Volume : 4, Issue : 3, MAR 2018

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STUDENT AWARENESS OF ROUTINE AND NON-ROUTINE QUESTIONS AND ACHIEVEMENT

SIBEL KAYA, ZEYNEL KABLAN

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between student awareness of routine and non-routine questions and their achievement levels. Student achievement on international tests relies on non-routine problem solving skills. Previous studies on non-routine questions focused on mathematics learning. However, non-routine questions can be found in other fields. In both PISA and TIMSS, there are non-routine science questions that are unfamiliar to students and that they require upper level science process skills, such as analyzing, synthesizing, hypothesizing and evaluating to reach the answer. Therefore, the current study focused on science learning. The participants were 121 undergraduate students (97 female, 24 male) enrolled in Primary Education program of a large university in western Turkey. The participants received a two-hour training from researchers on routine and non-routine questions. After the training, they completed an achievement test that consisted routine and non-routine questions, followed by a checklist in which they identified the question type as routine or non-routine. Study findings showed that, students are more successful on routine questions compared to non-routine ones. They also identified routine questions easier. There was a significant corelation between student awareness of non-routine questions and achievement. In order to increase student achievement on non-routine questions, their awareness of these questions need to be increased. However, the awareness is not adequate for success. Students also need to be informed about how to use their upper level cognitive skills in solving non-routine questions.

Article : Download PDF

Cite This Article

Article No : 7

Number of Downloads : 687

References

1. Altun, M., Memnun, D. S., & Yazgan, Y. (2007). Primary school teacher trainees’ skills and opinions on solving non-routine mathematical problems. Elementary Education Online, 6(1), 127-143. 2. Altun, M., & Memnun, D. S. (2008). Mathematics teacher trainees’ skills and opinions on solving non-routine mathematical problems. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 4(2), 213-238. 3. Artut, P. D., & Tar?m, K. (2006). ?lkö?retim ö?rencilerinin rutin olmayan sözel problemleri çözme düzeylerinin çözüm stratejilerinin ve hata türlerinin incelenmesi. Çukurova Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 15(2), 39-50. 4. Artut, P., & Tar?m, K. (2009). Ö?retmen adaylar?n?n rutin olmayan sözel problemleri çözme süreçlerinin incelenmesi. Uluda? Üniversitesi E?itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(1), 53-70. 5. Asman, D., & Markovits, Z. (2009). Elementary school teachers' knowledge and beliefs regarding non-routine problems. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 29(2), 229-249. 6. Baykal, A. (2013). Ucu aç?klar çoktan seçmelilere kar??. Art? E?itim Dergisi, 9(101), 24-25. 7. Bekdemir, M. & Selim, Y. (2008). Revize edilmi? Bloom taksonomisi ve cebir ö?renme alan? örne?inde uygulamas?. Erzincan E?itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(2) 185-196 8. Celebioglu, B., Yazgan, Y., & Ezenta?, R. (2010). Usage of non-routine problem solving strategies at first grade level. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2968-2974. 9. De Hoyos, M., Gray, E., & Simpson, A. (2004). Uncertainty during the early stages of problem solving. Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International,2, 255-262. 10. Dündar, S. (2015). Ö?retmen adaylar?n?n seriler konusuyla ilgili al??t?rmalar? ve rutin olmayan problemleri çözme becerilerinin incelenmesi. Kastamonu E?itim Dergisi, 23(3), 1293-1310. 11. English, L. D., & Halford, G. S. (1995). Mathematics education: Models and processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 12. Garden, R. A., Lie, S., Robitaille, D. F., Angell, C., Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V., ... & Arora, A. (2006). TIMSS Advanced 2008 Assessment Frameworks. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. Herengracht 487, Amsterdam 1017 BT, The Netherlands.
13. Gök, T. & S?lay, ?. (2009). Problem çözme stratejilerinin ö?renilmesinde i?birlikli ö?renme
yönteminin etkileri. Mersin Üniversitesi E?itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(1), 58-76. 14. Harskamp, E., & Suhre, C. (2007). Schoenfeld’s problem solving theory in a student controlled learning environment. Computers & Education, 49(3), 822-839. 15. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2013).TIMSS 2011 assessment. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA. 16. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). (2009).TIMSS 2007user guide for international database. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA. 17. ?ncebacak, B. B., & Ersoy, E. (2016). Problem solving skills of secondary school students. China-USA Business Review, 15(6), 275-285. 18. Jurdak, M. (2005). Contrasting perspectives and performance of high school students on problem solving in real world situated, and school contexts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 283-301. 19. Kablan, Z., Baran, T., & Hazer, Ö. (2013). ?lkö?retim matematik 6-8 ö?retim program?nda hedeflenen davran??lar?n bili?sel süreçler aç?s?ndan incelenmesi. Ahi Evran Üniversitesi K?r?ehir E?itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 14(1). 20. Kaya, S., Kablan, Z., & Rice, D. (2014). Examining question type and the timing of IRE pattern in elementary science classrooms. Journal of Human Sciences, 11(1), 621-641. 21. Kolovou, A.; van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. & Bakker, A. (2009). Non-routine problem solving tasks in primary school mathematics textbooks – A needle in a haystack. Mediterranean Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 8(2), 31-68. 22. Lee, C. Y., & Chen, M. P. (2009). A computer game as a context for non-routine mathematical problem solving: The effects of type of question prompt and level of prior knowledge. Computers & Education, 52(3), 530-542. 23. Lee, N. H., Yeo, D. J. S., & Hong, S. E. (2014). A metacognitive-based instruction for Primary Four students to approach non-routine mathematical word problems. ZDM, 46(3), 465-480. 24. Marchis, I. (2012). Non-routine problems in primary mathematics workbooks from Romania. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 5(3), 49-56.
25. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., & Foy, P., Olson, J. F., Erberber, E., Preuschoff, C., & Galia, J. (2008). TIMSS 2007 international science report. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College. 26. Milli E?itim Bakanl??? (2016). PISA 2015 ulusal raporu. Eri?im tarihi 21 Haziran 2017, http://pisa.meb.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/PISA2015_Ulusal_Rapor1.pdf 27. Mullis, I. V., Martin, M. O., Smith, T. A., Garden, R. A., Gregory, K. D., Gonzalez, E. J., ... & O'Connor, K. M. (2003). TIMSS Trends in mathematics and science study: Assessment frameworks and specifications 2003. International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. 28. Nancarrow, M. (2004). Exploration of metacognition and non-routine problem based mathematics instruction on undergraduate student problem-solving success (Unpublished doctoral thesis). The Florida State University, Florida. 29. OECD (2003).The PISA 2003. Assessment framework- mathematics, reading, science and problem solving knowlegde and skills. Eri?im tarihi 21 Haziran 2017, http://www.oecd.org/education/school/programmeforinternationalstudentassessmentpisa/33694881.pdf 30. Özmen, Z. M., Ta?k?n, D., & Güven, B. (2012). ?lkö?retim 7. s?n?f matematik ö?retmenlerinin kulland?klar? problem türlerinin belirlenmesi. E?itim ve Bilim, 37(165), 246-261. 31. Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method (2nd ed.). New York: Double Day and Co. 32. Polya, G. (1962). Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning, and teaching problem solving. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. 33. Polya, G. (1990). Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning: Induction and Analogy in Mathematics. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. 34. Pourdavood, R. R. (2012). Classrooms socio-mathematical discourse: two nine-grade-dyads’ non-routine problem-solving engagement. American Journal of Human Ecology, 1(2), 44-50. 35. Salleh, F., & Zakaria, E. (2009). Non-routine Problem-solving and attitudes toward problem-solving among high achievers. International Journal of Learning, 16(5), 549-559. 36. Santos-Trigo, M., & Camacho-Machín, M. (2009). Towards the construction of a framework to deal with routine problems to foster mathematical inquiry. Primus, 19(3), 260-279.
37. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). Cognitive science and mathematics education. Hillsadale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 38. Schoenfeld, A. H., (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenges of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28(7), 4-14. 39. Silver, E. A., Ghousseini, H., Gosen, D., Charalambous, C. & Strawhun, B. T. F. (2005) Moving from rhetoric to praxis: Issues faced by teachers in having students consider multiple solutions for problems in the mathematics classroom. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24, 287-301. 40. Slavin, R. E. (2000). Educational psychology: theory and practice. 6th. Ed. Singapore: Allyn and Bacon. 41. Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building students’ capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 455-488. 42. Teong, S. K., Hedberg, J. G., Ho, K. F., Lioe, L. T., Tiong, Y. S. J., Wong, K. Y. & Fang, Y. P. (2009). Developing the repertoire of heuristics for mathematical problem solving: Project 1. Final Technical Report for Project CRP1/04 JH. Singapore: Centre for Research in Pedagogy and Practice, National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University. 43. Ulu, M. (2008). S?n?f ö?retmeni-s?n?f ö?retmeni aday? ve 5. S?n?f ö?rencilerinin dört i?lem problemlerini çözmede kulland?klar? stratejilerin kar??la?t?r?lmas?. Afyon Kocatepe Üniversitesi, Yay?nlanmam?? yüksek lisans tezi. 44. Van Streum, A. (2000). Representations in applying functions. International Journal of Mathematics in Science and Technology, 31(5), 703-725. 45. Yenilmez, K. & Ya?a, E. (2007). Creative problem solving skills of the primary school students. Education Sciences, 2(4), 272-287. 46. Zakaria, M. J. (2002). Relationship between learning approach and problem solving on the topic of fraction. Unpublished Doctoral Thesis. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.