top of page
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: 15 December 2022

Integrated Mathematics and Science Instruction on Motion Problems in Grade 9 Classes

Cihan Kılıç, Belgin Özaydınlı-Tanrıverdi

Yıldız Technical University (Turkey), Kocaeli University (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.1993.05.04.611

Pages: 136-156

Keywords: Curriculum and Instruction, Integrated Teaching, Motion Problems, Upper Secondary Education, Mathematics Education, Science Education

Abstract

The integration of mathematics and science in teaching facilitates student learning, engagement, motivation, problem-solving, critical thinking, and real-life application. Although curriculum integration is theoretically desirable for many educators, what to integrate and how to integrate are often the big questions facing teachers working within education systems premised on a culture of segregated subject delivery. This quasi-experimental study reports on a 2-week inquiry of the implementation of an integrated unit of learning on motion problems, within upper secondary education in Turkey. In order to reveal the effect of the instruction on students with different mathematics achievements, the study was conducted with 131 students in two different schools. In the design of the integrated unit, continuum model of learning and four-stages of learning model were employed. The study employed a quantitative approach and examined the key aspects of the practice of the integration of mathematics and science teaching. In light of the data obtained, it was concluded that teaching the subject Motion Problems through an integrated design had a positive effect on students’ learning for the experimental groups in each school.

References

  1. Basista, B., & Mathews, S. (2002). Integrated science and mathematics professional development programs. School Science and Mathematics, 102(7), 359-370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb18219.x

  2. Başkan, Z., Alev, N., & Karal, A. S. (2010). Physics and mathematics teachers’ ideas about topics that could be related or integrated. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1558-1562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.235

  3. Berlin, D. F., & Lee, H. (2005). Integrating science and mathematics education: Historical analysis. School Science and Mathematics, 105(1), 15-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18032.x

  4. Berlin, D. F., & White, A. L. (1992). Report from the NSF/SSMA wingspread conference: A network for integrated science and mathematics teaching and learning. School Science and Mathematics, 92(6), 340-342. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1992.tb15602.x

  5. Berlin, D. F., & White, A. L. (2012). A longitudinal look at attitudes and perceptions related to the integration of mathematics, science, and technology education. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 20-30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00111.x

  6. Breiner, J. M., Harkness, S. S., Johnson, C. C., & Koehler, C. M. (2012). What is STEM? A discussion about conceptions of STEM in education and partnerships. School Science and Mathematics, 112(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00109.x

  7. Bosse, M., Lee, T., Swinson, M., & Faulconer, J. (2010). The NCTM process standards and the five es of science: Connecting mathematics and science. School Science and Mathematics, 110(5), 262-277. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00033.x

  8. Bower, M. L. W., & Ellerton, N. F. (2004). Language & Belief Factors in Learning & Teaching Mathematics & Physics: A Study of Three Teachers. In D. E. McDougall & J. A. Ross (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Annual Meeting, North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics & Education (PME-NA XXVI, Vol. 2, pp. 784-790). University of Toronto.

  9. Cohen, J. (2007). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.

  10. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage.

  11. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.

  12. Czerniak, C. M. (2007). Interdisciplinary science teaching. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education(pp. 537-560). Routledge.

  13. Czerniak, C. M., & Johnson, C. C. (2014). Interdisciplinary science teaching. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 395-411). Routledge.

  14. Davison, D., Miller, K. W., & Metheny, K. L. (1995). What does integration of science and mathematics really mean? School Science and Mathematics, 95(5), 226-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.1995.tb15771.x

  15. Dervişoğlu, S., & Soran, H. (2003). Ortaöğretim biyoloji eğitiminde disiplinlerarası öğretim yaklaşımının değerlendirilmesi [Evaluation of interdisciplinary teaching approach in secondary education biology education]. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Education, 25, 48-57. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/hunefd/issue/7813/102567

  16. Drake, S. M., & Burns, R. C. (2004). Meeting standards through integrated curriculum. Alexandria, Va: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  17. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-8327.1993.tb00605.x

  18. Frykholm, J., & Glasson, G. (2005). Connecting science and mathematics instruction: Pedagogical context knowledge for teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 105(3), 127-141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18047.x

  19. Furner, J. M., & Kumar, D. D. (2007). The mathematics and science integration argument: A stand for teacher education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3(3), 185-189. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/75397

  20. Gentry, A. R. (2016). An Integrated mathematics/science activity for secondary students: Development, implementation and student feedback[Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Colorado State University.

  21. Harris, J., Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. (2009). Teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge and learning activity types. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(4), 393-416. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2009.10782536

  22. Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: design and implementation. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  23. Jacobs, H. H., & Borland, J. H. (1986). The interdisciplinary concept model: Theory and practice. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30(4), 159-163. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F001698628603000403

  24. Karakuş, M., & Aslan, S. (2016).