The Effect of Using a Proposed Module in Robotic Mathematics Based on STEM for The Development of Mathematical Proficiency and Future Thinking of Secondary School Students

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Faculty of Education , Fayoum Unversity

Abstract

The current research aimed at exploring the effect of a proposed unit in robotic mathematics based on STEM for the development of mathematical proficiency and future thinking of secondary school students. The researcher prepared a unit of "Robot Mathematics" according to STEM and a teacher booklet for teaching it. The researcher also prepared a test of mathematical proficiency and a questionnaire of future thinking. The sample of the research consisted of (16) students in the first-year secondary school in The Fayoum governorate as an experimental group, and then the pre administration of the research tools were applied. The results of the current research revealed the development of the experimental group students in the pre-test in the mathematical proficiency as a whole and its sub-components as well as the development of future thinking as a whole and its sub-skills. The researcher attributed the results to the fact that the proposed unit in the robotic mathematics based on the entrance of STEM and its teaching methods has helped to develop the components of mathematical proficiency and future thinking. The study also found a positive correlation, significant at (0.01) between the grades of the experimental group students in the pre-test of mathematical proficiency and the future thinking questionnaire. The research recommended teaching the proposed unit based on STEM for first-year secondary students as well as using a range of teaching methods that help the learner to use the components of mathematical proficiency and future thinking.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1-        Akgunduz, D. (2016). A Research about the placement of the top thousand students placed in stem fields in turkey between the years 2000 and 2014. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(5), 1365-1377.‏
2-        Arsad, N. M., Osman, K., & Soh, T. M. T. (2011). Instrument development for 21st century skills in Biology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15(1), 1470-1474.‏
3-        Awofala, A. O. (2017). Assessing senior secondary school students' mathematical proficiency as related to gender and performance in mathematics in nigeria. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 3(2), 488-502.‏
4-        Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA press.‏
5-        Chang, M., Evans, M. A., Kim, S., Norton, A., & Samur, Y. (2015). Differential effects of learning games on mathematics proficiency. Educational Media International, 52(1), 47-57.‏
6-        Chiu, F. C. (2012). Fit between future thinking and future orientation on creative imagination. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 7(3), 234-244.‏
7-        Colucci-Gray, L., Burnard, P., Gray, D., & Cooke, C. (2019). A critical review of STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics). In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education.‏
8-        Cragg, L., & Gilmore, C. (2014). Skills underlying mathematics: The role of executive function in the development of mathematics proficiency. Trends in neuroscience and education, 3(2), 63-68.‏
9-        David, J. L. (2008). Project-based learning. Educational Leadership, 65(5), 80.‏
10-    Eisenchlas, S. & Trevaskes, K. (2005). Cognitive learning strategies programmed practices efficacy in Predictive & hypothetical thinking skills. The University of Wisconsin, Madison, p213, Abstract Dissertation, Pro-Quest.
11-    Fan, S. C. C., & Ritz, J. (2014). International views of STEM education. PATT-28 Research into Technological and Engineering Literacy Core Connections, 7-14.‏
12-    Fortunato, V. J., & Furey, J. T. (2011). The theory of MindTime: The relationships between future, past, and present thinking and psychological well-being and distress. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 20-24.‏
13-    Freund, D. P. N. (2011). Opportunities to develop mathematical proficiency: how teachers structure participation in the elementary mathematics classroom. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106.‏
14-    Gonzalez, H. B., & Kuenzi, J. J. (2012, August). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education: A primer. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.‏
15-    Groth, R. E. (2017). Classroom data analysis with the five strands of mathematical proficiency. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 90(3), 103-109.‏
16-    Groves, S. (2012). Developing mathematical proficiency. Journal of science and mathematics education in Southeast Asia, 35(2), 119-145.‏
17-    Hartje, D. (2008). An examination of the process of implementing futuristic imagination programs in schools. Fordham University, 208 pages, AAT 3210268, Abstract Dissertation, Pro-Quest.
18-    Jolly, A. (2016). STEM by design: Strategies and activities for grades 4-8. Routledge.‏
19-    Jones, A., Buntting, C., Hipkins, R., McKim, A., Conner, L., & Saunders, K. (2012). Developing students’ futures thinking in science education. Research in Science Education, 42(4), 687-708.‏
20-    Kim, S. & Chang, M.  (2010). Does computer use promote the mathematical proficiency of ell students ?. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 42 ( 3). 285 – 305.
21-    Klein, M. (2012). Mathematical proficiency and the sustainability of participation: A New Ball Game through a Poststructuralist Lens. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.‏
22-    Marshall, S. P. (2009). Re-imagining specialized STEM academies: Igniting and nurturing decidedly different minds, by design. Roeper Review, 32(1), 48-60.‏
23-    Moore, T. J., Stohlmann, M. S., Wang, H. H., Tank, K. M., Glancy, A. W., & Roehrig, G. H. (2014). Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In Engineering in pre-college settings: Synthesizing research, policy, and practices (pp. 35-60). Purdue University Press.‏
24-    Morrison, J., Bartlett, R., & Raymond, V. (2009). STEM as curriculum. Education Week, 23(19.03), 2017.‏
25-    Morrison, G. S. (2007). Early childhood education today. Kevin M. Davis.‏
26-    National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council. (2009). Engineering in K-12 Education: Understanding the Status and Improving the Prospects.Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
27-    National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers- [NGA Center and CCSSO]. (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. common core state standards (college- and career-readiness standards and K–12 standards in english language arts and math). Washington, D.C.: NGA Center and CCSSO.
28-    National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academies Press.‏
29-    Ntemngwa, C., & Oliver, S. (2018). The implementation of integrated science technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) instruction using robotics in the middle school science classroom. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 6(1), 12-40.‏
30-    Paxton, M. J. (2008). The role of positive future thinking in adolescent suicide risk. ProQuest.‏
31-    PCAST- President's Council for Science and Technology (2010): Prepare and inspire: K-12 science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education for America's future. Washington, DC: PCAST.
32-    Rahman, S. M., Chacko, S. M., & Kapila, V. (2017, June). Building trust in robots in robotics-focused STEM education under TPACK framework in middle schools. In Proc. of 2017 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition (pp. 25-28).‏
33-    Robelen, E. (2011). New STEM schools target underrepresented groups. Education Week, 31(1), 18-19.‏
34-    Sanders, M., Kwon, H. S., Park, K. S., & Lee, H. (2011). Integrative STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education: contemporary trends and issues. Secondary Education Research, 59(3), 729-762.‏
35-    Schoenfeld, A. H. (2007). What is mathematical proficiency and how can it be assessed?. Assessing mathematical proficiency, 53, 59.‏
36-    Smith, W. (2008). Impact of the use of a training program based on the model of creative problem solving Barnes Bouktoath in the development of awareness of the issues to in the state of Georgia. Educational Psychologist, 64( 3), 23-36
37-    Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 2(1), 4.‏
38-    Straw, S. (2014). Consultation on Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) for the Education and Training Foundation. National Foundation for Educational Research.‏
39-    Thomasian, J. (2011). Building a science, technology, engineering, and math education agenda: an update of state actions. NGA Center for Best Practices.‏
40-    Tsai, T. L., & Li, H. C. (2017). Towards a framework for developing students' fraction proficiency. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 48(2), 244-255.‏
41-    Vasquez, J. A., Sneider, C. I., & Comer, M. W. (2013). STEM lesson essentials, grades 3-8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (pp. 58-76). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.‏
42-    Volk, V. (2008). A global village is a small world. Roeper Review, 30(1), 39-44.‏
William E. & Dugger, Jr. (2013): Evolution of STEM in the United States. International Technology and Engineering Educators 

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics