• https://theoejwilson.com/
  • mariatogel
  • santuy4d
  • garuda slot
  • garudaslot
  • https://edujournals.net/
  • nadimtogel
  • https://mitrasehatjurnal.com/
  • slot gacor hari ini
  • g200m
  • 55kbet
  • slot gacor
  • garudaslot
  • link slot gacor
    • A COMPARISON OF MATHEMATICAL TASKS TYPES USED IN INDONESIAN AND AUSTRALIAN TEXTBOOKS BASED ON GEOMETRY CONTENTS | Hidayah | Journal on Mathematics Education

    A COMPARISON OF MATHEMATICAL TASKS TYPES USED IN INDONESIAN AND AUSTRALIAN TEXTBOOKS BASED ON GEOMETRY CONTENTS

    Miftahul Hidayah, Helen Forgasz

    Abstract


    This study examined the type of mathematical tasks in two Australian and two Indonesian mathematics textbooks for 7th-grade students. The quantitative data were collected from the coding results of the tasks in the textbooks. The tasks were coded based on six categories: the presentation forms, the cognitive requirements, the contextual features, the information provided, the number of steps required, and the numbers of answers. Both the similarities and differences in the mathematical tasks provided in the selected textbooks were analysed. The coding results reveal that the majority of tasks in both the Australian and Indonesian textbooks were presented in verbal and combined forms. Routine and closed tasks were still dominant in the four textbooks. More than 93% of tasks in the four textbooks had sufficient information for students to solve the problem. One of the Australian textbooks had a higher proportion of tasks with real-world contexts than the other textbooks. One of the Indonesian textbooks showed a high proportion of tasks requiring multiple steps or procedures. These results were used to explore the learning opportunities offered by the textbooks, and the possible influence on students’ performances in international assessments. Some recommendations for the refinement of the textbooks and future research are also outlined at the end of the study.


    Keywords


    Textbook analysis; Mathematical Task; Australia; Indonesia

    Full Text:

    PDF

    References


    Adinawan, M. C., & Sugijono. (2013). Matematika untuk SMP/MTs kelas VII semester 2. Jakarta: Erlangga.

    Ahyan, S., Zulkardi, & Darmawijoyo. (2014). Developing mathematics problems based on PISA level of change and relationships content. Journal on Mathematics Education, 5(1), 47-56. http://dx.doi.org/10.22342/jme.5.1.1448.47-56.

    As’ari, A. R., Tohir, M., Valentino, E., Imron, Z., & Taufiq, I. (2016). Matematika SMP/MTs Kelas VII semester 2 (Revised ed.). Jakarta: Pusat Kurikulum dan Perbukuan, Balitbang, Kemdikbud.

    Boaler, J. (2013). Ability and mathematics: The mindset revolution that is reshaping education. FORUM 55(1), 143–52. Retrieved from: http://www.youcubed.org/wp-content/uploads/14_Boaler_FORUM_55_1_web.pdf.

    Brady, P., & Bowd, A. (2006). Mathematics anxiety, prior experience and confidence to teach mathematics among pre?service education students. Teachers and Teaching, 11(1), 37-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1354060042000337084.

    Brown, P., Evans, M., Gaudry, G., Hunt, D., McIntosh, J., Pender, B., & Ramagge, J. (2011). ICE-EM mathematics: Year 7 book 1 (Australian curriculum ed.). Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University Press.

    Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H., & Mesa, V. (2010). A comparative analysis of the addition and subtraction of fractions in textbooks from three countries. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(2), 117-151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10986060903460070.

    Cline, K. S. (2005). Numerical methods through open-ended projects. Primus: Problems, Resources, and Issues in Mathematics Undergraduate Studies, 15(3), 274-287. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511970508984122.

    Edo, S. I., Hartono, Y., & Putri, R. I. I. (2013). Investigating secondary school students’ difficulties in modelling problems PISA-model level 5 and 6. Journal on Mathematics Education, 4(1), 41-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.22342/jme.4.1.561.41-58.

    Freeman, D. J., & Porter, A. C. (1989). Do textbooks dictate the content of mathematics instruction in elementary schools? American Educational Research Journal, 26(3), 403–421. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/63064529?accountid=12528.

    Gatabi, A. R., Stacey, K., & Gooya, Z. (2012). Investigating grade nine textbook problems for charateristic related to mathematical literacy. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, 24(1), 403-421. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13394-012-0052-5.

    Goos, M., Stillman, G., & Vale, C. (2007). Teaching secondary school mathematics. Research and practice for the 21st century. Sydney: Allen & Unwin Academic.

    Guven, B., Aydin-Guc, F., & Ozmen, Z. M. (2016). Problem types used in math lessons: the relationship between student achievement and teacher preferences. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(6), 863-876. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1136438.

    Indonesian Ministry of Education and Culture. (2013). Basic framework and curriculum structure of secondary school in attachment of Permendikbud Number 69, year 2013. Jakarta: Kemendikbud.

    Kwon, O. N., Park, J. S., & Park, J. H. (2006). Cultivating divergent thinking in mathematics through an open-ended approach. Asia Pacific Education Review, 7(1), 51-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03036784.

    Li, Y. (2000). A comparison of problems that follow selected content presentation in American and Chinese mathematics textbooks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 234-241. https://doi.org/10.2307/749754.

    Martin, H. (2007). Mathematical literacy. Principal Leadership, 7(5), 28-31. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/61809884?accountid=12528.

    Mayer, R., Tajika, H., & Stanley, C. (1991). Mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States: A controlled comparison. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 69-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.83.1.69.

    McInerney, D. (2014). Motivation for Effective Learning. In Monash University (Eds.), Understanding Learning (pp. 96-136). Australia: Pearson.

    Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2011 International Result in Mathematics. Retrieved from http://timss2015.org/wp-content/uploads/filebase/full%20pdfs/T15-International-Results-in-Mathematics-Grade-4.pdf.

    Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 International Result in Mathematics. Retrieved from http://timss.bc.edu/timss2011/international-results-mathematics.html.

    Novita, R., Zulkardi, & Hartono, Y. (2012). Exploring primary student’s problem-solving ability by doing tasks like PISA’s questions. Journal on Mathematics Education, 3(2), 133-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.22342/jme.3.2.571.133-150.

    OECD. (2019). PISA 2018 (Volume 1): What Students Know and Can Do. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa-2018-results-volume-i_5f07c754-en.

    OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 Result in focus: What 15-year-olds know and what they can do with what they know. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/pisa-2012-results.htm.

    OECD. (2010). PISA 2009 results: Vols. I – V. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2009keyfindings.htm.

    Pehkonen, E. (1997). Use of problem fields as a method for educational change. In E. Pehkonen (ed.), Use of open-ended problems in mathematics classrooms, 73-84. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/ 62512746?accountid=12528.

    Sanchez, W. B. (2013). Open-ended questions and the process standards. The Mathematics Teacher, 107(3), 206-211. http://dx.doi.org/10.5951/mathteacher.107.3.0206.

    Smith, C., Elms, L., Roland, L., & Rowland, R. (2014). Maths Quest 7 for Victoria (Australian Curriculum ed.). Queensland: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.

    Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. A. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: an analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455-488. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312033002455.

    Sullivan, P. (2011). Teaching Mathematics: Using research-informed strategies. Australian Education Review. Victoria: Australian Council for Educational Research.

    Tatsuoka, K. K., & Corter, J. E. (2004). Patterns of Diagnosed Mathematical Content and Process Skills in TIMSS-R Across a Sample of 20 Countries. American Educational Research Journal, 41(4), 901-926. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312041004901.

    Vincent, J., & Stacey, K. (2008). Do mathematics textbooks cultivate shallow teaching? Applying the TIMSS video study criteria to Australian eighth-grade mathematics textbooks. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(1), 82-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217470.

    Wijaya, A., Van de Heuvel Panhuizen, M., Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(1), 41-65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10649-015-9595-1.

    Yan, Z., & Lianghuo, F. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from Mainland China and The United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(1), 609-626. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10763-006-9036-9.




    DOI: https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.11.3.11754.385-404

    Refbacks

    • There are currently no refbacks.


    Creative Commons License
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

    Journal on Mathematics Education
    Doctoral Program on Mathematics Education
    Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Sriwijaya
    Kampus FKIP Bukit Besar
    Jl. Srijaya Negara, Bukit Besar
    Palembang - 30139
    email: jme@unsri.ac.id
    p-ISSN: 2087-8885 | e-ISSN: 2407-0610

    Creative Commons License
    Journal on Mathematics Education (JME) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


    View My Stats