The Mathematical Education (한국수학교육학회지시리즈A:수학교육)

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

DOI QR Code

A comparative analysis on ratio and rate in elementary mathematics textbooks of Korea and Singapore

비와 비율에 대한 한국과 싱가포르 초등학교 수학 교과서 비교 분석

  • Received : 2022.08.12
  • Accepted : 2022.08.30
  • Published : 2022.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Ratio and rate are key topics in the area of 'Patterns', but there are various perspectives on them. This study compared and analyzed the perspectives of Korean and Singaporean mathematics textbooks on ratio and rate, and explored how teaching and learning methods develop according to each perspective in terms of quantitative reasoning. To this end, we reorganized the analysis criteria based on some studies, and analyzed the textbooks of the two countries in relation to context, relationship, and representation. The results of the study are as follows. Regarding the context, there were differences in the situations, types of units and use of units of the problems presented in textbooks. In terms of relationship, there were differences in the types of two quantities and relationship of quantities. Lastly, there were differences in the representation of ratio and rate. Through these results, we found that elementary mathematics textbooks in Korea and Singapore take different perspectives on ratio and rate. In particular, the perspective taken by Korean textbooks on ratio and rate had unique points different from that of other previous studies. Considering this Korean perspective, we suggested some implications that could help improve textbooks related to ratio and rate and teach them meaningfully.

본 연구는 비와 비율에 대한 한국과 싱가포르의 관점을 비교·분석하고 두 나라의 교수·학습 방법이 어떻게 전개되는지를 양적 추론의 측면에서 탐색하였다. 연구 결과 교과서에 제시된 문제 상황, 단위의 유형, 단위 사용 방법, 두 양의 종류와 관계 및 표현 방법 등 전반적으로 많은 차이가 나타났다. 이를 통해 한국과 싱가포르는 비와 비율에 대한 서로 상이한 관점을 취하고 있으며, 특히 한국은 다른 선행연구와는 구분되는 독특한 관점을 취하고 있다는 것을 알 수 있었다. 이를 바탕으로 비와 비율과 관련된 교과서와 교수·학습 방법의 개선을 위한 시사점을 제안하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Chang, H. W. (2002). A Discussion on the distinction between 'the value of ratio' and 'the rate' in elementary school mathematics. School Mathematics, 4(4), 633-642.
  2. Chang, H., Lim, M., Yu, M., Park, H., Kim, J., & Lee, H. (2017). A comparative analysis of ratio and rate in elementary mathematics textbooks. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 21(1), 135-160.
  3. Chong, Y. O. (2015). Teaching proportional reasoning in elementary school mathematics. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 25(1), 21-58.
  4. Chong, Y. O. (2016). Teaching percent in elementary school mathematics. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 20(1), 71-104.
  5. Freudenthal, H. (1999). Didactical phenomenology of mathematical structures. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  6. Hong, G. J. (2013). A discussion on the terms related to ratio and rate from the revised 2007 curriculum textbook. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 23(2), 285-295.
  7. Jeong, E. S. (2003a). A historical, mathematical, psychological analysis on ratio concept. School Mathematics, 5(4), 421-440.
  8. Jeong, E. S. (2003b). An educational analysis on ratio concept. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 13(3), 247-265.
  9. Kheong, F. H., Ramakrishnan, C., & Choo, M. (2017a). My pals are here! 5A. Marshall Cavendish Education.
  10. Kheong, F. H., Ramakrishnan, C., & Choo, M. (2017b). My pals are here! 5B. Marshall Cavendish Education.
  11. Kheong, F. H., Ramakrishnan, C., & Choo, M. (2018a). My pals are here! 6A. Marshall Cavendish Education.
  12. Kheong, F. H., Ramakrishnan, C., & Choo, M. (2018b). My pals are here! 6B. Marshall Cavendish Education.
  13. Kim, J. (2019). Analysis of content correlation between grades 3-6 mathematics and science textbooks in the 2015 revised curriculum. School Mathematics, 21(4), 735-754. https://doi.org/10.29275/sm.2019.12.21.4.735
  14. Kim, K. H., & Paik, H. S. (2010). Comparison of the curricula and the textbooks concerning the proportion and ratio area between Korea and Singapore. School Mathematics, 12(4), 473-491.
  15. Kim, S. M. (2015). Different views of the US and Korea about mathematical terminologies, 'ratio' and 'rate'. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 25(3), 431-448.
  16. Lamon, S. J. (2012). Teaching fractions and ratios for understanding (3rd ed.). Routledge.
  17. Lee, J. E., Kim, J., & Park, K. S. (2015). A comparative study on definition of ratios in elementary school mathematics textbooks between Korean and Japanese. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 19(4), 485-499.
  18. Lesh, R., Post, T. R., & Behr, M. (1988). Proportional reasoning. In J. Hiebert & M. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 93-118). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  19. Lessani, A., Yunus, A. S. M., Tarmiz, R. A., & Mahmud, R. (2014). Why Singaporean 8th grade students gain highest mathematics ranking in TIMSS (1999-2011). International Education Studies, 7(11), 173-181.
  20. Lobato, J., & Ellis, A. B. (2010). Developing essential understanding of ratios, proportions, and proportional reasoning for teaching mathematics in Grades 6-8 (R. I. Charles & R.M. Zbiek, Eds.). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  21. Ministry of Education [MOE] (2022a). Mathematics textbook 6-1. Visang Education.
  22. Ministry of Education [MOE] (2022b). Mathematics textbook 6-2. Visang Education.
  23. Ministry of Education [MOE] (2022c). Teachers' guidebook of mathematics textbook 6-1. Visang Education.
  24. Park, H. J., & Jeong, E. S. (2010). A comparative analysis on units about ratio and rate between Korean mathematics textbook and MIC textbook. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 14(3), 769-788.
  25. Park, K. S. (2010). A critical analysis on definitions of Biyoul and value of Bi in elementary mathematics in Korea. Journal of Educational Research in Mathematics, 20(3), 397-411.
  26. Park, S. Y., & Lee, K. (2018). The comparison and analysis of models on ratio and rate in elementary mathematics textbooks: Centering on multiplicative perspectives on proportional relationships and the structure of proportion situations. Education of Primary School Mathematics, 21(2), 237-260. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmec.2018.21.2.237
  27. Seo, M., Kim, K., Lee, J., Jeon, S., & Kim, S. (2021). Comprehensive analysis on the results of TIMSS 2019 and its trends. Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation. RRE-2021-5.
  28. Thompson, P. W. (1994). The development of the concept of speed and its relationship to concepts of rate. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 179-234). State University of New York Press.
  29. Thompson, P. W., & Thompson, A. G. (1992, April 20-25). Images of rate [Paper presentation]. Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. San Francisco, CA, United States. http://bit.ly/17oJe30
  30. Vergnaud, G. (1988). Multiplicative structures. In J. Hiebert & M. Behr (Eds.), Number concepts and operations in the middle grades (pp. 141-161). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  31. Yim, J. (2015). A didactical analysis of Korean mathematical terms Bi-yul and Bi-ui-gap. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 19(3), 371-386.
  32. Yim, J. (2019). Meaning of the expression a:b=c:d and implications for teaching. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 23(3), 273-288.
  33. Yim, J. (2020). Analysis of the introduction of ratio concept in view of situation, unit, and meaning. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 24(4), 299-321.
  34. Yim, J. (2021). Analysis on expressions to explain the concept of rate in Korean elementary mathematics textbooks. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 25(3), 295-313.