한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육 (The Mathematical Education)

  • 제56권3호
  • /
  • Pages.257-280
  • /
  • 2017
  • /
  • 1225-1380(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-9633(eISSN)
한국수학교육학회 (Korean Society of Mathematical Education)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

교구를 활용한 탐구기반 외심 학습

Inquiry-Based Learning of Circumcenter Using Teaching Tools

  • 투고 : 2017.04.24
  • 심사 : 2017.06.30
  • 발행 : 2017.08.31
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

The purpose of this study is to analyze middle school students' learning characteristics they showed on the inquiry-based learning process of circumcenter using various teaching tools, and then to identify the effects of using teaching tools in the middle school students' learning process of circumcenter. For this purpose, we developed teaching materials for inquiry-based learning of circumcenter using textbook, origami, ruler and compass, GeoGebra and sand experiment. Then we applied them on the learning process of circumcenter for five groups of middle school students. From the analyzing of audio/video materials and documents which are collected from the process of participants' inquiry-based learning of circumcenter, we identified the following results. First, inquiry-based learning of circumcenter using various teaching tools promoted mathematical discourses among participants of this study. For example, they conjectured mathematical properties or justified their opinions after manipulated teaching tools in the process of learning circumcenter. Second, inquiry-based learning of circumcenter using various teaching tools promoted participants' divergent thinking. They tried many inquiry methods to find new mathematical properties relate to circumcenter. For example, they tried many inquiry methods to know whether there is unique circle containing four vertices of given quadrangles. Third, we found several didactic implications relate to inquiry-based learning of circumcenter using various teaching tools which are due to characteristics of teaching tools themselves. Participants showed several misconceptions about mathematical properties during they participated inquiry-based activity for learning of circumcenter using various teaching tools. We identified their misconceptions were not due to any other variables containing their learning characteristics but to characteristics of teaching tools.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. 강윤수, 서은정 (2009). 삼각형의 내.외심 지도방법 연구, 한국학교수학회논문집 12(3), 171-188.(Kang, Y. S. & Seo, E. J. (2009). A Study on the teaching method of incenter and circumcenter of triangle, Journal of The Korean School Mathematics 12(3), 171-188.)
  2. 고상숙, 정인철, 박만구 (2009). 교구를 활용한 중학교 공간능력 향상을 위한 수업에서 학습의 효과, 수학교육 48(1), 1-20.(Choi Koh, S. S., Jung, I. C., & Park, M. G. (2009). An Effect of Students' Learning for Spatial Ability Using a Geometric Manipulative, Mathematical Education 48(1), 1-20.)
  3. 권은정 (2006). 종이접기를 통한 수학학습 지도에 관한 사례연구: 중학교 삼각형의 성질을 중심으로. 석사학위논문, 전남대학교.(Gwon, E. J. (2006). The case study for math learning through paper-folding (centered on characteristics of triangle in middle school curriculum. Master's thesis. Chonnam National University.)
  4. 김부윤, 이성현, 이지성(2012). 수학이 있는 종이접기, 서울: 수학사랑(Kim, B. Y., Lee, S. H., & Lee, J. S. (2012). Origami relate to mathematics. Seoul: MathLove.)
  5. 신현용 (2004). 학교수학에서의 정당화 지도의 필요성 및 가능성에 관한 연구, 대한수학회논문집 19(4), 585-599.(Shin, H. Y. (2004). A Study on the necessity and feasibility of justification teaching in school mathematics, Communications of the Korean Mathematical Society 19(4), 585-599.) https://doi.org/10.4134/CKMS.2004.19.4.585
  6. 원보영 (2011). 교과서에서의 컴퓨터 활용에 대한 개선방안 연구: 중학교 2학년 교과서 기하단원 중심으로. 석사학위논문, 한양대학교.(Won, B. Y. (2011). A study of teaching methods with using computer application programs implemented for textbook of second grade of middle schools, Master's thesis, Hanyang University.)
  7. 이강섭, 심상길 (2007). 교구를 활용한 활동에서 창의성 평가를 위한 학생들의 반응 유형 분석, 수학교육 46(2), 227-237.(Lee, K. S. & Shim, S. K. (2007). A Type Analysis of Students' Responses for Assessing Creativity in Activity Using Manipulative, Mathematical Education 46(2), 227-237.)
  8. 이민혜 (2014). 수학교구를 활용한 삼각형의 내외심 지도방안 연구. 석사학위논문, 한국외국어대학교.(Li, M. H. (2014). A study on the teaching method of incenter and circumcenter of triangle using mathematical tools. Master's thesis, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies.)
  9. 조완영, 정보나 (2002). 7차 수학과 교육과정 작도 영역의 교과서와 수업사례 분석, 학교수학 4(4), 601-615.(Cho, W. Y. & Jung, B. N. (2002). The analysis textbooks and instruction activities of construction contents in 7th mathematics curriculum, School Mathematics 4(4), 601-615.)
  10. 한인기, 신현용 (2002). 삼각형의 접기 활동과 논증의 연계 가능성에 대한 연구, 수학교육 41(1), 79-90.(Han, I. K. & Shin, H. Y. (2002). A study on the connecting paper folding activities of triangle with mathematical proof, Mathematical Education 41(1), 79-90.)
  11. Almasi, J. (1995). The nature of fourth graders' sociocognitive conflicts in peer led and teach led discussions of literature, Reading Research Quarterly 30, 314-351. https://doi.org/10.2307/747620
  12. Arzarello, F., Olivero, F., Paola, D., & Robutti, O. (2002). A cognitive analysis of dragging practices in Cabri environments, ZDM - The International Journal on Mathematics Education 34(3), 66-72. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02655708
  13. Ball, D. (1997). What do students know? In: B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of teachers and teaching (769-818). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  14. Barrow, L. H. (2006). A brief history of inquiry: From Dewey to standards, Journal of Science Teacher Education 17, 265-278. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9008-5
  15. Brenner, M. E., Mayer, R. E., Moseley, B., Brar, T., Duran, R., Reed, B. S. (1997). Learning by understanding: The role of multiple representations inlearning algebra, American Educational Research Journal 34(4), 663-689. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312034004663
  16. Buteau, C., Marshall, N., Jarvis, D., & Lavicza, Z. (2010). Integrating computer algebra systems in post-secondary mathematics education: Preliminary results of a literature review, International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education 17(2), 57-68.
  17. Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: the language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
  18. Charalambous, C. Y. (2010). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and task unfolding: An exploratory study, Elementary School Journal 110(3), 247-278. https://doi.org/10.1086/648978
  19. Charalambous, C. Y. (2008). Preservice teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching and their performance in selected teaching practices: Exploring a complex relationship. Unpublished dissertation, University of Michigan.
  20. Christou, C., Mousoulides, N., Pittalis, M., & Pitta-Pantazi, D. (2004). Proofs through exploration in dynamic geometry environments, International Journalof Science and Mathematics Education 2(3), 339-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-004-6785-1
  21. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: a once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard.
  22. Cortazzi, M. (1993). Narrative analysis. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
  23. Davis, B. (1997). Listening for differences: An evolving conception of mathematics teaching, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 28(3), 355-376. https://doi.org/10.2307/749785
  24. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Macmillan.
  25. Drijvers, P., Doorman, M., Boon, P., Reed, H., & Gravemeijer, K. (2010). The teacher and the tool: Instrumental orchestrations in the technology-rich mathematics classroom, Educational Studies in Mathematics 75(2), 213-234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9254-5
  26. Duranti, A. & Goodwin, C. (Eds.). (1992). Rethinking context: language as an interactive phenomenon. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Edwards, D. & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: the development of understanding in the classroom. New York: Routledge.
  28. Erbas, A. K. & Yenmez, A. A. (2011). The effect of inquiry-based explorations in a dynamic geometry environment on sixth grade students' achievements in polygons, Computers & Education 57(4), 2462-2475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.07.002
  29. Fennema, E., Carpenter, T., Franke, M., Levi, L., Jacobs, V., & Empson, S. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 27(4), 403-434. https://doi.org/10.2307/749875
  30. Ferrara, F., Pratt, D., Robutti, O., Gutierrez, A., & Boero, P. (2006). The role and uses of technologies for the teaching of algebra and calculus. In Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education: past, present and future (237-273). Netherlands: Sense
  31. Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education: China lectures. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
  32. Gee, J. P. (1986). Units in the production of narrative discourse, Discourse Processes 9, 391-422. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538609544650
  33. Gee, J. P. & Green, J. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: a methodological study, Review of Research in Education 23, 119-169.
  34. Glazer, N. (2011). Challenges with graph interpretation: A review of the literature, Studies in Science Education 47(2), 183-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2011.605307
  35. Goos, M., Galbraith, P., Renshaw, P., & Geiger, V. (2003). Perspectives on technology mediated learning in secondary school mathematics classrooms, Journal of Mathematical Behavior 22(1), 73-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(03)00005-1
  36. Hall, J. & Chamblee, G. (2013). Teaching algebra and geometry with GeoGebra: Preparing pre-service teachers for middle grades/secondary mathematics classrooms, Computers in the Schools 30(1-2), 12-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.764276
  37. Healy, L. & Hoyles, C. (2001). Software tools for geometrical problem solving: Potentials and pitfalls, International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 6, 235-256. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013305627916
  38. Hill, H., Blunk, M., Charalambous, C., Lewis, J., Phelps, G., & Sleep, L. (2008). Mathematical knowledge for teaching and the mathematical quality of instruction: An exploratory study, Cognition and Instruction 26, 430-511. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802177235
  39. Hoffkamp, A. (2011). The use of interactive visualizations to foster the understanding of concepts of calculus: Design principles and empirical results, ZDM Mathematics Education 43(3), 359-372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-011-0322-9
  40. Hohenwarter, M., & Jones, K. (2007). BSRLM Geometry Working Group: Ways of linking geometry and algebra, the case of GeoGebra, Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics 27(3), 126-131.
  41. Hollebrands, K. F. (2007). The role of a dynamic software program for geometry in the strategies high school mathematics students employ, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 38, 164-192.
  42. Holt, J. (1982). How children fail. New York: Dell.
  43. Jaworski, B. (2006). Theory and practice in mathematics teaching development: Critical inquiry as a mode of learning in teaching, Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education 9, 187-211. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-005-1223-z
  44. Johnson, E. (2013). Teachers' mathematical activity in inquiry-oriented instruction, Journal of Mathematical Behavior 32, 761-775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.03.002
  45. Johnson, E. M. S. & Larsen, S. (2012). Teacher listening: The role of knowledge of content and students, Journal of Mathematical Behavior 31, 117-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.07.003
  46. Jones, K. (2002). Research on the use of dynamic geometry software: Implications for the classroom, MicroMath 18(3), 44-45.
  47. King, A. (1999). Discourse patterns for mediating peer learning. In: A. M. O'Donnell & A. King (Eds.), Cognitive perspectives on peer learning (87-115). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  48. King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questions, Educational Psychologist 27, 111-126. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2701_8
  49. Larsen, S., & Zandieh, M. (2007). Proofs and refutations in the undergraduate mathematics classroom, Educational Studies in Mathematics 67(3), 205-216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9106-0
  50. Manouchehri, A. (2003). Increasing access to shared knowledge. Paper presented at the 84th Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, Illinois.
  51. Mevarech, Z. R. & Stern, E. (1997). Interaction between knowledge and contexts on understanding abstract mathematical concepts, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 65(1), 68-95. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1996.2352
  52. Moss, J. & Beatty, R. (2006). Knowledge building in mathematics: Supporting collaborative learning in pattern problems, International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 1(4), 441-465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9003-z
  53. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  54. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(NCTM). (1992). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  55. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics(NCTM). (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  56. National Research Council(NRC). (2000a). Standards for teaching and learning mathematics and sciences. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
  57. National Research Council(NRC). (2000b). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  58. Northedge, A. (1994). Access as initiation into academic discourse. In: Lemelin, R. (Ed.), Issues in Access to Higher Education (145-151). Portland: University of Southern Maine.
  59. Nussbaum, M., Alvarez, C., McFarlane, A., Gomez, F., Claro, S., & Radovic, D. (2009). Technology as small group face-to-face collaborative scaffolding, Computers & Education 52(1), 147-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.07.005
  60. Pea, R. D. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In: G. Salomon & D. Perkins (Eds.), Distributed cognitions: psychological and educational considerations (47-87). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  61. Phelps, E. & Damon, W. (1989). Problem solving with equals: peer collaboration as a context for learning mathematics and spatial concepts, Journal of Educational Psychology 81, 639-646. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.4.639
  62. Ploetzner, R., Lippitsch, S., Galmbacher, M., Heuer, D., & Scherrer, S. (2009). Students' difficulties in learning from dynamic visualizations and how they maybe overcome, Computers in Human Behavior 25, 56-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.06.006
  63. Rakes, C. R., Valentine, J. C., McGatha, M. B., & Ronau, R. N. (2010). Methods of instructional improvement in algebra: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Review of Educational Research 80(3), 372-400. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654310374880
  64. Rasmussen, C., Zandieh, M., King, K., & Teppo, A. (2005). Advancing mathematical activity: A practice-oriented view of advanced mathematical thinking, Mathematical Thinking and Learning 7(1), 51-73. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327833mtl0701_4
  65. Reynolds, R. E., Sinatra, G. M., & Jetton, T. L. (1996). Views of knowledge acquisition and representation: a continuum from experience centered to mind centered, Educational Psychologist 21, 93-104.
  66. Saxe, G. B. (1991). Culture and cognitive development: studies in mathematical understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  67. Selden, A. & Selden, J. (2008). Overcoming students' difficulties in learning to understand and construct proofs. In M. Carlson, & C. Rasmusen (Eds.), Making the connection: Research and teaching in undergraduate mathematics education (95-110). MAA.
  68. Sinclair, M. P. (2005). Peer interactions in a computer lab: Reflections on results of a case study involving web-based dynamic geometry sketches, The Journal of Mathematical Behavior 24(1), 89-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2004.12.003
  69. Stein, M., Engle, R., Smith, M., & Hughes, E. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell, Mathematical Thinking and Learning 10, 313-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060802229675
  70. Weber, K., Radu, I., Mueller, M., Powell, A., & Maher, C. (2010). Expanding participation in problem solving in a diverse middle school mathematics classroom, Mathematics Education Research Journal 22(1), 91-118. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217560
  71. Weber, K. & Alcock, L. (2004). Semantic and syntactic proof productions, Educational Studies in Mathematics 56, 209-234. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000040410.57253.a1
  72. Wood, T. & Sellers, P. (1997). Deepening the analysis: Longitudinal assessment of a problem-centered mathematics program, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 28(2), 163-186. https://doi.org/10.2307/749760
  73. Yackel, E., Stephan, M., Rasmusen, C., & Underwood, D. (2003). Didactising: Continuing the work of Leen Streefland, Educational Studies in Mathematics 54, 101-126. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDUC.0000005213.85018.34