A Teaching Model of Polynomial Functions’ Learning Outcomes according to the System Approach for High School Students
Abstract
This study aims at designing a model for teaching polynomial functions’ learning outcomes based on the system approach (LOSA Model). The model includes procedural mechanisms for implementing each of its parts, yielding the model’s outputs, i.e. the tools needed to use the model in teaching high school students. The study consists of three phases: designing the LOSA Model, development of the procedural mechanism of the LOSA model, and formulating the necessary outputs needed to use the model in teaching. This study provides a model for teaching the learning outcomes of polynomial functions, consisting of six domains: the mathematical content; the equipment; teaching methods; evaluation methods; the students; and the teacher. In each domain, the inputs were processed to produce the required outputs through a procedural method based on the system approach. In addition, the study provides an electronic procedural guide that shows precisely how to use each and every constituent of the model. It also provides the outputs of the model which are its usable tools as a teaching model. These outputs are the learning outcomes and their prerequisites; the mathematical content of polynomial functions; the supporting electronic content on Blackboard; the initial, formative, and summative evaluation tools; the mechanisms for preparing the equipment; the teaching methods; and the training methods that qualify the students and teachers to work with the model. The study was applied to a cluster sample of 138 experts in education and mathematics, and the methodology employed the quantitative and qualitative research.Â
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.3.13
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ackoff, R. L. (1971). Towards a system of systems concepts. Management science, 17(11), 661-671.
Adam, S. (2006). An introduction to learning outcomes: A consideration of the nature, function and position of learning outcomes in the creation of the European Higher Education Area. Article B. 2.3-1. EUA Bologna Handbook.
Alexandrov, N., & Sancho, M.-R. (2017). Learning outcomes based evaluation of HPC professional training. Procedia Computer Science, 108, 2141-2150. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2017.05.135
Amalia, E., Surya, E., & Syahputra, E. (2017). The effectiveness of using problem based learning (PBL) in mathematics problem solving ability for junior high school students. International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education, 3(2). http://doi.org/16.0415/IJARIIE-4659
Barkley, E. F., & Major, C. H. (2020). Student engagement techniques: A handbook for college faculty: John Wiley & Sons.
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, handbook I: the cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co: Inc.
Clements, D. H., Fuson, K. C., & Sarama, J. (2017). The research-based balance in early childhood mathematics: A response to Common Core criticisms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 40, 150-162. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2017.03.005
Curto Prieto, M., Orcos Palma, L., Blázquez TobÃas, P. J., & León, F. J. M. (2019). Student assessment of the use of Kahoot in the learning process of science and mathematics. Education Sciences, 9(1), 55. http://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9010055
Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher education around the world: What can we learn from international practice? European Journal of Teacher Education, 40(3), 291-309. http://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1315399
DuPlass, J. A. (2006). Middle and high school teaching: Methods, standards, and best practices. Houghton Mifflin Company Boston.
Eviyanti, C. Y., Surya, E., Syahputra, E., & Simbolon, M. (2017). Improving the students’ mathematical problem solving ability by applying problem based learning model in VII grade at SMPN 1 Banda Aceh Indonesia. International Journal of Novel Research in Education and Learning, 4(2), 138-144.
Gudeva, L. K., Dimova, V., Daskalovska, N., & Trajkova, F. (2012). Designing descriptors of learning outcomes for Higher Education qualification. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1306-1311. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.292
Gupta, S., & Gupta, A. (2013). The systems approach in education. International Journal of Management, 1(1), 52-55.
Hasibuan, A. M., Saragih, S., & Amry, Z. (2018). Development of learning materials based on realistic mathematics education to improve problem solving ability and student learning independence. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(1), 243-252. http://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/4000
Hofer, M., & Harris, J. (2019). Topics & Sequences in Experienced Teachers’ Instructional Planning for Technology Integration. Research Highlights in Technology and Teacher Education 2019, 35.
Isdale, K., Reddy, V., Juan, A., & Arends, F. (2018). TIMSS 2015 Grade 5 national report: Understanding mathematics achievement amongst Grade 5 learners in South Africa: Nurturing green shoots.
Kitchen, R., & Berk, S. (2016). Educational technology: An equity challenge to the Common Core. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47(1), 3-16. http://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.47.1.0003
Kizilcec, R. F., Pérez-SanagustÃn, M., & Maldonado, J. J. (2017). Self-regulated learning strategies predict learner behavior and goal attainment in Massive Open Online Courses. Computers & education, 104, 18-33. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.10.001
Korhonen, A. M., Ruhalahti, S., & Veermans, M. (2019). The online learning process and scaffolding in student teachers’ personal learning environments. Education and Information Technologies, 24(1), 755-779. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9793-4
Lallemand, C. (2018). Conciliating scientific requirements and relevance to practice: why is it such a dilemma for the development of UX design and evaluation methods? UK: University of Nottingham.
Lamb, R. L., Annetta, L., Firestone, J., & Etopio, E. (2018). A meta-analysis with examination of moderators of student cognition, affect, and learning outcomes while using serious educational games, serious games, and simulations. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 158-167. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.040
Mat, S., Yassin, R. M., Ishak, N., Mohammad, N., & Pandaragan, S. L. (2012). Model of problem-based learning using systems approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 60, 541-545. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.420
Murtonen, M., Gruber, H., & Lehtinen, E. (2017). The return of behaviourist epistemology: A review of learning outcomes studies. Educational Research Review, 22, 114-128. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.08.001
Naja, A. R. (2018). Analysis of students’ creative thinking level in problem solving based on national council of teachers of mathematics. Paper presented at the Journal of Physics: Conference Series.
Oudman, S., van de Pol, J., Bakker, A., Moerbeek, M., & van Gog, T. (2018). Effects of different cue types on the accuracy of primary school teachers' judgments of students' mathematical understanding. Teaching and Teacher Education, 76, 214-226. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.02.007
RodrÃguez, G., Pérez, J., Cueva, S., & Torres, R. (2017). A framework for improving web accessibility and usability of Open Course Ware sites. Computers & education, 109, 197-215. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.02.013
Ross, J. G., Bruderle, E., & Meakim, C. (2015). Integration of deliberate practice and peer mentoring to enhance students’ mastery and retention of essential skills. Journal of Nursing Education. 54(3), 52-54. http://doi.org/10.3928/01484834-20150218-20
Rothaermel, F. T. (2016). Strategic management: concepts (Vol. 2). McGraw-Hill Education.
Sari, N., & Surya, E. (2017). Analysis effectiveness of using problem posing model in mathematical learning. International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR), 33(3), 13-21.
Singh, S. (2003). Evaluation of electronic reference sources. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 23(2).
Sinha, S. (2018). Fundamentals of Education. Lulu.com.
Stelmach, B., Adams, P., & Brandon, J. (2019). A Literature Synthesis: Optimum Learning for All Students--Implementation of Alberta’s 2018 Professional Practice Standards.
Tan, P. (2017). Advancing Inclusive Mathematics Education: Strategies and Resources for Effective IEP Practices. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 13(3), 28-38.
Taylor, R. D., Oberle, E., Durlak, J. A., & Weissberg, R. P. (2017). Promoting positive youth development through schoolâ€based social and emotional learning interventions: A metaâ€analysis of followâ€up effects. Child development, 88(4), 1156-1171. http://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12864
Tractenberg, R. E., Lindvall, J. M., Attwood, T., & Via, A. (2020). Guidelines for curriculum and course development in higher education and training. http://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/7qeht
Viji, B., & Raja, B. W. D. (2017). Preparing Teachers for Multisensory Teaching Strategy to Improve the Learning Outcomes of Students with Reading Disabilities. The Journal, 58.
Webb, S., Massey, D., Goggans, M., & Flajole, K. (2019). Thirtyâ€five years of the gradual release of responsibility: scaffolding toward complex and responsive teaching. The Reading Teacher, 73(1), 75-83. http://doi.org/10.1002/trtr.1799
Wilson, J. (2020). Reflections on Mathematics Education Research: 1970-1982. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 51(1), 3-11. http://doi.org/10.5951/jresematheduc.2019.0004
Refbacks
e-ISSN: 1694-2116
p-ISSN: 1694-2493