The meaning of meaningful learning in mathematics in upper-primary education
Tóm tắt
One of the ways in which schools try to improve students’ motivation is through making learning meaningful for students. The concept of meaningful learning, however, has been defined in various ways in the literature. This small-scale in-depth study focused on meaningful learning in mathematics in upper-primary education. We investigated what teachers, according to their own views, undertake to make mathematics learning meaningful for their students. Two interviews (one stimulated recall) were conducted with five fifth-grade teachers from five Dutch primary schools that differed in terms of their schools’ educational concept. Teachers’ beliefs about the meaning of meaningful learning varied from students being able to understand what is learned to connecting with students’ daily experiences. Teachers also differed in their self-reported pedagogical practices aimed at meaningful learning. They used different types of context, including activating prior knowledge, connecting to students’ personal worlds, showing the value beyond school, goal setting for/with students, creating a context that is future-oriented, referring to the personal world of the teacher, applying the learning content in school, and creating cross-curricular context. Practices to foster and support meaningful learning included collaboration and dialogue, working independently and experiential learning. This study provides suggestions for embedding meaningful elements in the mathematics learning environment to stimulate students’ learning motivation.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology. A cognitive view. New York, NY: Holt Rinehart and Winston.
Boaler, J. (1993). The role of contexts in the mathematics classroom: Do they make mathematics more :real”? For the Learning of Mathematics, 13(2), 12–17.
Boekaerts, M., De Koning, E., & Vedder, P. (2006). Goal-directed behavior and contextual factors in the classroom: An innovative approach to the study of multiple goals. Educational Psychologist, 41, 33–51. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4101_5.
Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39, 24–130. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2.
De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Masui, C. (2004). The CLIA-model: A framework for designing powerful learning environments for thinking and problem solving. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 19, 365–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173216.
Dutch Inspectorate of Education. (2017). Peil.onderwijs: Zicht op succesfactoren. Vier portretten van hoog scorende scholen [Level.Education: View on success factors. Four portraits of high performing schools]. Utrecht: Author.
Gijbels, D., Van de Watering, G., Dochy, F., & Van den Bossche, P. (2006). New learning environments and constructivism: The students’ perspective. Instructional Science, 34, 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-3347-z.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206.
Hallgren, K. A. (2012). Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: An overview and tutorial. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 8, 23–34. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023.
Hornstra, L., Mansfield, C., van der Veen, I., Peetsma, T., & Volman, M. (2015). Motivational teacher strategies: The role of beliefs and contextual factors. Learning Environments Research, 18(3), 363–392.
KNAW. (2009). Rekenonderwijs op de basisschool: Analyse en sleutels tot verbetering [Mathematics education in primary schools: Analysis and keys to improvement]. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen.
Ledoux, G., Blok, H., Boogaard, M., & Krüger, M. (2009). Opbrengstgericht werken: over de waarde van meetgestuurd onderwijs [Return-based teaching; About the value of data-driven education]. Amsterdam: SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut.
Lillard, A. S. (2005). Montessori: The science behind the genius. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Loyens, S. M. M., & Gijbels, D. (2008). Understanding the effects of constructivist learning environments: Introducing a multi-directional approach. Instructional Science, 36, 351–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9059-4.
Lui, A. M., & Bonner, S. M. (2016). Preservice and inservice teachers’ knowledge, beliefs, and instructional planning in primary school mathematics. Teaching and Teacher Education, 56, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.01.015.
Lyle, J. (2003). Stimulated recall: A report on its use in naturalistic research. British Educational Research Journal, 29, 861–878. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192032000137349.
Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59, 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.59.1.14.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Newman, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104, 280–312. https://doi.org/10.1086/444136.
Oostdam, R. J., Peetsma, T. T. D., & Blok, H. (2007). Het nieuwe leren in basisonderwijs en voortgezet onderwijs nader beschouwd [New learning in primary and secondary education reconsidered]. Amsterdam: SCO-Kohnstamm Instituut.
Roelofs, E., & Terwel, J. (1999). Constructivism and authentic pedagogy: State of the art and recent developments in the Dutch national curriculum in secondary education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31, 201–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/002202799183232.
Roelofs, E., Visser, J., & Terwel, J. (2003). Preferences for various learning environments: Teachers’ and parents’ perceptions. Learning Environment Research, 6, 77–110.
Schmeier, M. (2017). Effectief rekenonderwijs op de basisschool [Effective mathematics education in primary education]. Huizen: Pica.
Stocks, J., & Schofield, J. (1997). Educational reform and professional development. In E. Fennema & B. S. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 283–308). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Stroet, K., Opdenakker, M. C., & Minnaert, A. (2016). Fostering early adolescents’ motivation: A longitudinal study into the effectiveness of social constructivist, traditional and combined schools for prevocational education. Educational Psychology, 36(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.893561.
Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Uhrmacher, P. B. (1995). Uncommon schooling: A historical look at Rudolf Steiner, anthroposophy, and Waldorf education. Curriculum Inquiry, 25(4), 381–406. https://doi.org/10.2307/1180016.
Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Drijvers, P. (2013). Realistic mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education. New York, NY: Springer.
Van Oers, B. (1998). From context to contextualizing. Learning and Instruction, 8(6), 473–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(98)00031-0.
Van Oers, B. (2009). Developmental education: Improving participation in cultural practices. In M. Fleer, M. Hedegaard, & J. Tudge (Eds.), Childhood studies and the impact of globalization: Policies and practices at global and local levels (pp. 213–229). New York, NY: Routledge.
Van Oers, B. (2013). Learning mathematics as meaningful activity. In P. Nesher, L. Steffe, P. Cobb, G. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 91–114). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Van Rijk, Y., Volman, M., de Haan, D., & van Oers, B. (2017). Maximizing meaning: Creating a learning environment for reading comprehension of informative texts from a Vygotskian perspective. Learning Environments Research, 20(1), 77–98.
Verschaffel, L., & Greer, B. (2013). Mathematics education. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 553–563). New York, NY: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_43.
Vianna, E., & Stetsenko, A. (2011). Connecting learning and identity development through a transformative activist stance: Application in adolescent development in a child welfare program. Human Development, 54(5), 313–338. https://doi.org/10.1159/000331484.
Volet, S., & Järvelä, S. (Eds.). (2001). Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical and methodological implications. Amsterdam: Pergamon.
Volman, M., & Ten Dam, G. (2015). Critical thinking for educated citizenship. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 593–603). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wardekker, W., Boersma, A., Ten Dam, G., & Volman, M. (2012). Motivation for school learning: Enhancing the meaningfulness of learning in communities of learners. In M. Hedegaard, A. Edwards, & M. Fleer (Eds.), Motives in children’s development: Cultural–historical approaches (pp. 153–170). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, B. G. (2012). Constructivism in practical and historical context. In B. Reiser & J. Dempsey (Eds.), Current trends in instructional design and technology (3rd ed., pp. 45–52). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.