کاربست نشانگرهای تدریس اثربخش درس ریاضی در دبیرستان‌های شهر اصفهان
محورهای موضوعی : پژوهش در برنامه ریزی درسی
محمد جواد لیاقتدار
1
(
استاد برنامه‌ریزی درسی، دانشگاه اصفهان، ایران
)
مصطفی مهدیان
2
(
دانش‌آموخته برنامه‌ریزی درسی، دانشگاه اصفهان، ایران
)
نرجس امینی
3
(
دانشجوی دکتری برنامه‌ریزی درسی، دانشگاه اصفهان، ایران
)
کلید واژه: مدارس غیرانتفاعی, مدارس دولتی, تدریس اثربخش, آموزش ریاضی,
چکیده مقاله :
هدف پژوهش حاضر بررسی میزان کاربست نشانگرهای تدریس اثربخش درس ریاضی در دبیرستان‌های دولتی و غیرانتفاعی شهر اصفهان از منظر دانش‌آموزان بوده است. تحقیق حاضر از نوع توصیفی - پیمایشی بوده است. جامعة آماری پژوهش شامل دانش‌آموزان دوره پیش‌دانشگاهی مقطع دبیرستان است که با روش نمونه‌گیری هدفمند، تعداد 150 نفر دانش‌آموز به‌صورت تصادفی خوشه‌ای به‌عنوان نمونة آماری انتخاب شدند. ابزار اصلی جمع‌آوری داده‌ها پرسشنامه ارزشیابی تدریس (2008 Course Evaluation Quessionnaire, بوده است. داده‌های گردآوری شده با شاخص‌های آمار توصیفی (درصد) و آمار استنباطی (آزمون t تک متغیره، t مستقل، u من ویتنی) تحت نرم‌افزار SPSS15 مورد تحلیل قرار گرفت. نتایج نشان داد که دانش‌آموزان مدارس غیرانتفاعی میزان به‌کارگیری نشانگرهای تدریس اثربخش توسط دبیران ریاضی را در حد بالاتر از متوسط برآورد نموده‌اند و دانش‌آموزان مدارس دولتی میزان به‌کارگیری نشانگرهای تدریس اثربخش توسط دبیران ریاضی را در حد کمتر از متوسط برآورد نموده‌اند. برای همه دانش‌آموزان صرف‌نظر از جنسیت و نوع مدرسه اعم از غیرانتفاعی و دولتی بهترین ویژگی تدریس اثربخش ریاضی، مؤلفه "تضارب افکار" بوده است. در پایان برای بهبود کیفیت آموزش ریاضی گسترش علوم بین رشته‌ای جدید "آموزش ریاضی" با پژوهش‌های مورد نیاز آن در زمینه‌های تربیتی و تلفیق متناسب علوم تربیتی با دانش ریاضی پیشنهاد شده است.
The recent research goal is to evaluate effective teaching applying signsscale about mathematic course in public high school and non- profitable inEsfahan city from the view of students. The present research wasdescriptive-survey. The statistical population of the study consisted ofpre-university students in high school. Using a targeted sampling method, 150students were randomly selected as the statistical sample. The main instrumentof data collection was a Course evaluation questionnaire. The collected datawere analyzed by descriptive statistics (percent) and inferential statistics(single variable t test, t-test, Yu-mann-Whitney test). The results showed thatthe non-profitable school students have assessed effective teaching applyingsign scale more than medium and public school students have examined such signsfewer than medium, regardless of all students gender and the kind of theirschools, the best effective teaching quality for math has been (thoughmultiply) at the end in order to improve the mathematic teaching quality basedon the research results, propositions has been presented to officials, ofnecessities and new course intermediate science establishment is math teachingwith its requested researches on the field of training and relevant combinationof training science with mathematic knowledge for such aim providing closerelation and collaboration between trying science university and mathematiccollage could be useful.
Ahmadi, Gh.A. (2001). Study of the consistency and coordination between the three programs planned, implemented and acquired in the new curriculum science education program. Journal of Research Institute of Education, 22(86): 51-92. [Persian]
Aly, M. (2004). The Effect of Active Methods of Teaching and the Traditional Method on Students' Performance in Mathematical Mathematics. Abstract Collection Articles in Seventh Conference on Mathematical Education in Sanandaj: Kurdistan Education Organization.. [Persian]
Andalib, B;&ahmadi, G. (2007). Implement scale effective teaching criteria’s viewpoint of students in islamic azad university khurasgan branch in 2006 year. Knowledge and research in educational science quarterly,15, 67-82. [Persian]
Andreassen, R., & Braten, I. (2011). Implementation and effects of explicit reading compregevsion instruction in fifth- grade classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 21, 520- 537.
Blazar, D. (2015). Effective teaching in elementary mathematics: Identifying classroom practices that support student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 48, 16–29.
Bromes, D. (2003). Mathematical education for elementary school children. translated by Mohammadreza Karateti, Tehran: Growth.. [Persian]
Brown, M., Askew, M., Baker, D., Denvir, B., & Millett, A. (1998). Is the National Numeracy Strategy research-based? British Journal of Educational Studies, 46(4): 362-385.
Cakmak, M. (2009). The Perceptions of student teachers about the effects of class size with regard to effective teaching process. The qualitative report. 14, 395-408.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J.N., & Rockoff, J.E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American Economic Review, 104 (9): 2633–2679.
Danielson, C. (2007). Enhacing Professional Practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria,VA: Association for supervision and curriculum Development.
Elliott, B. L. S. (2010). Effective teacher characteristics: A Two Nation Causal Comparative Study. Ph.D. Walden University.
ESRC. (2010). The most effective teachers are in a class of their own.Teaching Business & Economics, 14 (1), 27-28.
Gourneau, B. (2005). Five attitudes of effective teachers: Implications for teacher training. Essays in Education. 13, 1-8.
Grant, L., Stronge, J.H., Popp, P. (2008). Effective teaching and At-Risk/Highly mobile students: What do award-winning teachers do? Available from: http://center.serve.org/nche/downloads/eff_teach. pdf.
Halat, E., Şahin, o. (2008). Van Hiele Levels of Pre- and In- Service Turkish Elementary School Teachers and Gender Related Differences in Geometry. Journal The Mathematics Educator, 11(1/2): 143-158.
Husen, T. (1967). International study of achievement: A comparison of 12 countries. New York: John Wiley & Sons.3.
Ingvarson, L., Beavis, A., Bishop, A., Peck, R., & Elsworth, G. (2004). Investigation of effective Mathematics teaching and learning in Australian secondary schools. Retrieved from http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/EA543951-4D16-4E9A-A92D- 6F98A49C7879/1629/report_web.pdf.
Ismail, S.F.Z.H., Shahrill, M., Mundia, L. (2014). Factors Contributing to Effective Mathematics Teaching in Secondary Schools in Brunei Darussalam. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 186, 474 – 481.
Khan, S.B. (2012). Preparation of Effective Teachers of Mathematics for Effective Teaching of Mathematics. Journal Of Educational And Instructional Studies In The World, 2 (4): 82-88.
Koster, B.; Brekelmans, B.; Wubbels, K. (2005). Quality requirements for teacher educators. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(2): 158161.
Krainer, K; Kieran, C; & Shaughnessy, J.M. (2013). Linking Research to Practice: Teachers Education Research. In M. A. (Ken) Clements, A. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. Leung. (Eds.). Third International Handbook of Mathematics Education. Springer.
Leikin, R. (2003). Raising mathematics teacher expectations of pupils' ability to solve challenging problems. In Velikova, E. (Ed.) Proceedings of The 3rd International Conference "Creativity in mathematics education and the education of gifted students", (pp. 243-250). Athens, Greece: V-publications.
Maduabum, M. A. (2009). Science teacher effectiveness and national goal attainment in Nigeria: In search and solution. 11th Inaugural Lecture Abia State University, 1–37. Retrieved from http://www.nmcabuja. org/Lectures/qualities_of_a_Mathematics_teacher.doc.
McDonough, A., & Clarke, D. (2012). Describing the practice of effective teachers of mathematics in the early years. In N. A. Pateman, B. J. Dougherty, & J. Zilliox (Eds.), Proc. 27th Conf. of the Int. Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 3, 261-268). Honolulu, USA: PME.
Middleton, J.A., & Spanias, P. (1999). Motivation for Achievement in Mathematics: Findings, Generalizations, and Criticisms of the Recent Research. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1): 65-88.
Miller, K. (2003). School teacher and leadership impacts on student achievement [policy brief]. Aurora, CO: Mid-continent. Research for Education and Learning.
Morgan, C. (2009). Questioning the mathematics curriculum: a discursive approach. In L. Black, H. Mendick & Y. Solomon (Eds.), Mathematical Relationships in Education: Identities and Participation (pp. 97-106). London: Routledge.
Mortimore, P., Sammons, P., Stoll, L., Lewis, D., & Ecob, R. (1988). School Matters, Wells, Somerset: Open Books.
Motallebifard, alireza;yagobnegad, naser; &sadin,aliakbar. (2011). Components of effective teaching in higher education, first International Congress Management; providence; Entrepreneurship and industrial in higher education, Sanandaj University.
Nasri, S. (2002). The Relationship between Mathematical Function and Some Psychological Variables in Students. Abstract Collection of Sixth Conference on Mathematical Education. Shiraz: Education Organization of Fars province. [Persian]
Nicoleta, S. (2011). Teachers for the knowledge society. How can technology improve math learning process? Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 11, 170–174.
Nye, B., Konstantopoulos, S., &Hedges, L.V. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 26 (3): 237–257.
Pahlevan Sadegh, A., Farzad, V., Naderi, E. (2005). Relationship mathematical progression Iranian male and female students participated in TIMMS 2003 with individual and family variables. New Cognitive Science, 7 (4), 22-15. [In Persian.]
Pakdel, L. (2003). Comparison of the Effectiveness of Active Teaching Method and traditional on the Development of academic of Friedan Students in year 81-82.. Master's Degree, Esfahan: Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Isfahan. [Persian]
Posamentier, A. S., & Stepelman, J. (1999). Teaching secondary mathematics: Techniques and enrichment units. 5th ed. Prentice–Hall, Inc., USA.
Rahimizadeh, Y. (2002). Studying the Causes of Student's Failure in Mathematical Education in Semnan Province, MSc Thesis, Semnan.. [Persian]
Research Institute for Educational Studies. (2005). Familiarity with Thesespelles International. Center for International Studies of Thames & Pearl
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools and academic achievement. Econometric, 73, 417–458.
Runnels, J.R., Rooze, G.E. (1996). Effect of Cooperative Learning Among Spanich Students in Dementry Social Studies. Journal of Educational Research, 3(3): 187-191.
Safavi, A. (1995). Comparative study of the methodology and content of mathematical education in several countries in elementary and guidance courses in order to achieve the principles and methods of mathematical education. Tehran: Office of Planning and Writing of Textbooks.. [Persian]
Sattari, S. (2014). Assessment of effective teaching, components based on the students viewpoints. Research in Curriculum Planning, 10(12): 134-146. [Persian]
Seah, W. T. (2007). Qualities co-valued in effective Mathematics lessons in Australia: Preliminary findings. Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 4, pp. 161–168. Seoul: PME.
Sharifian, F. (2005). Investigating and explaining effective teaching markers in higher education institutions and their research in Isfahan University. Master thesis, Esfahan: Faculty of Educational Sciences, University of Isfahan.. [Persian]
Shokouhian, H. (1995). The Effect of In-Service Training on the Teaching Efficiency and Sustainability of Teachers in Neyshabur. Neishabour: Research Council of Khorasan Education Directorate.. [Persian]
Slavin, R.E. (1991). Synthesis of Research of Cooperative Learning. Educational Leadership, 48, 71-77.
Spicuzza, R., Ysseldyke, J., Lemkuil, A., Kosciolek, S., Boys, C., Teelucksingh, E. (2001). Effects of curriculum-based monitoring on classroom instruction and math achievement. Journal of School Psychology, 39, 521-542.
Stanford, B. H. (2001). Reflections of resilient: Persevering urban teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly, 28, 75-87.
Stronge, J. H. (2002). Qualities of effective teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum Development.
Tanner, K. & Allen, D. (2004). Approaches to biology teaching and learning: understanding the wrong answers—teaching toward conceptual change. Cell Biology Education, 4, 112.
Tezer, M. & Karasel, N. (2010). Attitudes of primary school 2nd and 3rd grade students towards mathematics course. Journal of Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 5808–5812.
Unal, H. (2005). The Influence of Curiosity and Spatial on Preservice Middle and Secondary Mathematics Teachers Understanding of Geometry. Retrived 2005-30-03 from. http://www.google.com.
Wayne, A.J., & Youngs, P. (2003). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: are view. Review of Educational Research, 73 (1): 89–122.
Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Students motivation in middle school: The role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411-419.
Young, D. R., Westerhof, K. J., & Kruiter, J. H. (2004). Empirical evidence of a comprehensive model of school effectiveness: a multilevel study in Mathematics in the first year of junior general education in the Netherlands. School effectiveness and school improvement, 15 (1), 3-31.
Zafar Bakhsh, M. (2004). An Investigation and Comparison of Active and Traditional Teaching Methods in Students' Learning in the Course of Statistics and Modeling in the academic year of 83-82. Management and Planning Organization of Isfahan Province, Thesis Master. [Persian]
Zaraei, H.A., Golam Hosseinzadeh, O.K., Charmchian Langroudi, M. (2017). Structural Equation Modeling in Teaching Effectiveness of Upper Secondary Level Math Teachers in East of Mazandaran during the Educational Year 2015-16. Quarterly Journal of Educational and Vocational Education, 10(38): 95-113. [Persian]
Zarei, A. (2001). Investigating the Relationship between Documentary Styles and Achievement Motivation with Academic Achievement. Master thesis,Tehran: Tarbiat Moallem University. [Persian]
Zaslavsky, O.; & Leikin, R. (2004). Professional development of mathematics teacher educator: Growth through practice. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
_||_