The Study of Geometry in Elementary Mathematics Textbooks in Finland, Singapore, and Taiwan

Der-Ching Yang(1*),

(1) National Chiayi University
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


This study examined the differences in the presentation of geometry concepts and
characteristics of geometry questions among elementary mathematics textbooks in
Finland, Singapore, and Taiwan. Horizontal and vertical analysis methods were used to
collect and analyze the data. A popular Mathematics textbook from a dominant publisher
in each country was selected: Laskutaito from Finland, My Pals are Here! Maths from
Singapore, and Kang Hsuan from Taiwan. The results indicated differences in the
presentation of geometry concepts among the three textbooks series. In addition, the
questions in these textbooks were determined to demonstrate different characteristics.
Moreover, these findings highlight the importance of cross-national textbook comparison
to enhance the understanding of differences in learning opportunities across different
countries.

Keywords


characteristics; elementary school; geometry; mathematics textbook

Full Text:

PDF

References


Alajmi, A. H. (2012). How do elementary textbooks address fractions? A review of mathematics textbooks in the U.S., Japan, and Kuwait. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79, 239-261.

Atiyah, M. (2001). Mathematics in the 20th century. American Mathematical Monthly, 108(7), 654-666.

Baker, D., Knipe, H., Cummings, E., Blair, C., & Gamson, D. (2010). One hundred years of elementary school mathematics in the United States: A content analysis and cognitive assessment of textbooks from 1900 to 2000. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(4), 383-423.

Bieda, K. N., Ji, X., Drwencke, J., & Picard, A. (2014). Reasoning-and-proving opportunities in elementary mathematics textbooks. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 71-80.

Cai, J. & Cirillo, M. (2014). What do we know about reasoning and proving? Opportunities and missing opportunities from curriculum analyses. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 132-140.

Cai, J. & Ni, Y. (2011). Investigating curricular effect on the teaching and learning of mathematics in a cultural context: Theoretical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 65-70.

Cai, J. (1995). A cognitive analysis of U.S. and Chinese students mathematical performance on tasking involving computation, simple problem solving, and complex problem-solving. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education (Monograph series 7). Reston, VA: NCTM.

Cai, J., Ni, B., & Moyer, J. C. (2010). The teaching of equation solving: Approaches in standards-based and traditional curricula in the United States. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 5(3), 170-186.

Cai, J., Wang, N., Moyer, J. C., Wang, C., & Nie, B. (2011). Longitudinal investigation of the curriculareffect: An analysis of student learning outcomes from the LieCal Project in the United States. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 117–136. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2011.06.006

Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H.-Y., & 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. doi: 10.1080/10986060903460070

Ding, M. & Li, X. (2010). A comparative analysis of the distributive property in U.S. and Chinese elementary mathematics textbooks. Cognition and Instruction, 28(2), 146-180.

Fan, L. (2013). Textbooks research as scientific research towards the common ground on issues and methods of research on mathematics textbooks. ZDM -Mathematics Education, 45, 765-777.

Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbooks research in mathematics education: development, status and direction. ZDM, 45, 633-646.

Finnish National Board of Education. (2004). National Core Curriculum for Basic Education 2004. Retrieved April 20 2017, from. http://www.oph.fi/english/publications/2009/national_core_curricula_for_basci_education

Fong, H. K., Ramakrishnan, C., & Gan, K. S. (2005). Maths 1A to 6B. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish Education.

Fujita, T. & Jones, K. (2014). Reasoning-and-proving in geometry in school mathematics textbooks in Japan. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 81-91.

Ginsburg, A., Leinwand, S., Anstrom, T., & Pollock, E. (2005). What the United States can learn from Singapore’s world-class mathematics system (and what Singapore learn from the United States): An exploratory study. Retrieved April 25, 2017 from. http://www.air.org/news/documents/Singapore/htm.

Grouws, D. A., Tarr, J. E., Chávez, Ó., Sears, R., Soria, V., & Taylan, R. D. (2013). Curriculum and implementation effects on high school students’ mathematics learning from curricula representing subject-specific and integrated content organizations. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(2), 416–463.

Haggarty, L. & Pepin, B. (2002). An Investigation of Mathematics Textbooks and their Use in English, French and German Classrooms: Who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 567-590.

Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., & Jacobs, J. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.

Hong, D. S. & Choi, K. M. (2014). A comparison of Korean and American secondary school textbooks: the case of quadratic equations. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(2), 241-263.

Howson, G. (1991). National curricula in mathematics. Leicester, UK: The Mathematical Association.

Hoyles, C., Foxman, D., & Ku¨chemann, D. (2002). A comparative study of geometry curricula. London, UK: Institute of Education.

Huang, R. & Cai, J. (2011). Pedagogical representations to teach linear relations in Chinese and U.S. classrooms: Parallel or hierarchical? Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 30(2), 149-165.

Jones, K. & Fujitita, T. (2013). Interpretations of national curricula: the case of geometry in textbooks from England and Japan. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45, 671-683.

Kang Hsuan Educational Publishing Group. (2010). Mathematics Textbook 1A-6B. Taipei, Taiwan: Kang Hsuan Educational Publishing Group.

Ministry of Education in Singapore. (2001). Primary mathematics syllabus. Singapore: Curriculum Planning and Development Division.

Ministry of Education in Taiwan [MEiT]. (2008). Nine-year joint mathematics curricula plan in Taiwan. Taiwan: Ministry of Education.

Miyakawa, T. (2012). Proof in geometry: A comparative analysis of French and Japanese textbooks. In T. Y. Tso (Ed.), Proceedings of the 36th conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 3, pp. 225-232). Taipei, Taiwan: PME.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

Park, K. & Leung, F. K. S. (2006). A comparative study of the mathematics textbooks of China, England, Japan, Korea, and the United States. In F. K. S. Leung, K. D. Graf, and F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.). Mathematics education in different cultural traditions—A comparatives study of East Asia and the West: The 13th ICMI study (pp. 227-238). New York, NY: Springer.

Peterson, B. E. (2008). A look at Japanese junior high school mathematics textbooks. In Z. Usiskin and E. Willmore (Eds.), Mathematics Curriculum in Pacific Rim Countries: China, Japan, Korea, and Singapore (pp. 209-231). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Provenzo, E. F. J., Shaver, A. N., & Bello, M. (Eds.). (2010). The Textbook As Discourse: Sociocultural Dimensions of American Schoolbooks. New York, NY: Routledge.

Reys, B. J, Reys, R. E., & Rubenstein, R. (2010). Mathematics Curriculum: Issue, Trends, and Future, Direction. Seventy-second Yearbook. Reston, VA: NCTM.

Reys, B. J. & Reys, R. E. (2004).Why mathematics textbooks matter. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 61-66.

Reys, B. J. & Reys, R. E. (2006). The development and publication of elementary mathematics textbooks: Let the Buyer Beware!Phi Delta Kappan, 87(5), 377-384.

Rikala, S., Sintonen, A., Uus-Leponiemi, T., Ilmavirta, R., & Sieppe, H. (2006). Laskutaito in English, grade 1 to grade 6.Helsinki, Finland: WSOY Oppimateriaalit Oy.

Schmidt, W. H., Mcknight, C. C., Houang, R. T., Wang, H., Wiley, D. E., Cogan, L. S., & Wolfe, R. G. (2001). Why schools matter: A cross-national comparison of curriculum and learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Valverde, G. A., Houang, R. T., Wang, H., & Wiley, D. E. (1997). Many visions, many aims: A cross-national investigation of curricular intentions in school mathematics (Vol. 1). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Schoen, H, L., Ziebarth, S. W., Hirsch, C. R., & BrckaLorenz, A. (2010). A 5-year study of the first edition of the core-plus mathematics curriculum.Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Sinclair, N. (2008). The history of the geometry curriculum in the United States. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

Son, J. W. & Senk, S. L. (2010). How reform curricula in the USA and Korea present multiplication and division of fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 117-142.

Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. 2007. How curriculum influences student learning. In F. Lester, Jr. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp.319–369). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Stigler, J. W. & Hiebert, J. (2004). Improving mathematics teaching. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 12-17.

Tarr, J., Chavez, O., Reys, R., & Reys, B. (2006). From the written to enacted curricula: Intermediary role of middle school mathematics in shaping students’ opportunity to learn. School Science and Mathematics, 106, 191-201.

Tarr, J., Grouws, D. A., Chávez, O., & Soria, V. M. (2013). The effects of content organization and curriculum implementation on students’ mathematics learning in second-year high school courses. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(4), 683–729.

Tarr, J., Reys, R., Reys, B., Chavez, O., Shih, J., & Osterlind, S. (2008). The impact of middle grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247-280.

Thompson, D. R. (2014). Reasoning-and-proving in the written curriculum: Lessons and implications for teachers, curriculum designers, and researchers. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 141-148.

Törnroos, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn and student achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315–327.

Usiskin, Z. & Willmore, E. (2008). (Eds.). Mathematics Curriculum in Pacific Rim Countries-China, Japan, Korea, and Singapore. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.

Usiskin, Z. (1987). Resolving the continuing dilemmas in school geometry. In M. M. Lindquist & A. P. Shulte (Eds.), Learning and teaching geometry, K-12 (pp. 17-31). Reston, VA: NCTM.

Wang, S. F. (1996). Content Analysis in Communication. Taipei, Taiwan: You-Shi (In Chinese).

Yang, D. C. (2018). Study of fractions in elementary mathematics textbooks from Finland and Taiwan. Educational Studies, 44(2), 190-211.

Yang, D. C. & Huang, F. Y. (2004). Relationships among computational performance, pictorial representation, symbolic representation, and number sense of sixth grade students in Taiwan, Educational Studies, 30(4), 373-389

Yang, D. C., Reys, R. E., & Wu, L. L. (2010). Comparing how fractions were developed in textbooks used by the 5th- and 6th-graders in Singapore, Taiwan, and the U.S.A. School Science and Mathematics, 110(3), 118-127.

Zhu, Y. & Fan, L. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in the intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from Mainland China and the United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(4), 609-626.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.31327/jme.v5i1.1148

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 1013 times
PDF - 377 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2020 Der-Ching Yang


INDEXING DATABASE