Evaluation of the Content of Math Courses at the Faculty of Education- Sana’a University in light of Quality Standards

Dr. Fawzi Abdullah Al Haddad
{"title":"Evaluation of the Content of Math Courses at the Faculty of Education- Sana’a University in light of Quality Standards","authors":"Dr. Fawzi Abdullah Al Haddad","doi":"10.20428/jss.28.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to examine the availability of quality standards pertinent to mathematical thinking styles, objectivity and creative problem solving in math courses at the Faculty of Education, Sana’a University. To achieve this, the descriptive analytical method was used. Checklists for analyzing the math content were developed and a questionnaire was used to check their validity. The instuments were applied to a smple of four courses of the 3rd and 4th levels. The study results revealed  that the total weights of deductive and inductive mathematical thinking were 69.66% and 30.34% respectively. This percentage covered the quality of thinking styles being comprehensively represented in all the courses as follows: correlational thinking style, the highest type, scored 65.43%; thinking style using symbols scored 20.61%; other styles of mathematical thinking were represented in the content by varied percentages, ranging from 0% to 10.78%. These other styles include reflective, systematic, strategic, critical, accurate and creative thinking styles. The course content lacked creative problem solving questions. Further, the results of the Chi-square test showed statisitically significant differences at 0.01 regarding the quality standards of mathematical thinking, objectivity and creative problem solving. This means that the courses do not achieve the quality standards of developing thinking styles and creative problem solving among student-teachers.","PeriodicalId":53082,"journal":{"name":"mjl@ ldrst ljtm`y@","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"mjl@ ldrst ljtm`y@","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20428/jss.28.1.1","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

This study aimed to examine the availability of quality standards pertinent to mathematical thinking styles, objectivity and creative problem solving in math courses at the Faculty of Education, Sana’a University. To achieve this, the descriptive analytical method was used. Checklists for analyzing the math content were developed and a questionnaire was used to check their validity. The instuments were applied to a smple of four courses of the 3rd and 4th levels. The study results revealed  that the total weights of deductive and inductive mathematical thinking were 69.66% and 30.34% respectively. This percentage covered the quality of thinking styles being comprehensively represented in all the courses as follows: correlational thinking style, the highest type, scored 65.43%; thinking style using symbols scored 20.61%; other styles of mathematical thinking were represented in the content by varied percentages, ranging from 0% to 10.78%. These other styles include reflective, systematic, strategic, critical, accurate and creative thinking styles. The course content lacked creative problem solving questions. Further, the results of the Chi-square test showed statisitically significant differences at 0.01 regarding the quality standards of mathematical thinking, objectivity and creative problem solving. This means that the courses do not achieve the quality standards of developing thinking styles and creative problem solving among student-teachers.
基于质量标准的萨那大学教育学院数学课程内容评价
本研究的目的是检查在萨那大学教育学院的数学课程中是否存在与数学思维方式、客观性和创造性解决问题有关的质量标准。为此,采用了描述性分析方法。开发了分析数学内容的清单,并使用问卷来检查其有效性。这些工具适用于简单的3级和4级四个课程。研究结果表明,演绎和归纳数学思维的总权重分别为69.66%和30.34%。这一比例涵盖了在所有课程中全面体现的思维方式的质量:相关性思维方式是最高的类型,得分为65.43%;使用符号的思维方式得分为20.61%;其他类型的数学思维在内容中所占比例不同,从0%到10.78%不等。这些其他风格包括反思性、系统性、战略性、批判性、准确性和创造性思维风格。课程内容缺乏创造性的解决问题的问题。此外,卡方检验结果显示,在数学思维、客观性和创造性解决问题的质量标准方面,差异有统计学意义(0.01)。这意味着课程没有达到培养师生思维方式和创造性解决问题的质量标准。
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
23
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信