Search

Copyright of Pamukkale University Journal of Education is the property of Pamukkale University Journal of Education and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of the Faculty of Theology / Kilis 7 Aralik Universitesi Ilahiyat Fakultesi Dergisi is the property of Kilis 7 Aralik Universitesi Ilahiyat Fakultesi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of International Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies (IntJCES) is the property of International Journal of Contemporary Educational Studies and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study reports on comparing the presentation of mathematical content, types of responses required of students, conformity with the curriculum outcomes, and potentially confusing expressions in the subjects of percentages, triangles, and quadrilaterals of fifth-grade mathematics textbooks used in Turkey and Singapore. Document analysis of the two mathematics textbooks indicated that both books remained committed to achieving the curriculum outcomes, that the content of the Singapore textbook was more simply organized, and that the Singapore textbook included more visual representations and multiple solution strategies. The analysis also showed that the questions requiring numerical responses were common in both textbooks, while the Singapore textbook included relatively more questions requiring both response and explanation. The findings also indicated that the Singapore textbook was comparably more error-free; however, the Turkey textbook involved several difficulties concerning syntactic errors, ambiguity, unrealistic task presentation, redundant operation, unclarity in mathematical purposes, and weak mathematical context. We discuss the usefulness and intelligibility of mathematics textbooks regarding established cultural and philosophical traditions and trust and respect for textbooks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this study, it is aimed to comparatively examine practice questions and sample solved questions about the multiplication of fractions in mathematics textbooks in Turkey and Singapore. In this direction, document analysis was used as a research method. Descriptive analysis was used in the analysis and the questions in the books were examined in seven categories: the number of steps, contextual properties, representation type, model type, meaning of multiplication, fraction type, and cognitive expectation. From the results of the analysis, it was seen that there were more questions with pure mathematical context that were solved in one step in the books in both countries. However, all kinds of fraction models are used in the questions in the Singapore textbook, whereas the length model is not used in Turkey. In addition, in fraction multiplication, the repeated addition meaning of multiplication is used only in Turkey, whereas in Singapore the operator meaning is mostly used. When examined in terms of fraction types, it was concluded that there are no examples in the form of natural numbers × fractions in the Singapore books, but that there are more problems about fraction × fraction in Singapore. When the results are evaluated in general, it is observed that the books in both countries have advantages and disadvantages compared to each other, but in terms of the categories studied the distribution in the Singapore textbook is more balanced than it is in Turkey. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]