International Association of Educators   |  ISSN: 2834-7919   |  e-ISSN: 1554-5210
International Journal of Progressive Education
International Association of Educators

Original article | International Journal of Progressive Education 2019, Vol. 15(3) 108-122

Children’s Geometric Understanding through Digital Activities: The Case of Basic Geometric Shapes

Bilal Özçakır, Ahmet Sami Konca & Nihat Arıkan

pp. 108 - 122   |  DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.193.8   |  Manu. Number: MANU-1903-07-0003.R1

Published online: June 03, 2019  |   Number of Views: 420  |  Number of Download: 1037

Save PDF

Abstract

Early mathematics education bases a foundation of academic success in mathematics for higher grades. Studies show that introducing mathematical contents in preschool level is a strong predictor of success in mathematics for children during their progress in other school levels. Digital technologies can support children’s learning mathematical concepts by means of the exploration and the manipulation of concrete representations. Therefore, digital activities provide opportunities for children to engage with experimental mathematics. In this study, the effects of digital learning tools on learning about geometric shapes in early childhood education were investigated. Hence, this study aimed to investigate children progresses on digital learning activities in terms of recognition and discrimination of basic geometric shapes. Participants of the study were six children from a kindergarten in Kırşehir, Turkey. Six digital learning activities were engaged by children with tablets about four weeks in learning settings. Task-based interview sessions were handled in this study. Results of this study show that these series of activities helped children to achieve higher cognitive levels. They improved their understanding through digital activities.

Keywords: Digital Learning Activities, Early Childhood Education, Basic Geometric Shape, Geometry Education

How to Cite this Article?

APA 6th edition
Ozcakir, B., Konca, A.S. & Arikan, N. (2019). Children’s Geometric Understanding through Digital Activities: The Case of Basic Geometric Shapes . International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(3), 108-122. doi: 10.29329/ijpe.2019.193.8

Harvard
Ozcakir, B., Konca, A. and Arikan, N. (2019). Children’s Geometric Understanding through Digital Activities: The Case of Basic Geometric Shapes . International Journal of Progressive Education, 15(3), pp. 108-122.

Chicago 16th edition
Ozcakir, Bilal, Ahmet Sami Konca and Nihat Arikan (2019). "Children’s Geometric Understanding through Digital Activities: The Case of Basic Geometric Shapes ". International Journal of Progressive Education 15 (3):108-122. doi:10.29329/ijpe.2019.193.8.
References
  1. Alabay, E. (2006). Make to learn the children who are attending the pre-school age of six about same mathematical concepts with the helping of computer. (Unpublished Master Thesis). Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  2. Baroody, A. J., Eiland, M., & Thompson, B. (2009). Fostering at-risk preschoolers' number sense. Early Education and Development, 20(1), 80-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409280802206619 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  3. Baroody, A. & Ginsburg, H. (1986). The Relationship Between Initial Meaningful and Mechanical Knowledge of Arithmetic. In J. Hiebert (ed.) Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics. Hillsdale: Erlbaum, 75-112. [Google Scholar]
  4. Battista, M. T., & Clements, D. H. (2000). Mathematics curriculum development as a scientific endeavor. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 737-760). Mahwah: Erlbaum.  [Google Scholar]
  5. Bishop, A. J. (1988). Mathematics education in its cultural context. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 19(2), 179-191. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00751231 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  6. Biza, I. (2011). Students’ evolving meaning about tangent line with the mediation of a dynamic geometry environment and an instructional example space. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 16(2), 125-151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-011-9180-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  7. Bottino, R. M., & Kynigos, C. (2009). Mathematics education & digital technologies: Facing the challenge of networking European research teams. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14(3), 203-215. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-009-9153-y [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  8. Cankaya, Ö. (2012). The effect of using computer games on the teaching of some mathematical concepts in pre-school education. (Unpublished Master Thesis). Ataturk University, Erzurum, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  9. Christakis, D., Ebel, B., Rivara, F. & Zimmerman, F. (2004). Television, video and computer game usage in children under 11 years of age. The Journal of Pediatrics, November, 652-656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2004.06.078 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  10. Clements, D. H. (2002). Computers in early childhood mathematics. Contemporary issues in early childhood, 3(2), 160-181. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2002.3.2.2 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  11. Clements, D. H. & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A Grouws, (ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning, pp. 420-464. Macmillan, New York. [Google Scholar]
  12. Clements, D. H., Swaminathan, S., Hannibal, M. A. Z., & Sarama, J. (1999). Young children's concepts of shape. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 192-212. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/749610 [Google Scholar]
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA, US: Sage Publications, Inc.  [Google Scholar]
  14. Eryaman, M. Y. (2007). Examining the characteristics of literacy practices in a technology-rich sixth grade classroom. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET) 6(2), 26-41. [Google Scholar]
  15. Fessakis, G., Gouli, E. & Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education, 63, 87-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  16. Fischbein, E. (1993). The theory of figural concepts. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 24(2), 139-162. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01273689 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  17. Fletcher, N. (2015). Development and evaluation of a computer program to teach symmetry to young children. (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Columbia University, New York, United States of America. [Google Scholar]
  18. Fujita, T., & Jones, K. (2007). Learners’ understanding of the definitions and hierarchical classification of quadrilaterals: towards a theoretical framing. Research in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794800008520167 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  19. Ginsburg, H. P., Lee, J. S., & Boyd, J. S. (2008). Mathematics Education for Young Children: What It Is and How to Promote It. Social Policy Report, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2379-3988.2008.tb00054.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  20. Gormley, W. T. (2007). Early childhood care and education: Lessons and puzzles. Journal of Policy Analysis & Management, 26(3), 633-671. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20269 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  21. Hansen, A., Drews, D., Dudgeon, J., Lawton, F.& Surtees, L. (2005). Children's errors in mathematics: understanding common misconceptions in primary schools, Exeter: Learning Matters.  [Google Scholar]
  22. Hatzigianni, M., & Margetts, K. (2012). ‘I am very good at computers’: young children's computer use and their computer self-esteem. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20(1), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2012.650008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  23. Hershkowitz, R. (1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry. In P. Nesher & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and Cognition (pp. 70-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  24. Hsiao, H. S., & Chen, J. C. (2016). Using a gesture interactive game-based learning approach to improve preschool children’s learning performance and motor skills. Computers & Education, 95, 151-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.01.005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  25. Kesicioğlu, O. S. (2011). An analysis of the impact of an instructional program designed with direct instruction method and of a computer assisted instructional program designed in accordance with this method on preschoolers' geometric figures concepts learning (Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation). Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey. [Google Scholar]
  26. Lim, E. M. (2013). The factors influencing young children’s social interaction in technology integration. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(4), 545-562. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2013.810484 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  27. Ludwig, J., & Phillips, D. (2007). The benefits and costs of Head Start. Social Policy Report, 21(3), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.3386/w12973 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  28. Marsh, J., Brooks, G., Hughes, J., Ritchie, L., Roberts, S. & Wright, K., (2005). Digital Beginnings: Young children's use of popular culture, media and new technologies. Sheffield: University of Sheffield. [Google Scholar]
  29. Marzano, R. J. & Kendall, J. S. (2007). The new taxonamy of educational objectives (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. [Google Scholar]
  30. Mayberry, J. (1983). The van Hiele levels of geometric thought in undergraduate preservice teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 14(1), 58-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/748797 [Google Scholar]
  31. Miles, M, B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded Sourcebook. (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  [Google Scholar]
  32. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2013). Okul Öncesi Eğitim Programı (Preschool Curriculum). Ankara: Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. [Google Scholar]
  33. Ministry of National Education (MoNE). (2018). Matematik dersi öğretim program (Mathematics Curriculum). Ankara: Talim Terbiye Kurulu Başkanlığı. [Google Scholar]
  34. Mooney, C., Briggs, M., Hansen, A., McCullouch, J., & Fletcher, M. (2014). Primary mathematics: Teaching theory and practice. Exeter:Learning Matters. [Google Scholar]
  35. National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) & Frid Rogers Center (2012). Technology and Interactive Media as Tools in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8. Retrieved from: http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PS_technology_WEB2.pdf, June 14, 2018.  [Google Scholar]
  36. National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2009). Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8- Position Statement. Retrieved from: www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/position%20statement%20Web.pdf, June 10, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  37. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, Va. [Google Scholar]
  38. Ng, O. L., & Sinclair, N. (2015). Young children reasoning about symmetry in a dynamic geometry environment. ZDM, 47(3), 421-434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-014-0660-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  39. Nikolopoulou, K., Gialamas, V. & Batsouta M. (2008). Young children’s Access to and use of ICT at home. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 4(1), 25-40. [Google Scholar]
  40. Obersteiner, A., Reiss, K., & Ufer, S. (2013). How training on exact or approximate mental representations of number can enhance first-grade students’ basic number processing and arithmetic skills. Learning and Instruction, 23, 125-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.08.004 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  41. Plowman, L. & Stephen, C. (2005). Children, play and computers in pre-school education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (2), 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00449.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  42. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  43. Rideout, V. J., Vandewater, E. A. & Wartella E. A. (2003). Zero to Six. California: Kaiser Family Foundation. [Google Scholar]
  44. Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2003). More than Computers: Information and Communication Technology in the Early Years. London: The British Association for Early Childhood Education. [Google Scholar]
  45. Tall, D., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12(2), 151-16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00305619 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
  46. Vinner, S., & Hershkowitz, R. (1980). Concept images and common cognitive paths in the develop ment of some simple geometrical concepts. In R. Karplus (Ed.), Proceedings of the Fourth Inter national Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 177-184). Berkeley: University of California, Lawrence Hall of Science. [Google Scholar]
  47. Wu, W. H., Chiou, W. B., Kao, H. Y., Hu, C. H. A., & Huang, S. H. (2012). Re-exploring game-assisted learning research: The perspective of learning theoretical bases. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1153-1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.003 [Google Scholar] [Crossref] 
Download
Metric
History
Related

Volume 15 Issue 3

June 2019

All Articles

International Journal of Progressive Education

International Association of Educators.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License.
Privacy policy     |     Terms of Use     |     Use of Cookies
Creative Commons Lisansı
© 2012 - 2024 - THDSoft e-Journal Management System.