UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
UPSI Digital Repository (UDRep)
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract : Perpustakaan Tuanku Bainun |
| Evaluation on the quality of education in Malaysia is assessed mainly through written examinations. Both the Malaysian Education Development Plan for 2001-2010 and 2013-2025 outlined restructuring of the Integrated Secondary School Curriculum (KBSM) with one of the aims to enhance students_ critical and creative thinking which could be achieved through the imperative visual reasoning skills in mathematics education specifically in the solving of mathematical problems. This study presents the analysis on the roles of graphical tasks, which are visual in nature, in the mathematics papers, Mathematics and Additional Mathematics, of the main Malaysian national examination, the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia, with the visual reasoning demand as the point of focus. A quantitative analysis is carried out on the role of graphics: decorative, representational, organizational or informational, and the trend in topics with graphic-accompanied tasks. In addition, the level of visual reasoning demand by the graphical tasks: reading the graphics, reading between the graphics and reading beyond the graphics are also looked into. Findings observe that various forms of graphics are over-represented in the examination papers and suggest that the students_ ability to read and interpret graphics is central to the choice and structure of graphics accompanied in the problems. How information is presented plays a critical role in establishing students_ understanding of the mathematical concepts.
Keywords mathematic education, visual reasoning, graphics, mathematical tasks, decoding |
| References |
Ainsworth, S., & Loizou, A. T. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27, 669-681.
Bardelle, C.(2010). Visual Proofs: An Experiment. Proceedings of CERME 6, January 28th- February 1st 2009, Lyon France. INRP 2010
Blackwell, A., & Engelhardt, Y. (2002). A meta-taxonomy for diagram research. In M. Anderson, B. Meyer, & P. Olivier (Eds.), Diagrammatic representation and reasoning, 47–64. London: Springer-Verlag.
Carney, R. and Levin, J. R. (2002). Pictorial illustrations still improve students’ learning from text. Educational Psychology Review, 14,1, 5- 26.
Cook, M. (2011). Teachers’ use of visual representations in the science classroom. Science Education International, 22, 3,175-184.
Cox, R., & Grawemeyer, B. (2003). The mental organisation of external representations. Proceedings of the European Cognitive Science Conference (EuroCogSci-joint Cognitive Science Society and German Cognitive Science Society conference), Osnabrück, September,2003. Available from: http://www.cs.bath.ac.uk/~bg230/Cox& GrawemeyerEuroCogsci03.pdf
Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education Malaysia (2003). Integrated Curriculum for Secondary School Mathematics Curriculum Specifications. Kuala Lumpur.
Dhakulkar & Nagarjuna, (2011) An Analysis of Graphs in School Textbooks. Proceedings of epiSTEME 4 International Conference to Review Research on Science, Technology and Mathematics Education, 127-131. India: Macmillan.
Diezmann, C. M. (1999) Assessing diagram quality: Making a difference to representation. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, 185-191, Adelaide.
Diezmann, C.M.& English, L. D..(2001) Promoting the use of diagrams as tools for thinking. In Cuoco, A.A. (ed.) 2001 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Yearbook: The Role of Representation in School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, pp. 77-89.
Dufour-Janvier, B., Bednarz, N., & Belanger, M. (1987). Pedagogical considerations concerning the problem of representation. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation inthe teaching and learning of mathematics, 110-120. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Francisco, J.M., & Maher, C.A. (2005). Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem solving: Insights from a longitudinal study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24, 361-372.
Henningsen, M. & Stein, M.K.(1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroombased factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 524-549.
Hembree, R. (1992). Experiments and relational studies in problem-solving: A meta-analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 242–273.
Ichikawa, S. (2000). Benkyou-hou ga kawaru hon [A book about changing the approach to learning] Tokyo: Iwanami Press. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-99.
Kidman,G. (2002). The Accuracy of mathematical diagrams in curriculum materials. In Cockburn, A. & Nardi, E. (Eds) Proceeding of the PME 26, 3, 201-208. UK: University of East Anglia.
Larkin, J. and Simon, H. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11:65-69.
Lowrie , T. & Diezmann, C. M. (2007). Middle School students’ interpreting graphical tasks: Difficulties within a graphical language. Proceeding 4th East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education, Penang, Malaysia.
Ministry of Education (2001). Malaysian Education Development Plan 2001-2010. Kuala Lumpur
Ministry of Education (2013). Malaysian Education Development Plan 2013-2025. Kuala Lumpur
Mayer, R.E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instruction design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 125-139.
Novick, L. R. (2006). Understanding spatial diagram structure: An analysis of hierarchies, matrices, and networks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59, 1826- 1856.
Novick, L. R., & Hurley, S. M. (2001). To matrix, network, or hierarchy: That is the question. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 158–216.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2004).Learning for tomorrow’s world: First results from PISA 2003. Paris,VA: Author.
Pantziara, M., Gagatsis, A. &Pitta-Pantazi, D.(2004). The use of diagrams in solving nonroutine problems.Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 3, 489–496
Paoletti, G. (2004). Writing-to-learn and graph drawing as aids for the integration of text and graphs. In Rijlaarsdam, G., Van den Bergh, H. & Couzijn, M. (Eds.) Studies in writing. Volume 14, Effective learning and teaching of writing. Second Edition. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 587-598.
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 45, 255–87.
Postigo, Y. & Pozo, J. (2004). On the road to graphicacy: The learning of graphical representation systems. Educational Psychology, 24(5), 623-644.
OECD (2005). PISA 2003 Technical Report, OECD, Paris.
Shaughnessy, J.M. (2003). Research on Students’ Understanding of probability. In A Research Companion to Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Kilpatrick, J., Martin,
W.J., Schifter, D. (2003). (Eds.) Reston VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 216-226.
Uesaka, Y., & Manalo, E. (2011). The effects of peer communication with diagrams on students’ math word problem solving processes and outcomes. In L. Carlson, C. Hoelscher, & T. Shipley (eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society,312–317. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Uesaka, Y., Manalo, E., & Ichikawa, S. (2007). What kinds of perceptions and daily learning behaviours promote students’ use of diagrams in mathematics problem solving? Learning and Instruction,17, 322–335.
Uesaka, Y., Manalo, E., & Ichikawa, S. (2010). The effects of perception of efficacy and diagram construction skills on students’ spontaneous use of diagrams when solving math word problems. In A. K. Goel, M. Jamnik,& N. H. Narayanan (eds.), Diagrams 2010, LNAI 6170 (pp. 197–211).Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Winn, B. (1987). Charts, graphs, and diagrams in educational materials. In D. M.Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.). The psychology of illustration, 1. New York:Springer-Verlag. |
| This material may be protected under Copyright Act which governs the making of photocopies or reproductions of copyrighted materials. You may use the digitized material for private study, scholarship, or research. |