Volume 3, Issue 3, May 2014, Pages: 179-185
Received: Apr. 21, 2014;
Accepted: May 9, 2014;
Published: May 20, 2014
Views 2982 Downloads 169
Elif Türnüklü, Department of Mathematics Education, Education Faculty, Dokuz Eylül University, Izmir, Turkey
The objective of this study was to determine the concept images of individuals regarding trapezoid. In order to attain this objective, this research was designed based on qualitative approach. A total of 156 students attending 5th through 8th grade middle school and 36 middle school Mathematics teacher candidates from Turkey were chosen as participants in the study. Definitions and drawings of trapezoids were asked of the participants and their responses were used to analyze their concept images. The study was conducted using semi-structured interview technique. Data were analysed through content analysis. Results were presented both in the form of frequency and actual participants’ statements. According to data obtained from the participants, many of the definitions acquired were personal rather than formal. It was also determined that individuals used non-critical properties in non-formal and incorrect definitions and that they created some misconceptions by making excessive generalizations. Based on the data, some participants developed the concept image indicating that the sides and angles should be completely different. As a result, conceptual levels of the trapezoid within the framework of the obtained concept images were determined.
Concept Images of Trapezoid: Some Cases from Turkey, Education Journal.
Vol. 3, No. 3,
2014, pp. 179-185.
Baykul, Y. (1999). İlköğretimde Matematik Öğretimi. Ankara: Anıyayıncılık.
Duatepe, A. (2000). An investigation of the relationship between van hiele geometric level of thinking and demographic variable for pre-service elementary school teacher. Unpublished master thesis, ODTÜ, Turkey.
Fujita, T. & Jones K. (2007). Learners’ understanding of the definitions and hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals: Towards a theoretical framing. Research in Mathe-matics Education. 9 (1&2): 3–20.
Van Hiele, P.M. (1999). Developing geometric thinking through activities that begin with play. Teaching Children Mathematics. 5(6): 310-316.
Tall, D. & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12( 2): 151-16.
Fischbein, E. (1993). The theory of figural concepts. Educational Studies in Ma-thematics. 24 (2): 139–162.
Hershkowitz, R. (1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry. In P. Nesher & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition (pp. 70–95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Monaghan, F. (2000). What difference does it make? Child-ren’s views of the differences between some quadrilaterals. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 42 (2): 179-196.
Heinze, A. & Ossietzky, C. (2002). “…Because a square is not a rectangle” students’ knowledge of simple geometrical concepts when starting to learn proof. In A. Cockburn & E. Nardi (Eds.), Proceedings of The 26th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 3: 81–88.
Vighi, P. (2003). The triangle as a mathematical object. European Research in Mathematics Education III Congress Proceedings. Bellaria, Italy, 28 Februrary-3 March: 1-10.
Fujita, T. (2012). Learners’ level of understanding of inclusion relations of quadrilaterals and prototype phenomenon. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior. 31: 60–72.
Fujita, T. & Jones, K. (2006). Primary trainee teachers’ understanding of basic geometrical figures in Scotland. In J. Novotana, H. Moraova, K. Magdelena & N. Stehlikova (Eds.), Proceedings of The 30th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 3: 14–21.
Okazaki, M. & Fujita, T. (2007). Prototype phenomena and common cognitive paths in the understanding of the ınclusion relations between quadrilaterals in Japan and Scotland. In H. Woo, K. Park & D. Seo (Eds.), Proceedings of The 31st Conference of the Internatıonal Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 4: 41–48.
Erez, M. M. & Yerushalmy, M. (2006). ‘‘If you can turn a rectangle into a square, you can turn a square into a rectangle ...’’ young students experience. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 11: 271–299.
Türnüklü, E., Alaylı, F.G. & Akkaş, E.N. (2013). Investigation of prospective primary mathematics teachers’ perceptions and images for quadrilaterals. Educa-tional Sciences: Theory & Practice. 13(2): 1213-1232.
Türnüklü, E., Akkaş, E.N. & Alaylı, F.G. (2013). Mathematics teachers’ perceptions of quadrilaterals and understanding the inclusion relations. In B.Ubuz, Ç.Haser & M.A.Mariotti (Eds.), Proceedings of 8th Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education Antalya, Türkiye, 6-10 February: 705–714.
De Villiers, M. (1998). To Teach Definitions in Geometry or Teach to Define?. In A.Oliverve & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of The 22nd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 2: 248–255.
Nakahara, T. (1995). Children’s construction process of the concepts of basic quadrilaterals in Japan. In A.Oliver & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 19th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Ma-thematics Education. 3: 27–34.
Patton, Q.M. (1987). How to Use Qualitative Methods in Evaluation. London: Sage Pub.
Leung, F. & Park, K. (2009). The influence of language on the conception of geometric figures. In M. Tzekaki, M. Kaldrimidou, H. Sakonidis (Eds), Proceed-ings of The 33th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Educa-tion. 1: 81–88.
Matsuo, N. (2000). States of understanding relations among concepts of geometric figures: considered from the aspect of concept image and concept definition. In T. Na-kahara & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of The 24th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. 3: 271–278.
Burger, W.F. & Shaughnessy, J.M. (1986). Characterizing the van Hiele levels of development in geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education. 17 (1): 31–48.