2012). The transition of error patterns and error rates in elementary students’ arithmetic performance by going up grades and its instructional implication. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 16(1), 125-143.
  17. Kim, Y., & Pang, J. (2017). Research trends in elementary mathematics education: focused on the papers published in domestic journals during the resent seven years. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 20(1), 19-36. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2017.20.1.19
  18. Ko, J. (2012). Review of the unit on the mixed calculations in the 4th grade. The Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 22(4), 477-494.
  19. Kwon, J., & Choi, J. (2008). An analysis of trends in elementary mathematics education research-Focussing on mathematics education journals in Korea-. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 12(2), 149-163.
  20. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/002248719004100302
  21. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015a). Mathematics 5-1. Seoul: Chunjaeeduation.
  22. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015b). Mathematics 5-2. Seoul: Chunjaeeduation.
  23. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015c). Mathematics 6-1. Seoul: Chunjaeeduation.
  24. Ministry of Education [MOE]. (2015d). Mathematics Work Book 5-1. Seoul: Chunjaeeduation.
  25. Ministry of Education, Science, and Technology [MEST]. (2011). Curriculum of Mathematics. Ministry of Education Notice No. 2011-361 [Separate Book 8]. Seoul, Korea: Author.
  26. Moon, B., & Lee, D. (2014). An analysis on the students’ understanding in concept and operations of decimal fraction. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 18(2), 237-255.
  27. Movshovitz-Hadar, N., Zaslavsky, O., & Inbar, S. (1987). An empirical classification model for errors in high school mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 18(1), 3-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/749532
  28. Mun, H., & Kim. Y. (2011). An analysis of errors in problem solving of the function unit in the first grade highschool. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics, 14(3), 277-293.
  29. Na, G. (2012). Examining students’ conceptions about the area of geometric figures. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 16(3), 451-469.
  30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  31. Oh, Y. (2010). Rethinking about teaching area measurement in the elementary grades-focused on the 2007 revised curriculum of mathematics. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 21(1), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.20972/kjee.21.1.201007.233
  32. Paek, D. (2016). An analysis on the concept and measuring activities of the height of figures in elementary school mathematics textbooks. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 19(2), 113-125. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2016.19.2.113
  33. Park, S., Jeon, Y., Eum, N., & Chae, S. (2010). The relationship between of 5th grade elementary school students’ preferences and mathematics achievement. The Journal of Elementary Special Education, 12(1), 97-120.
  34. Schleppenbach, M., Flevares, L. M., Sims, L. M., & Perry, M. (2007). Teachers’ responses to student mistakes in Chinese and U.S. mathematics classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 108(2), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.1086/525551
  35. Seok, K., & Paik, S. (2004). An analysis of errors on the process of word problem solving in the elementary mathematics. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 8(2), 147-168.
  36. Song, M., & Park, j. (2005). An analysis of mathematics learning achievements of elementary students in measurement. The Research of Science Education, 28, 39-58.
  37. Son, J. (2013). How preservice teachers interpret and respond to student errors: ratio and proportion in similar rectangles. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84(1), 49-70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9475-5
  38. Radatz, H. (1979). Error analysis in mathematics education. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 10(3), 163-172. https://doi.org/10.2307/748804
  39. Reihl, S. M. & Steinthorsdottir, O. B. (2014). While students are solving a proportion problem, their work in a measure space will enable teachers to take the measure of their thinking. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 20(4), 221-228.