„Uchwycić kopię” czy podjąć własną aktywność myślową? O nauczaniu porównywania różnicowego i ilorazowego w szkole
Słowa kluczowe:
porównywanie różnicowe i ilorazowe, metody tradycyjne, konstruktywizmAbstrakt
The additive and multiplicative compare word problems are specifically difficult. The sources of these difficulties may lie in the nature of these tasks and the wrong teaching. In this article I have presented a proposal to amend the existing methodology of teaching to solve compare word problems by introducing a curriculum based on the constructivist approach. This change consists in the fact that at the beginning of schooling the pupils get familiar with the compare word problems on manipulated specific objects and simple numbers. Additive compare problem should be derived from the pupils’ activities associated with one-to-one correspondence assigned on the occasion of comparing the sets of numbers. In the idea of the constructivist approach to the multiplicative compare problem, it derives from the pupils’ activities, referring to measuring length by repeatedly applying a device to a measured object. Traditional methods used in the teaching of compare word problems (which is connected with characteristic phrases in tasks and verbal communication) are not very effective and develop only schematic thinking (in the negative sense of the word).
Downloads
Bibliografia
Aebli H. (1982), Dydaktyka psychologiczna. Warszawa, PWN.
Christou C., Philippou G. (1998), The Developmental Nature of Ability to Solve One-Step Word Problems. “Journal for Research in Mathematics Education”, 29(4).
Cydzik Z. (1966), Metodyka nauczania początkowego. Część II. Matematyka, Warszawa, PzWS.
Dąbrowski M. (2007), Pozwólmy dzieciom myśleć! O umiejętnościach polskich trzecioklasistów. Warszawa, Centralna Komisja Egzaminacyjna.
Dąbrowski M. (2013), (Za) trudne, bo trzeba myśleć? O efektach nauczania matematyki na I etapie kształcenia. Warszawa, Instytut badań Edukacyjnych.
Hejn’y M. (1997), Rozwój wiedzy matematycznej, „Dydaktyka Matematyki”, 19.
Jeleńska L. (1960), Metodyka arytmetyki i geometrii w pierwszych latach nauczania. Wyd. IV, Warszawa, PzWS.
Kalinowska A. (2010), Pozwólmy dzieciom działać - mity i fakty o rozwijaniu myślenia matematycznego. Warszawa, Centralna Komisja Egzaminacyjna.
Kieran C. (1998), Models in mathematics education research: a broader view of research results. W: A. Sierpińska, J. Kilpatrick (red.), Mathematics Education as a Research Domain: A Search for Identity, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kinitsch W., Greeno J.G. (1985), Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. “Psychological Review”, 92 (1).
Mrożek E. (Drewczynska E.) (2009), Ile razy więcej?. „Matematyka w Szkole”, 48. Mrożek E. (2010a), O porównywaniu. „Matematyka w Szkole”, 53.
Mrożek E. (2010), Task variables in compare word problems. “Didactica Mathematicae”, 33.
Nesher P., Greeno J.G., Riley M. S. (1982), The development of semantic categories for addition and subtraction. “Educational Study in Mathematics”, 13.
Semadeni Z. (2012), Matematyka w edukacji początkowej jako fundament całej matematyki szkolnej. “Nauczanie Początkowe”.
Sfard A. (1998), The many faces of mathematics: do mathematicians and researchers in mathematics education speak about the same thing. W: A. Sierpińska, J. Kilpatrick (red.), Mathematics Education as a Research Domain: A Search for Identity. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Steffe L. P. (1996), Social-cultural approaches in early childhood mathematics education: a discussion. W: H. Mansfield et al. (red.), Mathematics for Tomorrow’s Young Children. International Perspectives on Curriculum. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Turnau S. (1990), Wykłady o nauczaniu matematyki. Warszawa, PWN.
Valentin J. D., Chap Sam L. (2004), Roles of semantic structure of arithmetic word problems on pupils ability to identify the correct operation. “International Journal for Mathematics Teaching and Learning”.
Verschaffel L. (1994), Using retelling data to study elementary school children’s representations and solutions of compare problems. “Journal for Research in Mathematics Education”, 25.