The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

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

DOI QR Code

Analysis of problem solving competency and types of tasks in elementary mathematics textbooks: Challenging/Thinking and inquiry mathematics in the domain of number and operation

초등 수학교과서의 문제해결 역량 및 과제 유형 분석: 수와 연산 영역의 도전/생각 수학과 탐구 수학을 중심으로

  • Received : 2021.08.08
  • Accepted : 2021.08.28
  • Published : 2021.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Elementary mathematics textbooks present contents for enhancing problem solving competency. Still, teachers find teaching problem solving to be challenging. To understand the supports textbooks are suggesting, this study examined tasks from the challenging/thinking and inquiry mathematics. We analyzed 288 mathematical activities based on an analytic framework from the 2015 revised mathematics curriculum. Then, we employed latent class analysis to classify 83 mathematical tasks as a new approach to categorize tasks. As a result, execution of the problem solving process was emphasized across grade levels but understanding of problems was varied by grade levels. In addition, higher grade levels had more opportunities to be engaged in collaborative problem solving and problem posing. We identified three task profiles: 'execution focus', 'collaborative-solution focus', 'multifaceted-solution focus'. In Grade 3, about 80% of tasks were categorized as the execution profile. The multifaceted-solution was about 40% in the thinking/challenging mathematics and the execution profile was about 70% in Inquiry mathematics. The implications for developing mathematics textbooks and designing mathematical tasks are discussed.

본 연구는 초등학교 교과서가 반영하고 있는 문제해결 양상을 수와 연산 단원들을 중심으로 살펴보았다. 문제해결의 하위요소를 중심으로 수학적 활동에 대해 코딩을 실시한 결과 실행이 강조되는 가운데 학년별로 강조되는 하위 요소들이 다르게 나타났고, 잠재집단분석을 통해서 과제의 유형을 분류해 보았다. 향후 교과서 개발과 교사지원에 대한 시사점을 제공하고자 한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson, J. R., Lee, H. S., & Fincham, J. M.(2014). Discovering the structure of mathematical problem solving. NeuroImage,97, 163-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.04.031
  2. Bae, H. J., & Lee, D. H. (2016). An analysis on statistical units of elementary school mathematics textbook. ournal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 20(1). 55-69.
  3. Bae, J. H., & Park, M. (2016). The effects of reflective problem posing activities on students' problem solving ability and attitudes toward mathematics. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 20(2), 311-331.
  4. Ball, D. L, & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6-14. https://doi.org/10.2307/1177151
  5. Bonotto, C. (2013). Artifacts as sources for problem-posing activities. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83, 37-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9441-7
  6. Brannick, M. T., & Prince, C. (1997). An overview of team performance measurement. In M. T.Brannick, E. Salas, & C. Prince (Eds.), Team performance assessment and measurement: Theory methods and applications (pp. 3-16). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  7. Cai,J., Chen, T., Li, X., Xu, R., Zhang, S., Hu, Y., ... & Song, N. (2020). Exploring the impact of a problem-posing workshop on elementary school mathematics teachers' conceptions on problem posing and lesson design. International Journal of Educational Research, 102, 101404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.02.004
  8. Cai, J., & Hwang, S. (2002). Generalized and generative thinking in U.S. and Chinese students' mathematical problem solving and problem posing. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 21(4), 401-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(02)00142-6
  9. Cai, J., & Jiang, C. (2017). An analysis of problem-posing tasks in Chinese and US elementary mathematics textbooks. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(8), 1521-1540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9758-2
  10. Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H. Y., & Mesa, V. (2010). A comparative analysis of the addition and subtraction of fractions in textbooks from three countries. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(2), 117-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060903460070
  11. Choi, Y. S., & Bae, J. S. (2004). Effects of teaching with problem posing on mathematical problem solving ability and attitude in elementary school mathematics. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 8(1), 23-43.
  12. Choi, H. J., & Kim, S. L. (2011). Activities of mathematical problem posing using real-life materials. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 15(1), 121-139.
  13. Choi & Pang (2018). Research on the instructional strategies to foster problem solving ability as mathematical subject competency in elementary classrooms. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 21(3), 351-374. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEC.2018.21.3.351
  14. Collopy, R. (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers' learning. Elementary School Jurnal, 103(3), 287-311. https://doi.org/10.1086/499727
  15. Crespo, S. (2003). Learning to pose mathematical problems: Exploring changes in preservice teachers' practices. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 52(3), 243-270. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024364304664
  16. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M., & Gardner, M.(2017). Effective teacher professional development. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.
  17. Davis, E. A., Palincsar, A. S., Smith, P. S., Arias,A. M., & Kademian, S. M. (2017). Educative curriculum materials: Uptake, Impact, and Implications for Research and Design. Educational Researcher, 46(6), 293-304. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17727502
  18. Dillenbourg, P., & Traum, D. (2006). Sharing solutions: Persistence and grounding in multi-modal collaborative problem solving. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15, 121-151. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1501_9
  19. Drake, C., Land, T. J., & Tyminski, A. M. (2014).Using educative curriculum materials to support the development of prospective teachers' knowledge. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 154-162. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14528039
  20. Fan, L., & Zhu, Y. (2007). Representation ofproblem-solving procedures: A comparative look at China, Singapore, and US mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 66(1), 61-75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9069-6
  21. Fiore, S. M., Rosen, M. A., Smith-Jentsch, K. A.,Salas, E., Letsky, M., & Warner, N. (2010). Toward an understanding of macro cognition in teams: Predicting processes in complex collaborative contexts. Human Factors, 52, 203-224. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810369807
  22. Fiore, S., & Schooler, J. W. (2004). Process mapping and shared cognition: Teamwork and the development of shared problem models. In E. Salas & S. M. Fiore (Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 133-152). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  23. Gracin, D. (2018). Requirements in mathematics textbooks: a five-dimensional analysis of textbook exercises and examples. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(7), 1003-1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739x.2018.1431849
  24. Graesser, A. C., Foltz, P. W., Rosen, Y., Shaffer, D.W., Forsyth, C., & Germany, M.-L. (2018). Challenges of assessing collaborative problem solving. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching 21st century skills (pp. 75-91). Heidelberg: Springer.
  25. Griffin, P., Care, E., & McGaw, B. (2012). Thechanging role of education and schools. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching 21st century skills (pp. 1-15). Heidelberg: Springer.
  26. Hagenaars, J. A., & McCutcheon, A. L. (Eds.). (2002). Applied latent class analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Han, H., Choi, H., Kim, S., & Lee, J. (2017). The perceptions of pre-service mathematics teachers' mathematical problem posing and problem posing strategies. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 17(22), 325-352. https://doi.org/10.22251/jlcci.2017.17.22.325
  28. Hesse, F., Buder, J. Care, E., Griffin, P., & Sassenberg, K. (2012). Draft: A Framework for teachable collaborative problem solving skills. ATC21S: Australia, Melbern. Retrieved from: http://atc21s.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/white-paper7-Framework-for-Teachable-Collaborative-ProblemSolving-Skills_DRAFT.pdf
  29. Hesse, F., Care, E., Buder, J., Sassenberg, K., &Griffin, P. (2015). A framework for teachable collaborative problem solving skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching 21st century skills (pp. 37-56). Dordrecht: Springer.
  30. Hildebrandt, M. (2008). Defining profiling: A new type of knowledge? In M. Hildebrandt & S. Gutwirth (Eds.), Profiling the European citizen (pp. 17-45). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Springer.
  31. Jader, J., Lithner, J., & Sidenvall, J. (2020). Mathematical problem solving in textbooks from twelve countries. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(7), 1120-1136. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1656826
  32. Jay, E. S., & Perkins, D. N. (1997). Problem finding: The search for mechanism. In M. A. Runco (Ed.), The creativity research handbook (pp. 257-293). Cresskill, New Jersey: Hampton Press.
  33. Jitendra, A. K., Griffin, C., Deatline-Buchman, A.,Dipipi-Hoy, C., Sczesniak, E., Sokol, N. G., & Xin, Y. P. (2005). Adherence to mathematics professional standards and instructional design criteria for problem-solving in mathematics. Exceptional Children, 71(3), 319-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100307
  34. Jung, S. G., & Park, M. (2010). The effects of the mathematical problem generating program on problem solving ability and learning attitude. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 14(2), 315-335.
  35. Kilpatrick, J. (2009). A retrospective account of the past 25 years of research on teaching mathematical problem solving. In E. A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspective (pp. 1-15). NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  36. Kim, J. S. (1998). A study on the problems in the school textbooks from a problem solving point of view. The Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16(2), 205-223.
  37. Kim, S. (2019). An analysis of actual application of primary mathematics textbooks in respect to core competency: Focused on the 2015 revision curriculum. Asia-pacific Journal of Multimedia Services Convergent with Art, Humanities, and Sociology, 9(4), 55-67. https://doi.org/10.35873/ajmahs.2019.9.8.006
  38. Kim, H, M., & Han, S. Y. (2018). A study on the development of assessment tool for mathematics problem solving competency. School Mathematics, 20(1), 83-105. https://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2018.03.20.1.83
  39. Kim, H. Y., Huh, N., Noh, J. H., & Kang, O. K. (2012). Teachers' perceptions and applications of key competency-based learning and instruction in mathematics classroom. Journal of the Korean School Mathematics Society, 15(4), 605-625.
  40. Kim, S. B., & Hwang, H. J. (2015). An investigation on the application for problem generation and problem reformulation by pre-service teachers. Communications of Mathematical Education, 29(3), 533-551. https://doi.org/10.7468/JKSMEE.2015.29.3.533
  41. Kim, J. H., & Kim, I. K. (2011). Future research topics in the filed of mathematical problems solving: Using delphi method. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 14(2), 187-206.
  42. Kim, Y. M., & Lee, C. H. (2014). Analysing high school students' mathematical belief system and core belief factors. Journal of Korea Society Educational Studies in Mathematics, 16(1), 111-133.
  43. Kim, J. K., & Lim, M. K. (2001). An effect coming to the problem solving ability from the problem posing activity by presenting the problem situation. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 5, 77-98.
  44. Kim, J. W., Pang, J. S., & Hwang, J. N. (2020). An analysis of mathematics competencies in elementary mathematics textbooks for fifth and sixth grade. Mathematics Education, 59(2), 147-166.
  45. Kim, K. O., & Rye, S. R. (2009). The effects of the situation-based mathematical problem posing activity on problem solving ability and mathematical attitudes. School Mathematics, 11(5), 665-683.
  46. Klein, C., DeRouin, R. E., & Salas, E. (2006). Uncovering workplace interpersonal skills: A review, framework, and research agenda. In G. P. Hodgkinson & J. K. Ford (Eds.), International review of industrial and organisational psychology (pp. 80-126). New York: Wiley.
  47. Kotsopoulos, D., & Cordy, M. (2009). Investigating imagination as a cognitive space for learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70, 259-274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9154-0
  48. Kwon, J. R. (2020). International comparison of ways in which competencies is reflected in mathematics curriculum: Focused on France, Australia and British Columbia in Canada. Communications of Mathematical Education, 34(2), 135-160.
  49. Lee, D. H. (2017). The analysis of problem posing cases of pre-service primary teacher. School Mathematics, 19(1), 1-18.
  50. Lee, M. (2019). Analysis of Discourses in Collaborative Problem Solving Using Mathematics History. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 19(16), 311-333.
  51. Lee, C., & Yun, M. (2020). Delphi method looking for factors of collaborative problem solving competencies and collaborative metacognition in mathematics. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 20(23), 693-719.
  52. Leung, S. S. (2013). Teachers implementing mathematical problem posing in the classroom: Challenges and strategies. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 83(1), 103-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9436-4
  53. Li, X., Song, N., Hwang, S., & Cai, J.(2020).Learning to teach mathematics through problem posing: teachers' beliefs and performance on problem posing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 107(1), 1-23.
  54. Lin, P. J. (2004). Supporting teachers on designing problem-posing tasks as a tool of assessment to understand students' mathematical learning. In M. Hoines y A. Fuglestad (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 257-264). Bergen, Noruega: Bergen University College.
  55. Linzer, D. A., & Lewis, J. B. (2011). poLCA: An R package for polytomous variable latent class analysis. Journal of statistical software, 42(1), 1-29.
  56. Mayer, R. E., Sims, V., & Tajika, H. (1995). Brief note: A comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 443-460. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032002443
  57. Ministry of Education (2015a). 2015 revised curriculum. Ministry of Education Notice 2015-80 [supplement 1].
  58. Ministry of Education (2015b). Mathematics curriculum. Ministry of Education Notice 2015-74 [supplement 8].
  59. Ministry of Education (2019a). Korean national elementary mathematics 3-1. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  60. Ministry of Education (2019b). Korean national elementary mathematics workbook 3-2. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  61. Ministry of Education (2019c). Korean national elementary mathematics 4-1. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  62. Ministry of Education (2019d). Korean national elementary mathematics workbook 4-2. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  63. Ministry of Education (2019e). Korean national elementary mathematics 5-1. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  64. Ministry of Education (2019f). Korean national elementary mathematics workbook 5-2. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  65. Ministry of Education (2019g). Korean national elementary mathematics 6-1. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  66. Ministry of Education (2019h). Korean national elementary mathematics workbook 6-2. Seoul: Chunjae Education.
  67. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
  68. National Research Council. (2011). Assessing 21st century skills. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  69. Nylund, K. L., Asparouhov, T., & Muthen, B. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixturemodeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14(4), 535-569. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705510701575396
  70. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.. (2013). PISA 2015 collaborative problem solving framework. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Collaborative%20Problem%20Solving%20Framework%20.pdf.
  71. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.. (2014). PISA 2012 results: Creative problemsolving: Students' skills in tackling real-life problems (Volume, V). Paris: OECD Publishing.
  72. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. OECD Education Working Papers.
  73. Oh, Y., & Jeon, Y.(2018). The effect of problem-posing activities on the affective domain of mathematics. Journal of the Korea Contents Association, 18(2), 541-552. https://doi.org/10.5392/JKCA.2018.18.02.541
  74. Oh, D. G., & Kim, S. L (2010). The effect of problem posing activities using fairy tale on mathematical attitude and academic achievement. East Asian Mathematical Journal, 26(4), 509-533.
  75. Oh, Y., & Park, J. (2019). Exploring the task types of mathematical modeling applied to elementary school. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 30(1), 87-99. https://doi.org/10.20972/kjee.30.1.201903.87
  76. Pang, J. S. & Kim, S. H. (2006), An analysis on contents related to problem solving in the 7th elementary mathematics curriculum and instructional materials. School Mathematics, 8(3), 341-364.
  77. Park, K., Lee, H., Park, S., Kang, E., Kim, S., Lim, H.,...& Yeo, M.(2015). A study on the development of proposal of mathematics curriculum revision II. Korea Foundation for the Advancement of Science and Creativity research report BD15120005.
  78. Park, H. Y., & Lim, H. (2014). Analyzing features of collaborative problem solving competencies in PISA and ATC21S : Implications for instruction and assessment in Korea. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 14(9), 439-462.
  79. Polya, G. (1980). On solving mathematical problems in high school. In S. Krulik (Ed.), Problem solving in school mathematics(pp. 1-2). Reston, Virginia: NCTM.
  80. Remillard, J. T., & Heck, D. J. (2014). Conceptualizing the curriculum enactment process in mathematics education. ZDM, 46(5), 705-718. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0600-4
  81. Remillard, J., van Steenbrugge, H., & Bergqvist,T. (2014). A cross-cultural analysis of the voice of curriculum materials. In K.Jones, C. Bokhove, G. Howson, & L. Fan (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Mathematics Textbook Research and Development (pp.395-400). University of South Hampton.
  82. Salas, E., Cooke, N. J., & Rosen, M. A. (2008). On teams, teamwork, and team performance: Discoveries and developments. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50, 540-547. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288457
  83. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press, Inc.
  84. Silver, E. A. (1994). On mathematical problem posing. For the Learning of Mathematics, 14(1), 19-28.
  85. Silver, E. A. (1997). Fostering creativity through instruction rich in mathematical problem solving and problem posing. ZDM, 97(3), 75-80.
  86. Silver, E. A., & Cai, J. (1996). An analysis of arithmetic problem posing by middle school students. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 521-539. https://doi.org/10.2307/749846
  87. Silver, E. A., Mamona-Downs, J., Leung, S. S., & Kenney, P. A. (1996). Posing mathematical problems: An exploratory study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(3), 293-309. https://doi.org/10.2307/749366
  88. Son, T., Hwang, S., & Yeo, S. (2020). An analysis of the 2015 revised curriculum addition and subtraction of fractions in elementary mathematics textbooks. School Mathematics, 22(3), 489-508. https://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2020.09.22.3.489
  89. Song, M. J., & Park, J. S. (2005). The effects of development and application of problem posing program on mathematics learning achievements, attitude and interest. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 9(1), 1-18.
  90. Stein, M. K., & Kim, G. (2009). The role of mathematics curriculum materials in large-scale urban reform: An analysis of demands and opportunities for teacher learning. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 37-55). NewYork: Routledge.
  91. Suh, H., Lee, S. Y., & Han, S. (2019). Educative supports for high school geometry instruction: An examination of, and suggestions for teachers' guides. School Mathematics, 21(3), 531-559. https://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2019.09.21.3.531
  92. United Nations Educational, Science and Cultural Organization. (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: Learning Objectives. Paris, France: UNESCO.
  93. van Zanten, M., & van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. (2018). Opportunity to learn problem solving in Dutch primary school mathematics textbooks. ZDM, 50(5), 827-838. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0973-x
  94. World Economic Forum. (2016, January). The future of jobs: Employment, skills and workforce strategy for the fourth industrial revolution. Geneva, Switzerland: World Economic Forum.
  95. Xia, X., Lu, C., & Wang, B. (2008). Research on mathematics instruction experiment based on problem posing. Journal of Mathematics Education, 1(1), 153-163.
  96. Xie, J., & Masingila, J. O. (2017). Examining interactions between problem posing and problem solving with prospective primary teachers: A case of using fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 96(1),1-18 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-017-9761-8
  97. Yoon, S. A., & Paik, S. (2010). A study to improve teaching methods of mathematical problem posing in elementary mathematics. The Journal of Korea Elementary Education, 21(1), 25-47. https://doi.org/10.20972/kjee.21.1.201007.25
  98. Yun, M. R., & Park, J. S. (2008). The effects of problem posing program through structure-centered cooperative learning on mathematics learning achievements and mathematical disposition. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 12(2), 101-124.
  99. Yimer, A., & Ellerton, N. F. (2010). A five-phase model for mathematical problem solving: Identifying synergies in pre-service-teachers' metacognitive and cognitive actions. ZDM, 42(2), 245-261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-009-0223-3