Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7468/jksmee.2021.35.4.445

An Analysis of 'Related Learning Elements' Reflected in Textbooks  

Kwon, Oh Nam (Seoul National University)
Lee, Kyungwon (Dankook University Middle School)
Oh, Se Jun (Ewha Womans University High School)
Park, Jung Sook (Yangjae High School)
Publication Information
Communications of Mathematical Education / v.35, no.4, 2021 , pp. 445-473 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to derive implications for the design of the next curriculum by analyzing the textbooks designed as a new subject in the 2015 revised curriculum. In the mathematics curriculum documents of , 'related learning elements' are presented instead of 'learning elements'. 'Related learning elements' are defined as mathematical concepts or principles that can be used in the context of artificial intelligence, but there are no specific restrictions on the amount and scope of dealing with 'related learning elements'. Accordingly, the aspects of 'related learning elements' reflected in the textbooks were analyzed focusing on the textbook format, the amount and scope of contents, and the ways of using technological tools. There were differences in the format of describing 'related learning elements' in the textbook by textbook and the amount and scope of handling mathematics concepts. Although similar technological tools were dealt with in each textbook so that 'related learning elements' could be used in the context of artificial intelligence, the focus was on computations and interpretation of results. In order to fully reflect the intention of the curriculum in textbooks, a systematic discussion on 'related learning elements' will be necessary. Additionally, in order for students to experience the use of mathematics in artificial intelligence, substantialized activities that can set and solve problems using technological tools should be included in textbooks.
Keywords
Artificial Intelligence; Related Learning Elements; Textbooks;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Kafai, Y., & Burke, Q. (2013). Computer programming goes back to school. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 61-65.   DOI
2 OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/E2030%20Position%20Paper%20(05.04.2018).pdf
3 Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books: New York
4 Ministry of Education. (2020a). The 3rd Comprehensive Plans for Mathematics Education. A press release (May 24. 2020).
5 Ministry of Education. (2020b). Mathematics curriculum. Proclamation of the Ministry of Education #2020-236[Annex 8]. Sejong: Author.
6 Ministry of Education. (2020c). Practical subjects(Technology & Home Economics)/Informatics curriculum curriculum. Proclamation of the Ministry of Education #2020-236[Annex 10]. Sejong: Author.
7 Ministry of Education, & Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation. (2020). Compilational notes and accreditation criteria for the development of textbooks based on the 2015 revised curriculum. Sejong: Ministry of Education.
8 Noh, M., Jung, H., Yoon, J., Park, J., Kim, J., & Oh, T. (2004). A study on the concept of textbook and its internal s stem for effective teaching-learning in schools. Korea Textbook Research Foundation Research Report 2004-01. Seoul: Korea Textbook Research Foundation.
9 Shin, D. J., & Koh, S. S. (2019). A study on investigation about the meaning and the research trend of computational thinking(CT) in mathematics education. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematics Education Series A: The Mathematical Education, 58(4), 483-505.
10 Lee, H. J., Lee, J. H., Lee, K. J., Kim, T. J., & Park. J. H. (2021). . Seoul: Cmass.
11 Choi, E., & Kwon, O. N. (2020). Comparison of Trigonometry in Mathematics Textbooks in Korea, Australia, and Finland. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematics Education Series E: Communications of Mathematical Education, 34(3), 393-419.
12 Huh, K., Lee, J., Hyun, Y., Jung, M., Kang, W., & Jo, S. (2005). A study for the on-demand improvement on a textbook's external format according to changes in curriculum. Korea Textbook Research Foundation Research Report 2005-03. Seoul: Korea Textbook Research Foundation.
13 Abramovich, S. (2015). Mathematical problem posing as a link between algorithmic thinking and conceptual knowledge. Teach Math, 18(2), 45-60.
14 Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40.   DOI
15 Drijvers, P., Kodde-Buitenhuis, H., & Doorman, M. (2019). Assessing mathematical thinking as part of curriculum reform in the Netherlands. Educational studies in mathematics, 102(3), 435-456.   DOI
16 Scantamburlo, T. (2013). Philosophical aspects in pattern recognition research. A PhD dissertation, Department of informatics, Ca, Foscari University of Venice, Venice.
17 Hoim, T., Hommik, C., & Kikas, u. (2016). Changing mathematics education in Estonia. Computer-based statistics project. [Working paper submitted for CIDREE-STEM 2016, December 22nd].
18 Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks. Educational studies in Mathematics, 89(1), 41-65.   DOI
19 Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35.   DOI
20 Wolfram, C. (2020). The Math(s) Fix: An Education Blueprint for the AI Age-Wolfram Media. Wolfram Media, Inc.
21 Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills (pp. 17-66). Netherlands: Springer.
22 Oh, H. P., Heo, S. Cho, S. H., Jeong, Y. M., & Kwon, S. S. (2021). . Seoul: Kumsung Publishing.
23 Chang, K. (2017). A feasibility study on integrating computational thinking into school mathematics. Journal of Korea Society Educational Studies in Mathematics , 19(3), 553-570.
24 Hong, J. G., Park, J. S., Seol. J. S., Oh, S. J., Park, M. G., & Park, S. H. (2021). . Seoul: Chunjae Textbook.
25 Seong, D. H., Kim, S. H., Min, K. J., Yoo. S. M., Kim. J. B., Kim. J. S., & Woo. H. Y. (2021). . Seoul: Joongang.
26 Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158.   DOI
27 Schmidt, H. (2012). Measuring content through textbooks: The cumulative effect of middle-school tracking. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.). From text to 'lived' resources. Mathematics Teacher Education. Dordrecht: Springer.
28 Seland, A. (2021). Assessment in upper secondary mathematics education in Norway. In Proceedings of SNU Mathematics Education Webinar Series: Mathematics Education in the Era of COVID-19 (pp. 70-73).
29 Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J. S., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K-12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education and Information Technologies, 18(2), 351-380.   DOI
30 Stein, M., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 319-370). Greenwich, Conn: Information Age Publishing.
31 Kallia, M., van Borkolo, S., Drijvers, P., Barendsen, E., & Tolboom, J. (2021). Characterising computational thinking in mathematics education: a literature-informed Delphi study, Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 159-187.   DOI
32 Ministry of Education, & Korea Institute of Curriculum and Evaluation. (2015). Compilational notes and authorization criteria for the development of textbooks based on the 2015 revised curriculum. Sejong: Ministry of Education.
33 Hwang, S. U., Kwon, S. H., Jeong, D. S., Park, S, U., & Hong, C. S. (2021). . Seoul: Mirea-N.
34 Wing, J. M. (2017). Computational thinking's influence on research and education for all. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 25(2), 7-14.
35 Lockwood, E., DeJarnette, A., Asay, A., & Thomas, M. (2016). Algorithmic thinking: an initial characterization of computational thinking in mathematics. In Wood MB, Turner EE, Civil M, Eli JA (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. The University of Arizona, Tucson, (pp 1588-1595).
36 Freeman, D. J., & Porter, A. C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools? American Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 403-421.   DOI
37 ISTE, & CSTA. (2011). Computational thinking in K-12 education leadership toolkit.
38 Kadijevich, D. M. (2018) A cycle of computational thinking. In Trebinjac B, Jovanovic S (Eds), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on e-learning. Met-ropolitan University, Belgrade (pp. 75-77). https://econference.metropolitan.ac.rs/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/e-learning-2018-final.pdf
39 Li, Y. (2000). A comparison of problems that follow selected content presentations in American and Chinese mathematics textbooks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 234-241.   DOI
40 Lee, S. G., Ko, H. K., Kim, Y. R., Park, J. S, ..., & Hong, O. S.,(2020). A development of a draft for the 2015 revised mathematics curriculum Artificial Intelligence Mathematics. KOFAC Research Report BD20100001.
41 Park, J. H., Park, M. S., & Kwon, O. N. (2018). An analysis of the introduction and application of definite integral in textbook developed under the 2015-Revised Curriculum. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematics Education Series A: The Mathematical Education, 57(2), 157-177.