Do textbooks address known learning challenges in area measurement? A comparative analysis
This study compared area lessons from Korean textbooks and US standard-based textbooks to understand differences and similarities among these textbooks, as well as how these textbooks address known learning challenges in area measurement. Several well-known challenges have been identified in previous studies, such as covering, array structure, and linking array structure to area formula. We were interested in knowing if textbooks addressed these issues in their treatments of area measurement and, in doing so, provided students with opportunities to overcome or become familiar with known challenges. The results show that both countries’ textbooks demonstrated similar limitations; only few area and area-related lessons are covered and three important learning challenges in area measurement are not covered well, which need to be informed to practicing teachers.
KeywordsArea measurement Textbooks Curriculum
- Alkhrausi, H. (2012). Generalizability theory: An analysis of variance approach to measurement problems in educational assessment. Journal of Studies in Education, 2(1), 184–196.Google Scholar
- Battista, M. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 843–908). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
- Cai, J., & Howson, G. (2013). Toward an international mathematics curriculum. In M. A. Clements, A. J. Bishop, C. Keitel, J. Kilpatrick, & F. K. S. Leung (Eds.), Third international handbook of mathematics education (pp. 949–974). New York: Springer New York.Google Scholar
- Cai, J., Lo, J. J., & Watanabe, T. (2002). Intended treatments of arithmetic average in U.S. and Asian school mathematics textbooks. School Science and Mathematics, 102(8), 391–404. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2002.tb17891.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Clements, D., & Stephan, M. (2004). Measurement in pre-K to grade 2 mathematics. In D. Clements & J. Sarama (Eds.), Engaging young children in mathematics: standards for early childhood mathematics education (pp. 299–320). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Dossey, J., Soucy McCrone, S., & Halvorsen, K. (2016). Mathematics education in the United States 2016: a capsule summary fact book. VA: Retrieved from Reston.Google Scholar
- Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K., Hollingsworth, H., & Jacobs, J. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Retrieved from Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Hiebert, J., & Lefvre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: an introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: the case of mathematics (pp. 1–27). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Lee, J. (2010). Children’s strategies for measurement estimation of rectangular covering tasks. Journal of the Korean Society of Mathematical Education series A, 49(3), 375–487.Google Scholar
- Lehrer, R. (2003). Developing understanding of measurement. In J. Kilpatrick, W. G. Martin, & D. Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 179–192). Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
- Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). The TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College.Google Scholar
- Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Hooper, M. (2016). TIMSS 2015 International Results in Mathematics. Retrieved from Boston College: http://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2015/international-results/.
- Na, G. (2012). Examining Students’ conceptions about the area of geometric figures. Journal of Elementary Mathematics Education in Korea, 16(3), 451–469.Google Scholar
- National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: ensuring mathematical success for all. Reston: NCTM, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics,  ©2014.Google Scholar
- Neidorf, T. S., Binkley, M., Gattis, K., & Nohara, D. (2006). Comparing mathematics content in the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), and Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2003 Assessments. Retrieved from Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- Pang, J. (2012). Current Elementary Mathematics Textbooks. In J. Kim, I. Han, & J. Lee (Eds.), Mathematics Education in Korea - Vol. 1 Curricular and Teaching and Learning Practices (pp. 43–61): World Scientific Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- Sahm, C. (2015). Curriculum counts: NYC public schools and the Common Core. Civic Report. Retrieved from New York, NY: https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/curriculum-counts-nyc-public-schools-and-common-core-6360.html.
- Sarama, J., & Clements, D. (2009). Early childhood mathematics education research: learning trajectories for young children. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Son, J.-W., & Hu, Q. (2016). The initial treatment of the concept of function in the selected secondary school mathematics textbooks in the US and China. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 47(4), 505–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2015.1088084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stein, M. K., Remillard, J. T., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 319–369). Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
- Vasilyeva, M., Ganley, C. M., Casey, B. M., Dulaney, A., Tillinger, M., & Anderson, K. (2013). How children determine the size of 3D structures: investigating factors influencing strategy choice. Cognition and Instruction, 31(1), 29–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2012.742086.CrossRefGoogle Scholar