Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence

Emine Nur Unveren Bilgic; Sahin Danisman

doi:10.29333/iejme/13712

Full Text (PDF)

Emine Nur Unveren Bilgic ¹ ^* , Sahin Danisman ¹

More Detail

¹ Department of Mathematics Education, Faculty of Education, Duzce University, Duzce, TÜRKİYE^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

The aim of this study is to reveal the profiles of pre-service mathematics teachers in terms of learning and studying approaches by cluster-analyzing them on the basis of self-reinforcing and persistence. Learning and studying approaches inventory scale, self-reinforcing and persistence subscales were used to collect the data in the study, which was carried out with a descriptive research design. The participants of the study comprised of 487 pre-service mathematics teachers. According to the results, it was determined that the surface learning approach of the pre-service teachers did not differ according to gender while the strategic learning approach and the deep learning approach differed in favor of males. There was no significant difference in the learning approaches of the participants according to the grade level. According to the cluster analysis, it was revealed that pre-service teachers can be clustered as low motivation, high motivation, high self-reinforcing and high persistence.

Keywords

self-reinforce
persistence
mathematics teachers
teacher education

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

INT ELECT J MATH ED, Volume 18, Issue 4, November 2023, Article No: em0752

https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712

Publication date: 01 Oct 2023

Online publication date: 24 Sep 2023

Article Views: 1020

Article Downloads: 690

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Akyeampong, K., Lussier, K., Pryor, J., & Westbrook, J. (2013). Improving teaching and learning of basic maths and reading in Africa: Does teacher preparation count? International Journal of Educational Development, 33(3), 272-282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2012.09.006
Alexander, J. A., & Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1994). Strategy regulation: The role of intelligence, metacognitive attributions, and knowledge base. Developmental Psychology, 30, 709-723. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.30.5.709
Atlas, R. S., & Overall, J. E. (1994). Comparative evaluation of two superior stopping rules for hierarchical cluster analysis. Psychometrika, 59, 581-591. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294393
Baeten, M., Kyndt, E., Struyven, K., & Dochy, F. (2010). Using student-centred learning environments to stimulate deep approaches to learning: Factors encouraging or discouraging their effectiveness. Educational Research Review, 5(3), 243-260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.06.001
Balam, E. M. (2015). Learning strategies and motivation of graduate students: Is gender a factor? Institute for Learning Styles Journal, 1, 1-9.
Ball, D. L. (1988). Knowledge and reasoning in mathematical pedagogy: Examining what prospective teachers bring to teacher education [Unpublished PhD thesis]. Michigan State University.
Battle, E. S. (1965). Motivational determinants of academic task persistence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2(2), 209-218. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022442
Bengtsson, E., & Teleman, B. (2019). Motivation, learning strategies and performance among business undergraduates at university colleges in Sweden. Business, Management and Education, 17(2), 111-133. https://doi.org/10.3846/bme.2019.10512
Biggs, J. (1993). What do inventories of students learning process really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 63, 3-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1993.tb01038.x
Biggs, J. (2012). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(1), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436990180105
Brophy, J. (1983). Conceptualizing student motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18(3), 200-215. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461528309529274
Buehl, M. M., & Beck, J. S. (2014). The relationship between teachers’ beliefs and teachers’ practices. Routledge.
Bulut, A. S., Yildiz, A., & Baltaci, S. (2020). A comparison of mathematics learning approaches of gifted and non-gifted students. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 11(2), 461-491. https://doi.org/10.16949/turkbilmat.682111
Carnoy, M. (1971). Family background, school inputs and students’ performance in school: The case of Puerto Rico [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Stanford University.
Chamorro-Premuzic, T., & Furnham, A. (2008). Personality, intelligence and approaches to learning as predictors of academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 44(7), 1596-1603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2008.01.003
Chan, K. W., & Elliott, R. G. (2004). Epistemological beliefs across cultures: Critique and analysis of beliefs structure studies. Educational Psychology, 24(2), 123-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341032000160100
Clark, I., & Dumas, G. (2016). The regulation of task performance: A trans-disciplinary review. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1862. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01862
Cox, W. (1994). Strategic learning in A-level mathematics? Teaching Mathematics and its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 13(1), 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1093/teamat/13.1.11
Dasari, B. (2009). Hong Kong students’ approaches to learning: Cross-cultural comparisons. US-China Education Review, 6(12), 46-58.
Dweck, C. S., & Leggett, E. L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95(2), 256. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.2.256
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.549
Entwistle, N. (1997). Reconstituting approaches to learning: A response to Webb. Higher Education, 33(2), 213-218. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1002930608372
Entwistle, N. J., & Ramsden, P. (1983). Understanding student learning. Croo.
Ercoskun, M. H. (2016). Adaptation of self-control and self-management scale (SCMS) into Turkish culture: A study on reliability and validity. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 16, 1125-1145. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.4.2725
Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15(1), 13-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/0260747890150102
Escudero-Ávila, D., Montes, M., & Contreras, L. C. (2021). What do mathematics teacher educators need to know? Reflections emerging from the content of mathematics teacher education. In M. Goos, & K. Beswick (Eds.), The learning and development of mathematics teacher educators: International perspectives and challenges (pp. 23-40). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-62408-8_2
Evans, C. J., Kirby, J. R., & Fabrigar, L. J. (2003). Approaches to learning, need for cognition, and strategic flexibility among university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 507-529. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709903322591217
Goh, S. C. P. (2005). Perceptions of learning environments, learning approaches, and learning outcomes a study of private higher education students in Malaysia from twinning programmes [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Adelaide.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. Teachers College Press.
Gunderson, E. A., Hamdan, N., Sorhagen, N. S., & D’Esterre, A. P. (2017). Who needs innate ability to succeed in math and literacy? Academic-domain-specific theories of intelligence about peers versus adults. Developmental Psychology, 53, 1188-1205. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000282
Haag, L., & Götz, T. (2012). Mathe ist schwierig und Deutsch aktuell: Vergleichende studie zur charakterisierung von Schulfächern aus Schülersicht [Math is difficult and German up to date: A study on the characterization of subject domains from students’ perspective]. Psychologie in Erziehung und Unterricht [Psychology in Education and Teaching], 59(1), 32-46. https://doi.org/10.2378/peu2012.art03d
Hair, J. F., & Black, W. C. (2000). Cluster analysis. In L. E. Grimm, & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding more multivariate statistics (pp. 147-296). American Psychological Association.
Hattie, J. A., & Donoghue, G. M. (2016). Learning strategies: A synthesis and conceptual model. npj Science of Learning, 1(1), 16013. https://doi.org/10.1038/npjscilearn.2016.13
Hounsell, D., Entwistle, N., & Anderson, C. (2002). Experiences of teaching and learning questionnaire (ETLQ). Economic and Social Research Council Teaching and Learning Research Program.
Howie, P., & Bagnall, R. (2013). A critique of the deep and surface approaches to learning model. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(4), 389-400. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2012.733689
Jansen, R. S., Van Leeuwen, A., Janssen, J., Kester, L., & Kalz, M. (2017). Validation of the self-regulated online learning questionnaire. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(1), 6-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-016-9125-x
Kember, D. (2000). Misconceptions about the learning approaches, motivation and study practices of Asian students. Higher Education, 40(1), 99-121. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004036826490
Kilpatrick, J. (2020). History of research in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 349-354). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_71
Lastusaari, M., Laakkonen, E., & Murtonen, M. (2019). Persistence in studies in relation to learning approaches and first-year grades: A study of university chemistry students in Finland. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 20(3), 452-467. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8RP00244D
Leung, M. Y., Wang, Y., & Chan, K. K. D. (2007). Structural surface-achieving model in the teaching and learning process for construction engineering students. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice, 133(4), 327-339. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1052-3928(2007)133:4(327)
LoGiudice, A. B., Norman, G. R., Manzoor, S., & Monteiro, S. (2022). Does a deep learning inventory predict knowledge transfer? Linking student perceptions to transfer outcomes. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 28, 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-022-10141-7
Lucas, U., & Meyer, J. H. (2005). Towards a mapping of the student world: The identification of variation in students’ conceptions of, and motivations to learn, introductory accounting. British Accounting Review, 37(2), 177-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bar.2004.10.002
Marston, A. R. (1965). Self reinforcement: The relevance of a concept in analogue research to psychotherapy. Psychotherapy, 2(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088600
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: I–Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4-11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x
McManus, I. C., Richards, P., Winder, B. C., & Sproston, K. A. (1998). Clinical experience, performance in final examinations, and learning style in medical students: prospective study. British Medical Journal, 316(7128), 345-350. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.316.7128.345
Metin, M., Kaleli Yilmaz, G., Birisci, S. & Coskun, K. (2011). The investigating pre-service teachers’ learning styles with respect to the gender and grade level variables. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2728-2732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.178
Meyer, M., Cimpian, A., & Leslie, S.-J. (2015). Women are underrepresented in fields, where success is believed to require brilliance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 235. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00235
Mezo, P. G. (2009). The self-control and self-management scale (SCMS): Development of an adaptive self-regulatory coping skills instrument. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 31(2), 83-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-008-9104-2
MoNE. (2018). Mathematics curriculum. Ministry of Education. http://mufredat.meb.gov.tr/ProgramDetay.aspx?PID=329
Morris, S., & Messer, S. B. (1978). The effect of locus of control and locus of reinforcement on academic task persistence. Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development, 132(1), 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1978.10533310
NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards of school mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. https://www.nctm.org/standards/
Negash, T. T., Eshete, M. T., & Hanago, G. A. (2022). Students’ learning approaches as a factor of academic achievement at selected public universities: A cross-sectional study. Frontiers in Education, 7, 965573. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.965573
OECD. (2018). Developing schools as learning organisations in Wales.OECD Publsihing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264307193-en
Postareff, L., Parpala, A., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2015). Factors contributing to changes in a deep approach to learning in different learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 18(3), 315-333. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9186-1
Ramsden, P. (1979). Student learning and perceptions of the academic environment. Higher Education, 8(4), 411-427. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01680529
Riding, R. J., & Rayner, S. G. (1998). Cognitive style and learning strategies. David Fulton Publishers.
Rutherford, S. M., Limorenko, G., & Shore, A. (2016). Correlations between learning styles and perceptions of collaborative learning in higher education [Paper presentation]. Ireland International Conference on Education.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4(1), 1-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1080-9724(99)80076-7
Sengodan, V., & Iksan, Z. H. (2012). Students’ learning styles and intrinsic motivation in learning mathematics. Asian Social Science, 8(16), 17. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n16p17
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
Simons, K.D., Klein, J. & Brush, T. (2004). Instructional strategies utilized during the implementation of a hypermedia, problem-based learning environment: A case study. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 15, 213-233.
Sithole, S. T. (2018). Instructional strategies and students’ performance in accounting: An evaluation of those strategies and the role of gender. Accounting Education, 27(6), 613-631. https://doi.org/10.1080/09639284.2017.1361852
Smith, T. W., Gordon, B., Colby, S. A., & Wang, J. (2005). An examination of the relationship between depth of student learning and national board certification status. http://www.nbpts.org/UserFiles/File/Applachian_State_study_D_-_Smith.pdf
Son, S. K. (2004). Spacing one’s study: Evidence for a metacognitive control strategy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 601-604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.30.3.601
Stangor, C., & Wallings, J. (2014). Introduction to psychology. BCcampus.
Steegh, A. M., Höffler, T. N., Keller, M. M., & Parchmann, I. (2019). Gender differences in mathematics and science competitions: A systematic review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(10), 1431-1460. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21580
Teoh, H. C., & Yap, T. T. (2015). Student approaches to learning among university students. American Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(3-1), 15-20. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajap.s.2015040301.13
Topkaya, N., Yaka, B., & Ogretmen, T. (2011). The adaptation study of learning and studying approaches inventory and the relations with related constructs. Education and Science, 36(159), 192-204.
Turan, S., Beyaztas, D. I., Arif, O. N. A. N., & Elcin, M. (2020). Learning approach preferences of medical students in different grades. Cukurova Medical Journal, 45(3), 1051-1060. https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.689968
Ward, J. H. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58(301), 236-244. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1963.10500845
Xiao, F., & Sun, L. (2021). Students’ motivation and affection profiles and their relation to mathematics achievement, persistence, and behaviors. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 533593. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.533593
Yavuzalp, N. & Ozdemir, Y. (2020). Adaptation of the self-regulated online learning questionnaire (SOL-Q). Journal of Higher Education, 10(3), 269-278. https://doi.org/10.2399/yod.19.512415
Yeager, D. S., Walton, G. M., Brady, S. T., Akcinar, E. N., Paunesku, D., Keane, L., Kamentz, D., Ritter, G., Duckworth, A. L., Urstein, R., Gomez, E. M., Markus, H. R., Cohen, G. L., & Dweck, C. S. (2016). Teaching a lay theory before college narrows achievement gaps at scale. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 113(24), E3341-E3348. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1524360113
Ziguras, C. (2001). Educational technology in transnational higher education in South East Asia: The cultural politics of flexible learning. Educational Technology & Society, 4(4), 8-18.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. J. Zimmerman, & D. H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 1-37). Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3618-4_1
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.51
Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831202900366

How to cite this article

APA

Unveren Bilgic, E. N., & Danisman, S. (2023). Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 18(4), em0752. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712

Vancouver

Unveren Bilgic EN, Danisman S. Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2023;18(4):em0752. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712

AMA

Unveren Bilgic EN, Danisman S. Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2023;18(4), em0752. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712

Chicago

Unveren Bilgic, Emine Nur, and Sahin Danisman. "Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2023 18 no. 4 (2023): em0752. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712

Harvard

Unveren Bilgic, E. N., and Danisman, S. (2023). Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 18(4), em0752. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712

MLA

Unveren Bilgic, Emine Nur et al. "Examining the differentiation in pre-service mathematics teachers’ learning and studying approaches according to self-reinforcing, and persistence". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 18, no. 4, 2023, em0752. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/13712