Advertisement

Measuring Methematical Beliefs and Their Impact on the Learning of Mathematics: A New Approach

  • Gilah C. Leder
  • Helen J. Forgasz
Part of the Mathematics Education Library book series (MELI, volume 31)

Abstract

In this chapter we provide a brief overview of commonly used definitions of beliefs, ways in which beliefs are measured in general, and in mathematics education research in particular. Next we describe how the technique known as the Experience Sampling Method was used to infer students’ attitudes to, and beliefs about a range of daily activities, including those related to their (mathematical) studies. Briefly, on receipt of a signal sent six times per day for six consecutive days, our sample of mature age students1 was requested, through completion of a specially designed form, to record the activity in which they were currently engaged and their reactions to that activity. We argue that strengths of the approach adopted include the extended period of time used for data collection, the opportunity to gauge participant’ attitudes, beliefs, and emotions about the wide range of activities tapped, and to compare these with their beliefs about mathematics and the learning of mathematics.

Keywords

Preservice Teacher Mathematics Teacher Mathematics Learning Mathematical Thinking Attitude Theory 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aiken, L. R. (1980). Attitude measurement and research. In D.A. Payne (Ed.), Recent developments in affective measurement (pp. 1–24). San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  2. Artzt, A. F. (1999). A structure to enable preservice teachers of mathematics to reflect on their teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(2), 143–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bem, D. J. (1970). Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs. Belmont, California. Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  4. Board of Studies. (2000). Mathematics. Curriculum and Standards Framework II. Carlton, Victoria: Author.Google Scholar
  5. Carr, M., Jessup, D. L., & Fuller, D. (1999). Gender differences in first-grade mathematics strategy use: Parent and teacher contributions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 20–46.Google Scholar
  6. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flaws: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  7. Cook, S. W., & Selltiz, C. (1970). A multiple-indicator approach to attitude measurement. In G. F. Summers (Ed.), Attitude Measurement (pp. 23–41). Chicago: Rand McNally. (Reprinted from Psychological Bulletin, 1964, 62, 36–55.)Google Scholar
  8. Cooper, J. B,. & McGaugh, J. L. (1970). Attitude and related concepts. In M. Jahoda & N. Warren (Eds.), Attitudes. Selected readings (pp. 26–31). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.Google Scholar
  9. Eccles (Parsons), J., Adler, T. F., Futterman, R., Goff, S. B., Kaczala, C. M., Meece, J. L., & Midgley, C. (1985). Self-perceptions, task perceptions, socializing influences, and the decision to enroll in mathematics. In S. Chipman, L. R. Brush, & D. M. Wilson (Eds.), Women and mathematics: Balancing the equation (pp. 95–121). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Menlo Park, California: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  11. Forgasz, H. J. (1998). The typical Australian university mathematics student: Challenging myths and stereotypes? Higher Education, 36(1), 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forgasz, H. J., & Leder, G. C. (1996). Mathematics classrooms, gender and affect. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 8(2), 153–173.Google Scholar
  13. Forgasz, H. J., & Leder, G. C. (1998a). Tertiary mathematics students: Why are they here? Nordisk Matematik Didaktik (Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education), 6(2), 7–27.Google Scholar
  14. Forgasz, H. J., & Leder, G. C. (1998b). Affectivedimensions and tertiary mathematics students. In A. Olivier & K. Newstead (Eds.), Proceedings of the 22 conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 2-296–2-303). Program committee of the 22nd PME conference: Stellenbosch, S.A.Google Scholar
  15. Forgasz, H. J., Leder, G. C., & Gardner, P. L. (1999). The Fennema-Sherman ‘Mathematics as a male domain’ scale re-examined. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(3), 342–348.Google Scholar
  16. Frykholm, J. A. (1999). The impact of reform: challenges for mathematics teacher preparation. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 2(1), 79–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gellert, U. W. E. (1999). Prospective elementary teachers’ comprehension of mathematics instruction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 37(1), 23–43.Google Scholar
  18. Gopnik, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (1997). Words, thoughts and theories. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  19. Guttman, L. (1967). A basis for scaling qualitative data. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 96–107). New York: John Wiley & Sons. (Reprintedfrom American sociological Review, 1944, 9, 139–150.)Google Scholar
  20. Halloran, J. D. (1970). Attitude formation and change. Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Jensen, J. H., Niss, M., & Wedege, T. (Eds.), (1998). Justification and enrolment problems in education involving mathematics or physics. Roskilde, Denmark: Roskilde University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kiesler, C. A., Collins, B. E., & Miller, N. (1969). Attitude change: A critical analysis of theoretical approaches. New York: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  23. Leder, G., & Forgasz, H. (1998). Tertiary mathematics: Perceptions of school leavers and mature-age students. In C. Kanes, M. Goos, & E. Warren (Eds.), Teaching mathematics in new times (pp. 311–318). Mathematics education Research Group of Australasia Incorporated: Griffith University, Brisbane.Google Scholar
  24. Lemon, N. (1973). Attitudes and their measurement. London: B. T. Batsford.Google Scholar
  25. Likert, R. (1967). The method of constructing an attitude scale. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 90–95). New York: John Wiley & Sons. (Excerpted from the Appendix of ‘Atechnique for the measurement of attitudes’, Archives of Psychology, 1932, No.140, pp. 44–53.)Google Scholar
  26. Lokan, J., Ford, P., & Greenwood, L. (1996). Maths & science on the line: Australian junior secondary students’ performance in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  27. McLeod, D. B, (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: A reconceptualization. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 575–596). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  28. Mueller, D. J. (1986). Measuring social attitudes: A handbook for researchers and practitioners. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  29. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: AuthorGoogle Scholar
  30. Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1970). Attitude measurement. In G. F. Summers (Ed.), Attitude measurement (pp. 227–234). Chicago: Rand McNally. (Reprinted from C. E. Osgood, G. J. Suci, & P. H. Tannenbaum, The measurement of meaning, 1957, (pp. 189–199). University of Illinois Press.)Google Scholar
  31. Perry, B., Howard, P., & Tracey, D. (1999). Head teachers’ beliefs abut the learning and teaching of mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 11(1), 39–53.Google Scholar
  32. Rokeach, M. (1972). Beliefs, attitudes and values. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.Google Scholar
  33. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). New York: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  34. Schuck, S. (1999). Teaching mathematics: A brightly wrapped but empty box. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 11(2), 109–123.Google Scholar
  35. Senger, E. S. (1999). Reflective reform in mathematics: The recursive nature of teacher change. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 37(3), 199–221.Google Scholar
  36. Sloman, A. (1987). Motives, mechanisms and emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1(3), 209–216.Google Scholar
  37. Thurstone, L. L. (1967). Attitudes can be measured. In M. Fishbein (Ed.), Readings in attitude theory and measurement (pp. 77–89). New York: John Wiley & Sons. (Reprinted from Journal of Sociology, 1928, 33, 529–554.)Google Scholar
  38. Vacc, N. N., & Bright, G. W. (1999). Elementary preservice teachers’ changing beliefs and instructional use of children’s mathematical thinking. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30(1), 89–110.Google Scholar
  39. Verschaffel, L., De Corte, E., Lasure, S., Van Vaerenbergh, G., Bogaerts, H., & Ratinck, E. (1999). Learning to solve mathematical applications problems: A design experiment with fifth graders. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(3), 195–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Walkerdine, V. (1998). Counting girls out (new edition). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gilah C. Leder
  • Helen J. Forgasz

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations