Same Mathematical Structure, Different Design: How Does Task Format Affect Creative Problem-Posing Performance?

Ercan Özdemir, Tuğrul Kar, Tugba Öçal
{"title":"Same Mathematical Structure, Different Design: How Does Task Format Affect Creative Problem-Posing Performance?","authors":"Ercan Özdemir, Tuğrul Kar, Tugba Öçal","doi":"10.2478/atd-2022-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Introduction: The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect of task format on pre-service mathematics teachers’ creative problem-posing performance. Methods: In this quantitative study, a figural and a written pattern related to daily life with the same mathematical structure were presented to participants and they were asked to write as many problems as they could. The problems were analyzed based on whether they were viable and then on the components of fluency, flexibility, and originality of creativity. Results: The results of the study indicated that, although the flexibility and originality scores in the figural pattern were higher, the only statistical difference was observed in the originality component. Moreover, it has been found that some of the participants wrote similar problems in both tasks; however, the problems in the figural pattern were inclined to be more difficult. Discussion: Developing students’ creative-thinking skills is a main purpose of mathematics education research (Mann, 2006). However, the results of the research have indicated that the teachers’ knowledge of how to develop students’ creative-thinking skills is still lacking (Shriki & Lavy, 2012) and, consequently, students are provided with few opportunities to experience creative thinking and learning in class (Silver, 1997; Sriraman, 2005). Problem posing has a close association with creativity as well as with problem solving (Haylock, 1997; Silver, 1997). Therefore, to develop creative-thinking skills, learning environments should be enriched with problem-posing tasks. The results of this research do not assert that only one of the figural or written pattern types must be preferred to stimulate creative-thinking skills in the context of problem posing. Instead, the results emphasize that each of the written and figural patterns has its own strengths. Limitations: The fluency, flexibility, and originality scores are affected by the sample size. Conducting similar studies on larger samples may provide more valid conclusions about possible differences. This study has taken two different task formats into account as follow; being in written form related to daily life or including figural patterns. Figural patterns can also be structured based on whether they explicitly provide the pattern rule (Barbosa & Vale, 2016). The effect of these types of problem-posing tasks on creativity components is another case that can be investigated. Conclusions: Considering these results together, while including problem-posing tasks for both written and figural patterns to improve the flexibility and originality components of creativity is supported, the use of problem-posing tasks for figural patterns may be further recommended.","PeriodicalId":113905,"journal":{"name":"Acta Educationis Generalis","volume":"168 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Educationis Generalis","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/atd-2022-0017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: The purpose of the study was to investigate the effect of task format on pre-service mathematics teachers’ creative problem-posing performance. Methods: In this quantitative study, a figural and a written pattern related to daily life with the same mathematical structure were presented to participants and they were asked to write as many problems as they could. The problems were analyzed based on whether they were viable and then on the components of fluency, flexibility, and originality of creativity. Results: The results of the study indicated that, although the flexibility and originality scores in the figural pattern were higher, the only statistical difference was observed in the originality component. Moreover, it has been found that some of the participants wrote similar problems in both tasks; however, the problems in the figural pattern were inclined to be more difficult. Discussion: Developing students’ creative-thinking skills is a main purpose of mathematics education research (Mann, 2006). However, the results of the research have indicated that the teachers’ knowledge of how to develop students’ creative-thinking skills is still lacking (Shriki & Lavy, 2012) and, consequently, students are provided with few opportunities to experience creative thinking and learning in class (Silver, 1997; Sriraman, 2005). Problem posing has a close association with creativity as well as with problem solving (Haylock, 1997; Silver, 1997). Therefore, to develop creative-thinking skills, learning environments should be enriched with problem-posing tasks. The results of this research do not assert that only one of the figural or written pattern types must be preferred to stimulate creative-thinking skills in the context of problem posing. Instead, the results emphasize that each of the written and figural patterns has its own strengths. Limitations: The fluency, flexibility, and originality scores are affected by the sample size. Conducting similar studies on larger samples may provide more valid conclusions about possible differences. This study has taken two different task formats into account as follow; being in written form related to daily life or including figural patterns. Figural patterns can also be structured based on whether they explicitly provide the pattern rule (Barbosa & Vale, 2016). The effect of these types of problem-posing tasks on creativity components is another case that can be investigated. Conclusions: Considering these results together, while including problem-posing tasks for both written and figural patterns to improve the flexibility and originality components of creativity is supported, the use of problem-posing tasks for figural patterns may be further recommended.
相同的数学结构,不同的设计:任务格式如何影响创造性问题提出的表现?
摘要:本研究旨在探讨任务格式对职前数学教师创造性问题提出绩效的影响。方法:在定量研究中,研究人员向参与者展示了与日常生活相关的具有相同数学结构的图形和书面模式,并要求他们尽可能多地写下问题。这些问题的分析依据是它们是否可行,然后是流畅性、灵活性和创造力的原创性。结果:研究结果表明,虽然在图形图案上的灵活性和独创性得分较高,但在独创性成分上存在统计学差异。此外,研究发现,一些参与者在两个任务中都写了类似的问题;然而,在图形模式的问题倾向于更困难。讨论:培养学生的创造性思维能力是数学教育研究的主要目的(Mann, 2006)。然而,研究结果表明,教师对如何培养学生的创造性思维技能的知识仍然缺乏(Shriki & Lavy, 2012),因此,学生很少有机会在课堂上体验创造性思维和学习(Silver, 1997;Sriraman, 2005)。提出问题与创造力以及解决问题有着密切的联系(Haylock, 1997;银,1997)。因此,为了培养创造性思维能力,学习环境应该通过提出问题的任务来丰富。这项研究的结果并没有断言只有一种图形或书面模式类型必须首选,以激发创造性思维技能在问题提出的背景下。相反,研究结果强调,每一种书写和图形模式都有自己的优势。局限性:流畅性、灵活性和独创性得分受样本量的影响。在更大的样本上进行类似的研究,可能会对可能存在的差异得出更有效的结论。本研究考虑了以下两种不同的任务格式:与日常生活有关的或包含图形图案的书面形式的。图形模式也可以根据它们是否明确提供模式规则来构建(Barbosa & Vale, 2016)。这些类型的问题型任务对创造力成分的影响是另一个可以研究的案例。结论:综上所述,在支持在书写模式和图形模式中加入问题提问任务以提高创造力的灵活性和独创性成分的同时,可以进一步推荐在图形模式中使用问题提问任务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信