Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 12 – uploaded by Firat Hayyam Sabuncu

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Table 12: Thoughts of Students on Computer Assisted Mathematics Teaching Ine of the students used the following expressions regarding the theme "satisfaction":

Table 12 Thoughts of Students on Computer Assisted Mathematics Teaching Ine of the students used the following expressions regarding the theme "satisfaction":

Related Figures (15)

Sabuncu, Firat Hayyam, and Ipek, Jale. (2021), Computer Assisted Education’s Effects of Learning the Eighth Grade Math Subjects with Geometer’s Sketchpad on Students’ Performance Grades and Academical Achievements and Students’ Opinions: A Mixed Method Study. In: Education Quarterly Reviews, Vol.4 Special Issue 1: Primary and Secondary Education, 307-322.
Sabuncu, Firat Hayyam, and Ipek, Jale. (2021), Computer Assisted Education’s Effects of Learning the Eighth Grade Math Subjects with Geometer’s Sketchpad on Students’ Performance Grades and Academical Achievements and Students’ Opinions: A Mixed Method Study. In: Education Quarterly Reviews, Vol.4 Special Issue 1: Primary and Secondary Education, 307-322.
Table 1: Mean Success Points of Classes for Previous Years According to the Data Taken from the e-School System As seen in Table 1, it has been determined that 8-A class has the mean of 74,624 and 8-B class has the mean of 74,359. Based on these data, it could be thought that the academic achievement levels of 8-A and 8-B classes were close to each other. Since the same mathematics teacher has been teaching in these two classes, it was thought that they could be suitable classes for the study. In order to determine whether the 8-A and 8-B classes were statistically equivalent or not, the Transformation Geometry Achievement Test was applied to both classes as a pretest and the data sets were analyzed. The findings obtained are given in Table 2.
Table 1: Mean Success Points of Classes for Previous Years According to the Data Taken from the e-School System As seen in Table 1, it has been determined that 8-A class has the mean of 74,624 and 8-B class has the mean of 74,359. Based on these data, it could be thought that the academic achievement levels of 8-A and 8-B classes were close to each other. Since the same mathematics teacher has been teaching in these two classes, it was thought that they could be suitable classes for the study. In order to determine whether the 8-A and 8-B classes were statistically equivalent or not, the Transformation Geometry Achievement Test was applied to both classes as a pretest and the data sets were analyzed. The findings obtained are given in Table 2.
Table 2: Independent Sample T-Test for Equivalence of Control and Experimental Groups According to the results of the Independent Sample T-Test, no statistically significant difference was found between academic achievement test pretest score averages of the control group and the experimental group (t (40) = - 0.55, p = 0.585, r = 0.04). The effect size value shows that there is a small difference between the mean scores of the groups (r = 0.04). It was determined that the groups chosen before the study were statistically equivalent to each other. Based on these data, 8-A class was assigned to the experimental group and 8-B class was assigned to the control group randomly.
Table 2: Independent Sample T-Test for Equivalence of Control and Experimental Groups According to the results of the Independent Sample T-Test, no statistically significant difference was found between academic achievement test pretest score averages of the control group and the experimental group (t (40) = - 0.55, p = 0.585, r = 0.04). The effect size value shows that there is a small difference between the mean scores of the groups (r = 0.04). It was determined that the groups chosen before the study were statistically equivalent to each other. Based on these data, 8-A class was assigned to the experimental group and 8-B class was assigned to the control group randomly.
The subject of “transformation geometry” was chosen because of the fact that reflection, symmetry, rotation and translation are among the basic concepts of geometry and it was determined that students have misconceptions about it in the literature. The dynamic geometry software, GSP, was chosen because it is an interactive teaching tool and enables constructivist teaching environments. Transformation geometry sub-learning areas were investigated before the implementation of the study, which was designed using a pretest-posttest control group quasi-experimental design. All the outcomes related to the subject have been determined by examining the curriculum and making use of the studies on sub-learning areas. Considering the opinions of the experts who have worked in the field, it was decided that a 3-week curriculum of 12 hours in total was sufficient for the students to achieve the relevant outcomes. The table of transformation geometry outcomes is given in Table 3. Before the implementation, information about the use of GSP was given to the math teacher of the school by t researcher and several practices were carried out together. Transformation geometry achievement test a computer attitude scale were applied to the both groups as a pretest. Then, 3 hours of training was given by t! math teacher in drawing points, segments and polygons, calculating side lengths and areas, creating a coordine system and determining the coordinates of geometric shapes in order to introduce the GSP software to t experimental group students and to gain them skills in using it in the IT Laboratory. There were 20+1 compute in the laboratory. After the implementation started, the subject of Transformation Geometry was taught to bo groups simultaneously by the same math teacher at the school. The control group was taught in the classroo using traditional teaching methods. The experimental group was taught the same subject in the IT Laborato1 The lessons were taught by math teacher with daily lesson plans, worksheets and GSP drafts prepared by tl researcher in accordance with the curriculum. Worksheets containing paper-pencil activities, thinking activiti and GSP activities were distributed to each student before the lesson. GSP activities were also copied to tl desktop of student computers by the researcher before the lesson started. Students created what was asked them in the worksheets and wrote their findings and generalizations on the worksheets. When it was the turn the relevant GSP activity in the worksheets, the students opened these drafts on their computers and worked « them. After each activity on the worksheets was completed, the students discussed the findings they obtain and the students who volunteered solved it on the smart board. After the existing worksheets were finished, ne worksheets were distributed to the students. The researcher was not present in the IT laboratory during t lesson, but he was ready outside in order to immediately intervene in the malfunctions that may occur in tl computers or the smart board and to ensure the effective use of the course time.
The subject of “transformation geometry” was chosen because of the fact that reflection, symmetry, rotation and translation are among the basic concepts of geometry and it was determined that students have misconceptions about it in the literature. The dynamic geometry software, GSP, was chosen because it is an interactive teaching tool and enables constructivist teaching environments. Transformation geometry sub-learning areas were investigated before the implementation of the study, which was designed using a pretest-posttest control group quasi-experimental design. All the outcomes related to the subject have been determined by examining the curriculum and making use of the studies on sub-learning areas. Considering the opinions of the experts who have worked in the field, it was decided that a 3-week curriculum of 12 hours in total was sufficient for the students to achieve the relevant outcomes. The table of transformation geometry outcomes is given in Table 3. Before the implementation, information about the use of GSP was given to the math teacher of the school by t researcher and several practices were carried out together. Transformation geometry achievement test a computer attitude scale were applied to the both groups as a pretest. Then, 3 hours of training was given by t! math teacher in drawing points, segments and polygons, calculating side lengths and areas, creating a coordine system and determining the coordinates of geometric shapes in order to introduce the GSP software to t experimental group students and to gain them skills in using it in the IT Laboratory. There were 20+1 compute in the laboratory. After the implementation started, the subject of Transformation Geometry was taught to bo groups simultaneously by the same math teacher at the school. The control group was taught in the classroo using traditional teaching methods. The experimental group was taught the same subject in the IT Laborato1 The lessons were taught by math teacher with daily lesson plans, worksheets and GSP drafts prepared by tl researcher in accordance with the curriculum. Worksheets containing paper-pencil activities, thinking activiti and GSP activities were distributed to each student before the lesson. GSP activities were also copied to tl desktop of student computers by the researcher before the lesson started. Students created what was asked them in the worksheets and wrote their findings and generalizations on the worksheets. When it was the turn the relevant GSP activity in the worksheets, the students opened these drafts on their computers and worked « them. After each activity on the worksheets was completed, the students discussed the findings they obtain and the students who volunteered solved it on the smart board. After the existing worksheets were finished, ne worksheets were distributed to the students. The researcher was not present in the IT laboratory during t lesson, but he was ready outside in order to immediately intervene in the malfunctions that may occur in tl computers or the smart board and to ensure the effective use of the course time.
Table 4: The Quantitative Method of the Research The experimental implementation was carried out in 12 lesson hours for 3 weeks. In the both groups, the subjects were started and completed at the same time. After the implementation, transformation geometry achievement test was applied to both groups as posttest. In addition, computer attitude scale was applied to the experimental group students as a posttest.
Table 4: The Quantitative Method of the Research The experimental implementation was carried out in 12 lesson hours for 3 weeks. In the both groups, the subjects were started and completed at the same time. After the implementation, transformation geometry achievement test was applied to both groups as posttest. In addition, computer attitude scale was applied to the experimental group students as a posttest.
Table 5: ANCOVA Analysis of the Pretest Corrected Posttest Scores According to Groups According to ANCOVA results given in Table 5, no statistically significant difference was found between the pretest-corrected posttest scores of the students studying in the control and experimental groups (F (1,42) = 0.049, p> .05, n? = .001). The finding of Eta-square (7) .001, which is the effect size, can be interpreted as 1% of the variance of achievement test scores originates from GSP supported education. This finding means that GSP supported instruction has a very low effect on Transformation Geometry Achievement Test scores. It was determined that all the assumptions required for the analysis (the need of a linear relationship between the dependent variable and covariate, the scores of the dependent variable for each of the groups are normally distributed and their variances are homogeneous, the regression slopes -coefficients- are equal within the groups) were met before ANCOVA Covariance Analysis was performed.
Table 5: ANCOVA Analysis of the Pretest Corrected Posttest Scores According to Groups According to ANCOVA results given in Table 5, no statistically significant difference was found between the pretest-corrected posttest scores of the students studying in the control and experimental groups (F (1,42) = 0.049, p> .05, n? = .001). The finding of Eta-square (7) .001, which is the effect size, can be interpreted as 1% of the variance of achievement test scores originates from GSP supported education. This finding means that GSP supported instruction has a very low effect on Transformation Geometry Achievement Test scores. It was determined that all the assumptions required for the analysis (the need of a linear relationship between the dependent variable and covariate, the scores of the dependent variable for each of the groups are normally distributed and their variances are homogeneous, the regression slopes -coefficients- are equal within the groups) were met before ANCOVA Covariance Analysis was performed.
Table 6: Mann-Whitney U Test for the Computer Attitude Scale Pretest Results of the Groups
Table 6: Mann-Whitney U Test for the Computer Attitude Scale Pretest Results of the Groups
Table 7: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test of the Experimental Group's Computer Attitude Scale Before and After Implementation * Based on negative ranks. According to the results of the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test given in Table 7, the use of CAI in mathematics eaching has no effect on computer attitude (T = 48.50, p = 0.058, z = -1.893, r = -0.41). The effect size value shows that there is a moderate difference between pretest and posttest (r = -0.41).
Table 7: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test of the Experimental Group's Computer Attitude Scale Before and After Implementation * Based on negative ranks. According to the results of the Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test given in Table 7, the use of CAI in mathematics eaching has no effect on computer attitude (T = 48.50, p = 0.058, z = -1.893, r = -0.41). The effect size value shows that there is a moderate difference between pretest and posttest (r = -0.41).
Table 8: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Regarding Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores of the Experimental Group's Computer Attitude Scale "Self-Confidence in Using Computer" Sub-Factor * Based on negative ranks. As seen in Table 8, a statistically significant difference was found in the attitude scores of the experimental group students before and after the implementation, belonging to the "self-confidence in using computer" sub- factor determined in the Computer Attitude Scale (p = 0.009, p <,05, r = -0.56). Considering the rank totals of the difference scores, it is seen that the observed difference is in favor of the posttest mean scores. This finding means that there is a positive increase in students’ self-confidence attitudes while using computers. The effect size value indicates a moderate difference (r = -0.56).
Table 8: Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test Regarding Pretest and Posttest Mean Scores of the Experimental Group's Computer Attitude Scale "Self-Confidence in Using Computer" Sub-Factor * Based on negative ranks. As seen in Table 8, a statistically significant difference was found in the attitude scores of the experimental group students before and after the implementation, belonging to the "self-confidence in using computer" sub- factor determined in the Computer Attitude Scale (p = 0.009, p <,05, r = -0.56). Considering the rank totals of the difference scores, it is seen that the observed difference is in favor of the posttest mean scores. This finding means that there is a positive increase in students’ self-confidence attitudes while using computers. The effect size value indicates a moderate difference (r = -0.56).
Table 9: Experimental Group Students’ Opinions Regarding the Learning of Geometry Topics Before Implementation
Table 9: Experimental Group Students’ Opinions Regarding the Learning of Geometry Topics Before Implementation
Table 10: The Views of the Experimental Group Students on Geometer's Sketchpad “What are your positive thoughts about Geometer's Sketchpad? Can you explain the reason?” The finding obtained from answers to this question are given in Table 10. It was concluded that the lessons were taught using the traditional teaching method in the classroom, various implementations were opened from the smart board and the subjects were learnt by making use of some educational websites and DGSs were not used.
Table 10: The Views of the Experimental Group Students on Geometer's Sketchpad “What are your positive thoughts about Geometer's Sketchpad? Can you explain the reason?” The finding obtained from answers to this question are given in Table 10. It was concluded that the lessons were taught using the traditional teaching method in the classroom, various implementations were opened from the smart board and the subjects were learnt by making use of some educational websites and DGSs were not used.
One of the students used the following expressions on the theme of "individual study”:
One of the students used the following expressions on the theme of "individual study”:
Table 13: Opinions of Students Related to Situations in Daily Life with Transformation Geometry Concepts “Do you think this software will contribute to teaching mathematics? Can you explain why?" The findings obtained from answers to this question are given in Table 14. Based on the answers given by the students, it could be said that they could make connections between the concepts they have learnt about transformation geometry with the situations they encountered in daily life, they could better understand the geometry of the various movements of objects, in short, they realized that there was mathematics in situations that they can encounter at any moment in daily life and that mathematics was a part of life.
Table 13: Opinions of Students Related to Situations in Daily Life with Transformation Geometry Concepts “Do you think this software will contribute to teaching mathematics? Can you explain why?" The findings obtained from answers to this question are given in Table 14. Based on the answers given by the students, it could be said that they could make connections between the concepts they have learnt about transformation geometry with the situations they encountered in daily life, they could better understand the geometry of the various movements of objects, in short, they realized that there was mathematics in situations that they can encounter at any moment in daily life and that mathematics was a part of life.
“Finally, do you want to add anything or do you have any suggestions about education? If so, what are they?" The findings obtained from answers to this question are given in Table 15. Based on the answers given by the students, it could be said that GSP software made the learning environment student-centered, provided better learning opportunities and helped the information they learnt to be more permanent due to the visual environment and implementation opportunities provided to students. CAI would contribute to students’ development of a more positive perspective on mathematics lesson, help students overcome their fear of mathematics and make the lesson more enjoyable. Based on the answers given by the students, it could be said that the implementation of CAI was more efficient, it should be applied to all students in other lessons, and it provided easier learning of the subjects due to its
“Finally, do you want to add anything or do you have any suggestions about education? If so, what are they?" The findings obtained from answers to this question are given in Table 15. Based on the answers given by the students, it could be said that GSP software made the learning environment student-centered, provided better learning opportunities and helped the information they learnt to be more permanent due to the visual environment and implementation opportunities provided to students. CAI would contribute to students’ development of a more positive perspective on mathematics lesson, help students overcome their fear of mathematics and make the lesson more enjoyable. Based on the answers given by the students, it could be said that the implementation of CAI was more efficient, it should be applied to all students in other lessons, and it provided easier learning of the subjects due to its
Related topics:
Dynamic Geometry SofwareComputer Assisted Instruction
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved