| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立屏東師範學院 === 數理教育研究所 === 90 === The study of mathematics concept and scientific reasoning in elementary science textbook
Chen Su Lin
Abstract
The study had three concrete goals as follows:
1. To characterize relative concept of mathematics from the current licensed science textbook and to discuss whether the sequence of those corresponded with that of the teaching in mathematics class.
2. To investigate the condition of the licensed science textbook that made scientific reasoning according to the mathematics concept.
3. To analyze both the mathematics concept and scientific reasoning in different topics of science concept.
The mathematics concept in science textbook was almost that for the first-grade students. By all accounts, the sequence of the mathematics concept in science textbook appeared much more lately than that in mathematics textbook. Some appeared with mathematics textbook in the same grade concurrently that improved students integrating across-curriculum and learning meaningfully, some were easier that might be the prior knowledge in mathematics class, and some were more difficult that could cause problems in students’ learning. All above were worth that curriculum designer and textbook editor paid attention to. Based upon constructive and professional validity, the research established the table of mathematics concept and scientific reasoning in science textbook. In order to increase the reliability, there was another analyst to assist data collecting and analyzing. The result of the study was that: the mathematics concept in science textbook included “number and arithmetic”, “measurement”, “graph and space”, and “statistic table”, and the frequency in both “Newton” and “Kanshen” most was “measurement” but least was “statistic table”. Besides, some mathematics concept was different from that in mathematics curriculum, and some couldn’t be found in “82 mathematics scenario”.
The way of reasoning that “Newton” and “Kanshen” used most was “inductive” and “deductive”, and that least was “analogical”, “evaluative”, and “integrative”. The research also found that students might make incorrect reasoning when textbook cited inappropriately or describing unclearly.
“Newton” and “Kanshen” used more mathematics concept and scientific reasoning both in the topics of “earth environment” and “material and energy”, and that implied the two topics needed much more mathematics concept than the topic of “living phenomenon” to help students learn concretely and take advantage of thinking and reasoning activities in the sequel.
|
|---|
