• 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 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF QUADRILATERALS TOPIC CONTENT IN MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS BETWEEN MALAYSIA AND SOUTH KOREA | Abdullah | Journal on Mathematics Education

    A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF QUADRILATERALS TOPIC CONTENT IN MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS BETWEEN MALAYSIA AND SOUTH KOREA

    Abdul Halim Abdullah, Bomi Shin

    Abstract


    This study compares Malaysian and Korean geometry content in mathematics textbooks to help explain the differences that have been found consistently between the achievement levels of Malaysian and South Korean students in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Studies have shown that the use of textbooks can affect students’ mathematics achievements, especially in the field of geometry. Furthermore, to date, there has been no comparison of geometry content in Malaysian and Korean textbooks. Two textbooks used in the lower secondary education system in Malaysia and South Korea were referred. The topic of quadrilaterals was chosen for comparison, and the topic’s chapter in the South Korean textbook has been translated into English. The findings show four main aspects that distinguish how quadrilaterals are taught between the two countries. These aspects include the composition of quadrilaterals topics, the depth of concept exploration activities, the integration of deductive reasoning in the learning content and the difficulty level of mathematics problems given at the end of the chapter. In this regard, we recommend the Division of Curriculum Development of the Malaysian Ministry of Education reviews the geometry content of mathematics textbook used today to suit the curriculum proven to produce students who excel in international assessments.

    Keywords


    geometry; quadrilaterals; textbook; Malaysia; South Korea

    Full Text:

    PDF

    References


    Abdullah, A. H. & Zakaria, E. (2013). Enhancing students’ level of geometric thinking through van Hiele’s phase-based learning. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 6(5), 4432-4446.

    Ahamad, S.N.S.H., Li, H.C., Shahrill, M., & Prahmana, R.C.I. (2018). Implementation of problem-based learning in geometry lessons. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 943(1), 012008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/943/1/012008.

    Ahmad, M.N.N. (2016). A Discourse Analysis of Malaysian and Singaporean Final Secondary Level Mathematics Textbooks. Unpublished Master Dissertation. University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

    Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D.R. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Complete Edition. New York: Longman.

    Bal?m, A.G. (2009). The Effects of Discovery Learning on Students’ Success and Inquiry Learning Skills. Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 35, 1-20.

    Battista, M.T. (2002). Learning geometry in a dynamic computer environment. Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 333–340.

    Boyraz, S. (2008). The effects of computer based instruction on seventh grade students’ spatial ability, attitudes toward geometry, mathematics and technology. Unpublished Master Dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Turkey.

    Brahier, D.J. (2005). Teaching Secondary and Middle School Mathematics (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

    Bruni, J.V., & Seidenstein, R.B. (1990). Geometric concepts and spatial sense. Mathematics for the Young Child. Reston, Va.: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

    Cao, M. (2018). An Examination of Three-dimensional Geometry in High School Curricula in the US and China. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Columbia University, New York, USA.

    Cao, Y., Wu, L., & Dong, L. (2017) Comparing the Difficulty Level of Junior Secondary School Mathematics Textbooks in Five Nations. In: Son, J.W., Watanabe, T., Lo, J.J. (Eds.) What Matters? Research Trends in International Comparative Studies in Mathematics Education. Research in Mathematics Education. Cham : Springer.

    Ceretkova, S., Sedivy, O., Molnar, J., & Petr, D. (2008). The Role and Assessment of Textbooks in Mathematics Education. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 6, 27-37.

    Chew, C.M. (2009). Enhancing students' geometric thinking through phase-based instruction using Geometer's Sketchpad : A case study. Jurnal Pendidik dan Pendidikan, 24, 89-107.

    Choi, K.M., & Park, H-J. (2013). A Comparative Analysis of Geometry Education on Curriculum Standards, Textbook Structure, and Textbook Items between the U.S. and Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 9(4), 379-391. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.947a.

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

    Crowley, M. (1987). The van Hiele model of development of geometric thought. In. M. M. Lindquist, (Ed.). Learning and teaching geometry K-12, pp.1-16. Reston, VA: NCTM.

    Fan, L., Mailizar, M., Alafaleq, M., & Wang, Y. (2018). A Comparative Study on the Presentation of Geometric Proof in Secondary Mathematics Textbooks in China, Indonesia, and Saudi Arabia . In L. Fan, L. Trouche, C. Qi, S. Rezat, J. Visnovska (Eds.), Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: Advances and issues, Springer, Cham.

    Faucett, C.W. (2007). Relationship between type of instruction and student learning in geometry. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.Walden University, Minnesota, USA.

    Fujita, T. (2012). Learners’ level of understanding of the inclusion relations of quadrilaterals and prototype phenomenon. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 60-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2011.08.003.

    Fuys, D.J., & Liebov, A.K. (1997). Concept learning in geometry. Teaching Children Mathematics, 3, 248–251.

    Gillis, J.M. (2005). An investigation of student conjectures in static and dynamic geometry environments. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Auburn University, Alabama, USA.

    Gracin, D.G. (2018). Requirements in mathematics textbooks: a five-dimensional analysis of textbook exercises and examples, International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(7), 1003-1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1431849.

    Hadar, L.L. (2017). Opportunities to learn: Mathematics textbooks and students’ achievements. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 153–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.10.002.

    Halat, E. (2008). In-Service Middle and High School Mathematics Teachers: Geometric Reasoning Stages and Gender. The Mathematics Educator, 18(1), 8–14.

    Han, S., Rosli, R., Capraro, R.M., & Capraro, M.M. (2011). The Textbook Analysis on Probability: The Case of Korea, Malaysia and U.S. Textbooks. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education Series D: Research in Mathematical Education, 15(2), 127-140. https://doi.org/10.7468/jksmed.2011.15.2.127.

    Hong, D.S., & Choi, K.M. (2018). Reasoning and proving opportunities in textbooks: A comparative analysis. International Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 4(1), 82-97.

    Hsu, W-M., & Ko, F-Y. (2014). A Comparison of Geometry Content in Instructional Materials of Elementary School Mathematics Textbooks in Taiwan, Finland, and Singapore. Journal of Textbook Research, 7(3), 101-141.

    Husnaeni. (2006). Penerapan model pembelajaran Van Hiele dalam membantu siswa kelas IV SD membangun konsep segi tiga. Jurnal Pendidikan, 7(2), 67-78.

    Hwang, H.J. (2004). A comparative analysis of mathematics curricula in Korea and England focusing on the content of the algebra domain. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning. Available online at: http://www.ex.ac.uk/cimt/ijmtl/hwang.pdf

    Ibrahim, Z.B., & Othman, K.I. (2010). Comparative Study of Secondary Mathematics Curriculum between Malaysia and Singapore. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 351-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.049.

    Ismail, N.A., & Awang, H. (2008). Mathematics Achievement among Malaysian Students: What Can They Learn from Singapore. Paper presented at the 3rd IEA International Research Confenrence held on 18-20 September 2008 in Taipei, Taiwan.

    Kelley, G.D. (2013). Approaches to Proof in GeometryTextbooks: Comparing Texts from The 1980s and 2000s. Unpublished Master Thesis. University of Maryland, College Park, USA.

    Kim, H. (1993). A Comparative Study Between an American and a Republic of Korean Textbook Series’ Coverage of Measurement and Geometry Content in First Through Eighth Grades. Measurement & Geometry, 93(3), 123-126.

    Kim, R.Y. (2012). The quality of non-textual elements in mathematics textbooks: an exploratory comparison between South Korea and the United States. ZDM, 44(2), 175–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0399-9.

    Kistian, A., Armanto, D., & Sudrajat, A. (2017). The Effect of Discovery Learning Method on The Math Learning of The V SDN 18 Students of Banda Aceh, Indonesia. British Journal of Education, 5(11), 1-11.

    Koedel, C., Li, D., Polikoff, M.S., Hardaway, T., & Wrabel, S.L. (2017). Mathematics Curriculum Effects on Student Achievement in California. AERA Open, 3(1), 1-22.

    Kuang, K., Yao, C., Cai, Q., & Song, N. (2015). An International Comparison on the Degrees of Difficulty of Primary Mathematics Textbooks and Its Enlightenments. Comparative Education Research, 9, 75-80.

    Lepik, M., Grevholm, B., & Viholainen, A. (2015). Using textbooks in the mathematics classroom – the teachers’ view. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 20(3-4), 129-156.

    Leung, I.K.C., & Lew, H.-c. (2013). The ability of students and teachers to use counter-examples to justify mathematical propositions: A pilot study in South Korea and Hong Kong. ZDM: The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(1), 91-105. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0450-x.

    Maheshwari, G., & Thomas, S. (2017). An analysis of the effectiveness of the constructivist approach in teaching business statistics. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 20, 83-97.

    Ministry of Education Korea. (2018). Grade 8 Middle School Mathematics Textbook. Seoul: www.ktbook.com

    Ministry of Education Malaysia. (2016). Mathematics Textbook Form 1. Johor Bahru: Penerbitan Pelangi Sdn. Bhd.

    Mironychev, A.F. (2016). Logical Arrangement of Topics in the High School Geometry Curriculum: An International Comparison. Journal of Universality of Global Education Issues, 3, 1-16.

    Morgan, C. (2004). Writing Mathematically: The Discourse of Investigation. London: Falmer Press.

    Muhtadi, D., Wahyudin, Kartasasmita, B.G., & Prahmana, R.C.I. (2018). The Integration of technology in teaching mathematics. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 943(1), 012020. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/943/1/012020.

    Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2011/reports/international-results-mathematics.html

    Mustafa, S.T., Evrim, E., & Serkan, A. (2016). Factors Predicting Turkish and Korean Students’ Science and Mathematics Achievement in TIMSS 2011. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(7), 1711-1737. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2016.1530a.

    National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2015). Mathematics Curriculum, Teacher Professionalism, and Supporting Policies in Korea and the United States: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/21753

    National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston: VA.

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

    Newton, J. (2010). An examination of K-8 geometry state standards through the lens of van Hiele levels of geometric thinking. In J. P. Smith (Ed.), Variability is the rule: a companion analysis of K-8 state mathematics standards (pp. 71–94). Charlotte: InfoAge Publishing.

    Nik Azis Nik Pa. (1992). Agenda Tindakan: Penghayatan Matematik KBSR dan KBSM. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

    Nik Azis Nik Pa. (2008). Isu-isu kritikal dalam pendidikan matematik. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

    Noraini Idris. (2005). Pedagogy in Mathematics Education. Second Edition. Kuala Lumpur: Utusan Publication Sdn. Bhd.

    O’Dwyer, L., Wang, Y., & Shields, K. (2015). Teaching for conceptual understanding: A cross-national comparison of the relationship between teachers’ instructional practices and student achievement in mathematics. Large Scale Assessments in Education, 3(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-014-0011-6.

    Ozlem Sadi & Jale Cakiroglu. (2011). Effects of hands-on activity enriched instruction on students’ achievement and attitudes towards science. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 10(2), 87-97.

    Prahmana, R.C.I., & Suwasti, P. (2014). Local instruction theory on division in mathematics GASING. Journal on Mathematics Education, 5(1), 17-26. https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.5.1.1445.17-26.

    Revina, S., Zulkardi, Darmawijoyo, & Galen, F.V. (2014). Spatial visualization tasks to support students’ spatial structuring in learning volume measurement. Journal on Mathematics Education, 2(2), 127-146. http://dx.doi.org/10.22342/jme.2.2.745.127-146.

    Rezat, S. (2009). The utilization of mathematics textbooks as instruments for learning. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME6, Lyon France. http://www.inrp.fr/editions/cerme6. 15 July 2011.

    Saifulnizan Che Ismail. (2007). Pembinaan modul pembelajaran menggunakan perisian geometri interaktif, Unpublished Master Dissertation. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia.

    Scharfenberg, F. J., & Bogner, F. (2010). Instructional efficiency of changing cognitive load in an out-of-school laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 829-844. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690902948862.

    Shin, J., & Lee, S.J. (2018). The alignment of student fraction learning with textbooks in Korea and the United States. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 51, 129-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.11.005.

    Silalahi, S.M., & Chang, C.C. (2017). A Comparative Study of Geometry Problems in Junior Secondary Mathematics Textbooks From US, Singapore, and Indonesia. Proceedings of 76th IASTEM International Conference, Seoul, South Korea, 18th-19th September 2017.

    Sinambela, J.H., Napitupulu, E.E., Mulyono, & Sinambela, L. (2018). The Effect of Discovery Learning Model on Students Mathematical Understanding Concepts Ability of Junior High School. American Journal of Educational Research, 6(12), 1673-1677.

    Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Nah, K. (2013). A comparison of the pedagogical practices of mathematics education for young children in England and South Korea. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 145-165. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-013-9412-1.

    Son, J., & Senk, S. (2010). How reform curricula in the USA and Korea present multiplication and division of fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74(2), 117-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9229-6.

    Sukirwan, Darhim, Herman, T., & Prahmana, R.C.I. (2018). The students’ mathematical argumentation in geometry. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 943(1), 012026. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/943/1/012026.

    Thien, L.M., & Ong, M.Y. (2015). Malaysian and Singaporean students’ affective characteristics and mathematics performance: evidence from PISA 2012. Springer Plus, 4, 563.

    Thompson, D.R., Senk, S.L., & Johnson, G.J. (2012). Opportunities to learn reasoning and proof in high school mathematics textbooks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 43, 253-295. https://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.43.3.0253.

    Thompson, J., & Soyibo, K. (2002). Effects of lecture, teacher demonstrations, discussions and practical work on 10th graders’ attitudes to chemistry and understanding of electrolysis. Research in Science & Technological Education, 20, 25-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635140220130902.

    Tornroos, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn and student achievement. Studies In Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2005.11.005.

    Usiskin, Z. (1982). Van Hiele levels of achievement in secondary school geometry. Final report of the Cognitive Development and Achievement in Secondary School Geometry Project. Chicago, University of Chicago

    Usiskin, Z., Griffin, J., Witonsky, D., & Willmore, E. (2008). The Classification of quadrilaterals: a study of definition. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Valverde, G.A., Bianchi, L.J., Wolfe, R.G., Schmidt, W.H., & Houang, R.T. (2002). According to the Book - Using TIMSS to investigate the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Wang, T.L., & Yang, D.C. (2016). A Comparative Study of Geometry in Elementary School Mathematics Textbooks from Five Countries. European Journal of STEM Education, 1(3), 58. http://dx.doi.org/10.20897/lectito.201658.

    Wong, K-c. (2017). Reasoning-and-proving in geometry in school mathematics textbooks in Hong Kong. CERME 10, Feb 2017, Dublin, Ireland.

    Xin, Y.P. (2007). Word Problem Solving Tasks in Textbooks and Their Relation to Student Performance. The Journal of Educational Research, 100(6), 347-360. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.100.6.347-360.

    Yang, D-c, Tseng, Y-k & Wang, T-l. (2017). A Comparison of Geometry Problems in Middle-Grade Mathematics Textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2841-2857. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2017.00721a.

    Yunita, H., Wahyudin, & Sispiyati, R. (2017). Effectiveness of discovery learning model on mathematical problem solving. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1868(1), 050028. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4995155.




    DOI: https://doi.org/10.22342/jme.10.3.7572.315-340

    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