Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute
Asian Institute of Research, Journal Publication, Journal Academics, Education Journal, Asian Institute

Education Quarterly Reviews

ISSN 2621-5799

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
crossref
doi
open access

Published: 27 August 2021

Examination of 4th Grade Students' Definitions for Square, Rectangle and Triangle Geometric Shapes

Kemal Altıparmak, Gizem Gürcan

University of Ege, Turkey

asia institute of research, journal of education, education journal, education quarterly reviews, education publication, education call for papers
pdf download

Download Full-Text Pdf

doi

10.31014/aior.1993.04.03.340

Pages: 304-321

Keywords: Error, Misconception, Van Hiele Geometry Thinking Level, Hierarchical Definition, Partitional Definition

Abstract

The aim of this study is to obtain information about students' definitions, mistakes, misconceptions, and van Hiele geometry thinking levels by using the definitions of 4th grade students for geometric shapes of rectangle, square, isosceles triangle, equilateral triangle, and scalene triangle. The study was carried out with 156 primary school 4th grade students. In the study, the case design, one of the qualitative methods, was used. Students were asked to describe geometric shapes. It was observed that most of the 4th grade students participating in the study were in the visualization stage of van Hiele. There are very few definitions of the hierarchical structure in the study. Most correct definitions are in the partitional form. In the study, misconceptions were detected in some of the students.

References

  1. Aktaş, M. C., & Aktaş, D. Y. (2012). Öğrencilerin Dörtgenleri Anlamaları: Paralelkenar Örneği. Eğitim ve Öğretim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(2), 319–329.

  2. Ay, Y., & Başbay, A. (2017). Çokgenlerle İlgili Kavram Yanılgıları ve Olası Nedenler. Fen Eğitim Dergisi, 18(1) , 83-104.

  3. Berkün, M. (2011). İlköğretim 5 ve 7. sınıf öğrencilerinin çokgenler üzerindeki imgeleri ve sınıflandırma stratejileri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.

  4. Bernard, H. R. (2011). Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative And Quantitative Approaches. New York: Rowman Altamira.

  5. Clement, J. (1982). Algebra word-problems solutions: Thought processes underlying a common misconception. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13 (1), 16-30.

  6. Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 420­464). New York: Macmillan.

  7. Cochran, W. G. (2007). Sampling Techniques. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

  8. Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2016). Designing And Conducting Mixed Methods Research. New York: Sage.

  9. Drews, D. (2005). Children’s errors and misconceptions in mathematics. In A. Hansen (Ed.), Understanding common misconceptions in primary mathematics (pp. 14–22). London: Learning Matters Ltd.

  10. Eryılmaz, A., & Sürmeli, E. (2002). Üç-aşamalı sorularla öğrencilerin ısı ve sıcaklık konularındaki kavram yanılgılarının ölçülmesi. V. Ulusal Fen ve Matematik Eğitimi Kongresinde sunulmuş sözlü bildiri, Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Ankara, Türkiye.

  11. Fujita, T. (2012). Learners‘ level of understanding of the inclusion relations of quadrilaterals and prototype phenomenon. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31, 60–72.

  12. Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2007). Learners‘ understanding of the definitions and hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals: Toward a theoretical framing. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 3-20.

  13. Gal, H., & Linchevski, L. (2010). To see or not to see: Analyzing perspectives of visual perception. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 163-183.

  14. Gilbert, J., & Watts, M. (1983). Concepts, Misconceptions and Alternative Conceptions: Changing Perspectives in Science Education. Studies in Science Education, 10, 61-98.

  15. İncikabı, L., & Kılıç, Ç.(2013). İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Geometrik Cisimlerle İlgili Kavram Bilgilerinin Analizi. Kuramsal Eğitimbilim Dergisi, 6(3), 343-358.

  16. Jacobson, C., & Lehrer, R. (2000). Teacher appropriation and student learning of geometry through design. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(1), 71-88.

  17. Keiser, J. M., Klee, A., & Fitch, K. (2003). An assessment of students’ understanding of angle. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 9(2), 116-119.

  18. Kembitzky, A.K. (2009) Addressing Misconceptions in Geometry Through Written Error Analyses, Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

  19. Luneta, K. (2015). Understanding students’ misconceptions: An analysis of final Grade 12 examination questions in geometry. Pythagoras, 36(1), Art. 261, 11 pages.

  20. Mbusi, N. (2015). Misconceptions and related errors displayed by pre-service foundation phase teachers in transformation geometry. International Conference on Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 386–400.

  21. McMillan, J. H. (2004). Educational research: Fundematals for the consumer. (Fourth Edition). USA: Pearson Education, Inc.

  22. Matematik Öğretim Programı (2018). (İlkokul ve Ortaokul 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ve 8. Sınıflar). MEB: Ankara.

  23. Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

  24. Miyazaki, M., Kimiho, C., Katoh, R., Arai, H., Ogihara, F., Oguchi,Y., Morozumi, T., Kon, M., & Komatsu, K. (2012). Potentials for spatial geometry curriculum development with three-dimensional dynamic geometry software in lower secondary mathematics. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 19(2), 73-79.

  25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

  26. Ningrum, R. W., Yulianti M., Helingo, D. D. Z., & Budiarto, M,T. (2018). Students’ Misconceptions on Properties of Rectangles. Journal of Physics, Series 947(1).

  27. Ozerem, A., 2012. Misconceptions in geometry and suggested solutions for seventh grade students. Int. J. New Trends Arts Sports Sci. Educ., 1: 23-35.

  28. Öksüz, C. & Başışık, H . (2019). 5. Sınıf Öğrencilerinin Çokgenler ve Dörtgenler Konularında Sahip Oldukları Kavram Yanılgılarının Belirlenmesi. Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, Eskişehir Osmangazi Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi Armağan Özel Sayısı , 413-430 .

  29. Pickreign, J. (2007). Rectangle and Rhombi: How well do pre-service teachers know them? IUMPST, 1, 1-7.

  30. Ryan, J., & Williams, J. (2007). Children'S mathematics 4-15: learning from errors and misconceptions: learning from errors and misconceptions. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).

  31. Shaughnessy, J. (1981). Misconceptions of probability: From systematic errors to systematic experiments and decisions. In A.P. Shulte & J.R. Smart (Eds.), National Council of Teachers of Mathematics 1981 yearbook (pp. 90-100): Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

  32. Ubuz, B. (1999) 10. ve 11. Sınıflardaki Öğrencilerin Geometri Konularındaki Kavram Yanılgıları. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 16(17), 95-104.

  33. Van Hiele, P. M., (1986), Structure and Insight. A theory of Mathematics Education, Academic press Inc.

  34. Yenilmez, K., & Yaşa, E. (2008) . İlköğretim Öğrencilerinin Geometrideki Kavram Yanılgıları. Uludağ Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi , 11(2) , 461-463.

  35. Yıldırım, A., & Simsek, H. (2008). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.

  36. Yin, R. (2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, fourth edition, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.