[Fostering Flexible Equation Solving in Classroom Talk-the Contribution of Comparing Solution Methods].

IF 0.9 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal fur Mathematik-Didaktik Pub Date : 2023-01-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-04 DOI:10.1007/s13138-023-00221-5
Christian Serop Hämmerle
{"title":"[Fostering Flexible Equation Solving in Classroom Talk-the Contribution of Comparing Solution Methods].","authors":"Christian Serop Hämmerle","doi":"10.1007/s13138-023-00221-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Students struggle with planning suitable solution methods in equation solving. Planning suitable solution methods is key to flexibility, a desired skill for equation solving. Comparing solution methods has been shown to foster flexibility. To support the learning benefits of the comparisons, productive classroom talk, which includes the discussion of different solution methods, is recommended. This study examines whether discussions that compare multiple methods include more planning processes than discussions that do not compare multiple solution methods or that are just about one solution method. The content analysis is based on utterances from 172 lessons from 43 classrooms in grades 9 and 10. The hypothesis is tested both <i>across classes</i> using binary logistic regression models and <i>at the class level</i> using paired samples t‑tests. The results show that planning processes are addressed about twice as often when comparing multiple solution methods. Additionally, the study finds that enacting solution methods is the most frequent topic in classroom talk about solving equations.</p>","PeriodicalId":43968,"journal":{"name":"Journal fur Mathematik-Didaktik","volume":"44 2","pages":"355-384"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10522760/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal fur Mathematik-Didaktik","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13138-023-00221-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Students struggle with planning suitable solution methods in equation solving. Planning suitable solution methods is key to flexibility, a desired skill for equation solving. Comparing solution methods has been shown to foster flexibility. To support the learning benefits of the comparisons, productive classroom talk, which includes the discussion of different solution methods, is recommended. This study examines whether discussions that compare multiple methods include more planning processes than discussions that do not compare multiple solution methods or that are just about one solution method. The content analysis is based on utterances from 172 lessons from 43 classrooms in grades 9 and 10. The hypothesis is tested both across classes using binary logistic regression models and at the class level using paired samples t‑tests. The results show that planning processes are addressed about twice as often when comparing multiple solution methods. Additionally, the study finds that enacting solution methods is the most frequent topic in classroom talk about solving equations.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
【在课堂上培养灵活的方程求解能力——谈谈比较求解方法的贡献】。
学生在方程求解中难以规划合适的求解方法。规划合适的求解方法是灵活性的关键,这是求解方程所需的技能。比较解决方法已被证明可以提高灵活性。为了支持比较的学习益处,建议进行富有成效的课堂谈话,包括讨论不同的解决方法。这项研究考察了比较多种方法的讨论是否比不比较多种解决方案方法或只讨论一种解决方案方法的讨论包含更多的规划过程。内容分析基于9年级和10年级43间教室172节课的话语。该假设使用二元逻辑回归模型在班级间进行测试,并在班级层面使用配对样本t检验。结果表明,在比较多种解决方案时,规划过程的处理频率大约是原来的两倍。此外,研究发现,制定求解方法是课堂上关于求解方程最常见的话题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal fur Mathematik-Didaktik
Journal fur Mathematik-Didaktik EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
22.20%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: ZielsetzungenDas ''Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik'' (JMD) publiziert Originalbeiträge aus allen Bereichen mathematikdidaktischer Forschung und Entwicklung. Eingereichte Texte werden in der Regel von drei anonym bleibenden FachgutachterInnen bewertet, die das Herausgebergremium des JMD benennt. Das Herausgebergremium entscheidet aufgrund der Gutachten und eigener Fachkompetenz über das weitere Vorgehen (wie Ablehnung, eventuelle Änderungsauflagen und/oder den Abdruck des Textes im JMD). Das JMD ist offen für Forschungsarbeiten aus Bezugswissenschaften (wie Pädagogik, Psychologie, Soziologie oder Philosophie) und Nachbarwissenschaften (wie Didaktik der Physik oder Sprachdidaktik), sofern sich die Beiträge in ihrem Schwerpunkt auf das Lernen und Lehren von Mathematik beziehen.Das JMD ist das offizielle Organ der Gesellschaft für Didaktik der Mathematik (GDM). Aims & ScopeThe “Journal für Mathematik-Didaktik” (JMD) publishes original work from all areas of research in mathematics education. Submitted articles will be anonymously reviewed by three experts who are appointed by the journals’ editors. The JMD is open to research in related disciplines (such as pedagogy, psychology, or science education), provided the main scope of the article remains the learning and teaching of mathematics.The JMD is the official journal of the GDM – Gesellschaft für Didaktik der Mathematik (Society of Didactics of Mathematics).
期刊最新文献
Which Potential Linguistic Challenges do Pre-Service Teachers Identify in a Mathematical Expository Text? Developing a Simulation to Foster Prospective Mathematics Teachers' Diagnostic Competencies: the Effects of Scaffolding. [Fostering Flexible Equation Solving in Classroom Talk-the Contribution of Comparing Solution Methods]. [Conceptualizing and Measuring the Quality of Adaptive Learning Support in Kindergarten Using Mathematical Board Games. A Study in Germany and Switzerland].
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1