Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Investigating the Perception of Senior Secondary School Students on the Role of Classroom Engagement in Mathematics Problem Solving

Iliya Joseph Bature 1 * ,
Bill Atweh 2,
Funmilola Oreoluwa 3
1 Batchelor Institute of Indiginous Higher Education2 One World Rippled Education Consultant3 Northern Territory Correctional Services * Corresponding Author
Download PDF
Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Volume 3, Issue 2, May 2020, pp. 73-105
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 1165 DOWNLOADS: 876 Publication date: 15 May 2020
ABSTRACT
This study was designed to investigate the perception of students on the role of classroom engagement in student’s  problem solving in mathematics. Specifically, the study investigated the perception of 6 students taught by 4 mathematics teachers in 2 secondary schools in Nigeria for a period of 2 years. Two research objectives were developed to guide the  study. Research journal and video recordings were used to document the focus group discussions and classroom observations.  The findings of the study suggested that the mathematics teachers made positive effort to use the engagement  strategy as a tool to increase students problem solving abilities during mathematics classroom instruction. In addition, the  result of the study suggested a positive increase in students’ problem-solving skills. This was evident in students’ engagement in collaboration, participation, increase in positive relationships that existed between students and their teachers. He study also suggested that the mathematics teachers created positive classroom atmosphere for students’ participation in  classrooms problem solving. It also suggests that teachers provided inclusive support for students’ problem solving in  mathematics and provided evidence of general traditional teacher centred learning in mathematics as opposed to student-centred learning among the students.
KEYWORDS
Classroom practice, collaborative work, engagement, mathematics, problem solving, secondary school students.
CITATION (APA)
Bature, I. J., Atweh, B., & Oreoluwa, F. (2020). Investigating the Perception of Senior Secondary School Students on the Role of Classroom Engagement in Mathematics Problem Solving. Journal of Research in Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 3(2), 73-105. https://doi.org/10.31756/jrsmte.323
REFERENCES
  1. Abanihe, I., Ifeoma, M., John, L., & Tandi, I. (2010). Evaluation of the methodology aspect of the science teacher education curriculum in Nigeria. Pakistan Journal of Social Sciences, 7(2), 170-176.
  2. Adeyemi, T.O. (2008). The influence of class-size on the quality of output in secondary schools in Ekiti state, Nigeria. American-Eurasian Journal of Scientific Research, 3(1), 7-14
  3. Adiku M. U. (2008). Curriculum development in science, technology and mathematics (STM) education. Proceedings of the 49th Annual Conference of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria. Nigeria
  4. Ajai, J. T., Imoko, B. I. & Okwu, E. I (2013). Comparison of the Learning Effectiveness of Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and Conventional Method of Teaching Algebra. Journal of Education and Practice. Vol.4(1), 131-136
  5. Akala, J., (2000). The Agony of Teaching Mathematics, Kenya Times, 16, 1
  6. Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., eds. (2001). Taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives; abridged edition. NY: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
  7. Anthoony G & Walshaw M (2009). Characteristics of Effective Teaching of Mathematics: A View from the West. Journal of Mathematics Education. 2(2),147-164
  8. Attard, C. (2015). Engagement and mathematics: what does it look like in your classroom? Journal of Professional Learning (semester 2 2015)
  9. Atweh, B. (2007). The social turn in understanding learning and its implications for facilitating learning: ripples for change. A journey of preservice teacher education reforms in the Philippines Commission for Higher Education. Print house, Quezon City.
  10. Atweh et al. (2011) (eds.), Mapping Equity and Quality in Mathematics Education, © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 35,
  11. Atweh B. (2014) Improving teaching through Productive Pedagogy. A paper presented at the Department of Mathematics Education in the College of Education research and Innovation week, university of South Africa
  12. Azuka, B. (2006). Active learning in the mathematics classroom implications to secondary mathematics and UBE. Proceeding of Annual national conference of MAN, 181-187.
  13. Bajah, S. I. (1999). The challenges of science technology and teacher education in Nigeria; beyond the year 2000. African Journal of Education, 1(91), 43-49.
  14. Ball, D. L. 2003. Mathematical proficiency for all students. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation
  15. Bature, I. J. (2014) Productive Pedagogies for Reforming Secondary School Mathematics Classroom Practice in Nigeria.
  16. Curtin University PhD Thesis Online.
  17. Bature, I. J., & Atweh, B. (2020). Mathematics teacher’s reflection on the role of productive pedagogies in improving their classroom instruction. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 6(2), 319-335.
  18. Bature, I. J., & Atweh, B. (2019). Collaboration: A collective bargain for achieving quality mathematics classroom practice.
  19. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 5(3), 347-361.
  20. Bature, I.J., & Atweh, B. (2016). Achieving quality mathematics classroom instruction through productive pedagogies. International Journal of Educational Methodology, 2(1), 1-18.
  21. Bature, I. J. Atweh B. & Treagust D. (2016). Inclusivity: An Effective Tool for Achieving Quality Mathematics Classroom Instruction in Nigerian Secondary Schools. Universal Journal of Educational Research 4(1): 173-180,
  22. Bature, I. J., & Bundot, G. B. (2009). Setting the classroom climate for effective teaching and learning process: implications for classroom environment and learning. International Journal for Contemporary Issues in Education (Special edition), 198-201.
  23. Bature, I. J., & Bature, F. S. (2005). Attitude of teachers and students towards teaching and learning of mathematics. Journal of Educational Studies, Institute of Education, 11(1), 64-70.
  24. Bature, I. J., & Bature, F. S. (2006). Effect of maths-phobia on students’ attitude towards mathematics. Journal of Educational Studies, Institute of Education, 12(1), 6-12.
  25. Bature, I., Jackson, J., Kemi, A., Shol, D. & Sabo, N. (2015). Introducing productive pedagogies to Nigerian mathematics classroom through collaborative action research using community of practice approach. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 11(3), 41-58.
  26. Bature, I. J., & Igwe, O. (2010). An investigation into the factors affecting Junior Secondary School 3 students understanding of mathematics language in Gombe metropolis: African Journal of Educational Research and Administration, 3(1), 47-52.
  27. Bature, I.J. & Jibrin, A.G. (2015). The perception of preservice mathematics teachers on the role of scaffolding in achieving quality mathematics classroom instruction. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(4), 275-287.
  28. Black & Solomon (2008). Talking to learn and learning to talk in mathematics classroom. @: https://www.researchgate. net/publication/41125144.
  29. J. of Res. in Sci. Math. and Tech. Edu.|
  30. Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain.
  31. Board of Studies New South Wales. (2012). Mathematics K-10 syllabus. Retrieved from http://syllabus.bos.nsw.edu.au/
  32. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3 (2), 77-101.
  33. Briggs M. I, McCaulley, M. C, Quenk, M. H, & Hammer, A.L., (1998), ‘MBTI Manual. A Guide to the Development and Use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator’. 3rd edn. Consulting Psychologists Press Inc. Palo Alto. 21.
  34. Bristow, S.F. & Patrick, S. (2014), “An international study in competency education: Postcards from abroad”, International Association for K–12 Online Learning, Competency Works Issue Brief, CW-An-International-Study-in-CompetencyEducationPostcards-from-Abroad.
  35. Brophy, J. (1999). Perspectives of Classroom Management: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. In H. J. Freiberg, & J. E. Brophy (Eds.), Beyond Behaviourism: Changing the Classroom Management Paradigm. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  36. Cavin, M. (2008). Constructivist approaches to Learning in Science and their implications for Science Pedagogy: A Literature Review. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 3, 193 – 206.
  37. Choy, B. H. (2013). Productive mathematical noticing: What it is and why it matters. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Proc. 36th annual conference of Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (186-193). Melbourne, Victoria: MERGA.
  38. Choy, B. H. (2014). Teachers’ Productive Mathematical Noticing During Lesson Preparation. In Nicol, C., Liljedahl, P., Oesterle, S., & Allan, D. (Eds.) Proceedings of the Joint Meeting of PME 38 and PME-NA 36(2), 297-304. Vancouver, Canada: PME.
  39. Clandinin, D.J. & Connelly, F.M. (2000) Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
  40. Clarke, A. E. (2005). Situational analysis: Grounded theory after the postmodern turn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  41. Colgan L (2014). Making maths children Will Love: Building Positive Mathematics to improve student’s achievement in Mathematics. Queens University.
  42. Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research.
  43. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
  44. D’Ambrosio, U. (2006). Ethno-mathematics: Link between traditions and modernity. ZDM, 40(6), 1033-1034.
  45. Davis, R.B., Maher, C.A., & Noddings, N. (Eds.). (1990). Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics.
  46. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Reston,
  47. de Bono, E, (1991) "Why Do Quality Efforts Lose Their Fizz?" Quality is No Longer Enough, The Journal for Quality and Participation,
  48. Dweck C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York, NY: Random House.
  49. Eccles, J. S. (2016). Engagement: where to next. Learning and Instruction, 43, 71–75.
  50. Egeberg, H. M., McConney, A., & Price, A. (2016). Classroom Management and National Professional Standards for Teachers: A Review of the Literature on Theory and Practice. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(7).
  51. Emaikwu, S. O. (2012). Assessing the effect of prompt feedback as a motivational strategy on students’ achievement in secondary school mathematics. Journal of Educational Research, 3(4), 371-379.
  52. Ernest, l (1991). The philosophy of mathematics education: Studies in mathematics education. London: Falmer Press.
  53. Ernest, P. (2001). ‘Critical Mathematics Education’. In Gates, P. (Ed.), Issues in mathematics teaching, 277-293. Routledge/Falmer.
  54. Esan F. (2015). Cooperative Problem-Solving Strategy and Students’ Learning Outcomes in Algebraic Word Problems: A Nigerian Case. International Journal for Infonomics (IJI), 8(1), 986 – 989.
  55. Eso, O.T. (1998). Assessment procedure and student locus of control as determinants of achievement in Integrated Science.
  56. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).
  57. Fair Go Team NSW Department of Education and Training. (2006). School is for me: pathways to student engagement.
  58. Sydney: NSW Department of Education and Training.
  59. FGN. (2004). National Policy on Education (4th Ed.). Nigerian Educational Research and Development Council Press.
  60. FME, (2006). Federal ministry of education operation reaches all secondary schools: Report on the state of secondary schools in Nigeria. Abuja: Federal Inspectorate Service Publication.
  61. Fredricks, J. A. (2011). Engagement in school and out-of-school contexts: a multidimensional view of engagement. Theory into Practice, 50(4), 327–335
  62. Fredricks, J. A., Filsecker, M., & Lawson, M. A. (2016). Student engagement, context, and adjustment: addressing definitional, measurement, and methodological issues. Learning and Instruction, 43, 1–4.
  63. Feldman, K. A. (1976). The superior college teacher from the students' view. Research in Higher Education, 5(3), 243-288.
  64. Freudenthal, H. (1978). Weeding and sowing: Preface to a science of mathematical education. Dordrecht: Reidel.
  65. Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on Multiple Intelligences. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 200.
  66. Gay, G. (2000). Culturally Responsive Teaching: Theory, Research, & Practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
  67. Glasersfeld, E. (1987). ‘Learning as a constructive activity.’ In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Hillslade, NJ: Erlbaum.
  68. Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C. F., Marsh, H. W. & Boivin, M. (2010). Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 711-735
  69. Hiebert, J. (2003). What research says about the NCTM standards. In A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics, edited by J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin, and D. Schifter, 1-23. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
  70. Huerta M, O. (2008), “Managing change in OECD governments: An introductory framework”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance.12, OECD Publishing, Paris.
  71. Ingram, N. (2013). Mathematical engagement skills. In V. Steinle, L. Ball, & C. Bardini (Eds.), Mathematics Education: Yesterday, today and tomorrow (Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia). Melbourne: MERGA.
  72. Jaworski B. (2006). Theory and practice in mathematics teaching development: Critical inquiry as a mode of learning in teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 187-211.
  73. Jensen, B. et al. (2016), Beyond PD: Teacher Professional Learning in High-Performing Systems, National Center on Education and the Economy, Washington, D.C., www.ncee.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/BeyondPD Webv2.pdf.
  74. Johnson, K. (2004). The role of field palaeontology on teachers’ attitudes toward inquiry science. Novation’s Journal, 2f.
  75. Julius, E, Abdullah, A., & Suhairom, N. (2018) Attitude of Students Towards Solving Problems in Algebra: A Review of Nigeria Secondary Schools.” IOSR Journal of Research & Method in Education (IOSRJRME), 8(1), 26-31.
  76. Kaka, M. O. (2007). Games assisted instructional materials – A strategy for enhancing students’ achievement in integrated sciences. Journal of Research in Curriculum and Teaching, 2 (1), 120 – 128.
  77. Klegeris, A., Bahniwal, M., & Hurren, H., (2013). Improvement in generic problem-solving abilities of students by use of tutor-less problem-based learning in a large classroom setting. CBE-life science Education. 12, 73 – 79
  78. Knowles, M. S. (1975). Self-Directed Learning: A Guide for learners and Teachers. Chicago, Illinois: Follert Publishing.
  79. Kusure, L. P. & Bashira K (2012). Instruction in Science and Mathematics for the 21st century proceedings of the first national science and mathematics teachers conference, Bindura university of science education (BUSE), Bindura
  80. Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal (27), 29-63.
  81. Lave, D., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  82. Lerman, S. (1996). Inter-subjectivity in mathematics learning: A challenge to the radical constructivist paradigm. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(2), 133-150.
  83. James, A. O. & Adewale, O.A. (2015). Relationship between senior secondary schools’ students’ achievement in mathematical problem solving and intellectual abilities tests. European Scientific Journal, 8(15): 169-179.
  84. Mayer, R. E. & Wittrock, R.C. (2006). Problem solving. In Handbook of educational psychology 287–304. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  85. McDonald, T. (2013). Classroom Management: Engaging students in learning. (2nd Ed.) Australia & NZ: Oxford University Press
  86. Montessori, M. (2003). Montessori Method Book. Berne Nobles
  87. Morganett, L. (1991). Good teacher-student relationships: A key element in classroom motivation and management. Education, 112(2), 260-264.
  88. Mpofu, G. & Mpofu, M. 2019. A Motivating Tool in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. International Journal of Biology, Physics & Mathematics.3(2),102 – 113
  89. Mupa, (2015) in Mpofu, G. & Mpofu, M. (2019). A Motivating Tool in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. International Journal of Biology, Physics & Mathematics. 3(2), 102 – 113
  90. Nagy, R (2019). The epic failure at the root of Australia's maths problem. ABC News. Online
  91. @https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-12-07/the-demise-of-australian-mathematics-teachers-students/11768644
  92. National Center for Educational Achievement. (2010). Best Practice Framework. Accessed online @ http://www.just4kids. org/en/texas/best_practices/framework.cfm.
  93. National Curriculum Framework (2005) (NCF-2005)-A Paradigm Shift-Mathematics; NCERT publications, New Delhi Nesmith S. J. (2008). Mathematics and Literature: Educators’ Perspectives on Utilizing a Reformative Approach to Bridge Two Cultures; Wayland Baptist University
  94. Nevid, J. (2013). Psychology: concepts and applications. Belmont CA: Wadworth.
  95. Nwagbo, C. (1999). Effects of guided-discovery and expository teaching methods on the attitudes towards biology of students of with different levels of scientific literacy. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria (STAN), 36, 43-51.
  96. Obamanu, B.J. & Ademola, M.O. (2011). Factors related to under achievement in science, technology and mathematics education in secondary schools in Rivers state, Nigeria. World Journal of Education. 1(1), 102-109.
  97. Odili, G.A. (2006). Mathematics in Nigeria secondary schools: A teaching perspective. Port Harcourt: Anachuna Educational Books.
  98. Op 't Eynde, P. (2004). A socio-constructivist perspective on the study of affect in mathematics education. In M. J. Hoines & A. B. Fuglestad (Eds.), 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education 1, 118-122. Bergen, Norway: Bergen University College.
  99. Osuafor, A. M. (1999). Extent of use of research findings on instructional strategies in science education. Journal of Science Teachers Association of Nigeria 34: 102-112.
  100. Oyanya E. O. & Njuguna, B. M., (1999). (SMASSE). A paper presented to Kenya National Heads Association Conference, Mombasa, Kenya.
  101. Piggott, J. (2004,). Developing a Framework for Mathematical Enrichment. Conference Proceedings, "Critical Thinking", University of the West Indies, Trinidad.
  102. Protheroe, N. (2007). “What Does Good Math Instruction Look Like?” Principal 7(1), 51 – 54.
  103. Rowe, K.J. (2006). Effective teaching practices for students with and without learning difficulties: Constructivism as a legitimate theory of learning AND of teaching? Background paper to keynote address presented at the NSW DET Office of Schools Portfolio Forum, Wilkins Gallery, Sydney.
  104. Salman, M. F., Yahaya, L. A., & Adewara, A. A. (2011). Mathematics Education in Nigeria: Gender and Spatial Dimensions of Enrolment. 3(1), 15–20
  105. Schoen, H. L., & Charles, L. I. (2003). (Eds.), Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Grades 6-12. Reston, VA.
  106. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
  107. Skemp, R. R. (2008). The Psychology of learning Mathematics. Hillside: Lawrence Eribaum Associates.
  108. Skemp R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20-26.
  109. Skovsmose, O. (2005). Travelling through education: Uncertainty, mathematics, responsibility. Rotterdam, NHL: Sense Publishers.
  110. Smith, N.N. (2017). A mind for mathematics: Meaningful teaching and learning in elementary classrooms. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
  111. Smith, N.N. (2018). Ten Tips to Engage Students with Mathematics. Online @ https://corwin-connect.com/2018/01 /ten-tipsengage-students-mathematics/
  112. Solomon, Y. (2007). Experiencing mathematics classes: gender, ability and the selective development of participative identities. International Journal of Educational Research 46 (1-2), 8-19
  113. Solomon, Y. (2008). Mathematical Literacy: Developing Identities of Inclusion. Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates/Taylor and Francis.
  114. Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative Case Studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research 443-466. Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications Ltd.
  115. Steffe, L. P. & Thompson, P. W. (2000). Interaction or Intersubjectivity? A Reply to Lerman. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 191- 209.
  116. Sullivan, P., McDonough, A., (2007) Eliciting positive student motivation for learning mathematics. Acess online @ https://research.monash.edu/en/publications/eliciting-positive-student-motivation-for-learning-mathematics
  117. Sullivan, P., Tobias, S., & McDonough, A. (2006). Perhaps the decision of some students not to engage in learning mathematics in school is deliberate. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62(1), 81-99.
  118. Tun, M. (2016). "What do Math and Language have in Common? Lessons from Foreign Language Learning." Journal of Mathematics and Culture. 10(3): 148-168
  119. UNESCO (2015), Transversal Competencies in Education Policy and Practice. (Phase 1 Regional Synthesis Report), Paris, France.
  120. Vander Ark, T. (2016), Project or Activity? Project-Based Learning and Cousins, acess online @ http://gettingsmart. com/2016/06 /project-
  121. Vondrová, N., & Žalská, J. (2013). Mathematics for teaching and pre-service mathematics teachers' ability to notice. In A. Lindmeier & A. Heinze (Eds.), Proc. 37th Conf. of the Int. Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.4, 361-368.
  122. Valero, P. (2009). Mathematics education as a network of social practices. Invited keynote lecture at the 6th Conference of the European Society for research in Mathematics Education (CERME6) (forthcoming proceedings). University Joseph Fourier, Lyon, France.
  123. Watts H. M. G. & Goos M. (2017). Theoretical foundations of engagement in mathematics. Math Ed Research Journal 29:133–142.
  124. Williams, S.R., Ivey, K.M. (2001). Affective Assessment and Mathematics Classroom Engagement: A Case Study. Educational Studies in Mathematics 47, 75–100.
  125. Wu, M., & Dianzhou, Z (2006) Mathematics Education in Different Cultural Traditions-A Comparative Study of East Asia and the West. The 13th ICMI Study
  126. Yang, Y., & Ricks, T. E. (2013). Chinese lesson study: Developing classroom instruction through collaborations in schoolbased teaching research group activities. In Y. Li & R. Huang (Eds.), How Chinese teach mathematics and improve teaching 51-65. New York: Routledge.
  127. Yin, R. K. (1994) Case study research: design and methods (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.