Comparison Between Malaysian And Singaporean Mathematics Grade Seven Textbooks On Worked-Out Examples With Geometrical Diagrams For The Topic Of Lines And Angles

Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Date
2017-08
Authors
T. Velayutham, Sarveswary
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Universiti Sains Malaysia
Abstract
This study made a comparison between Malaysian and Singaporean mathematics Grade Seven textbooks on worked-out examples with geometrical diagrams for the topic of lines and angles. Three major objectives of this study were to: (i) analyse and compare the cognitive domains of knowing, applying and reasoning based on TIMSS 2011 assessment framework, (ii) analyse and compare the ideational, interpersonal and compositional meaning of geometrical diagrams, and (iii) determine if there is a relation between cognitive domains and the ideational meaning. This study employed a content analysis research design with purposive sampling involving three series of textbooks (used in a period of 19 years) for Grade Seven Mathematics. The Malaysian textbooks were chosen from those used by students from the northern region of Malaysia, whereas the Singaporean textbooks were from those used by the Express stream students which were also the most used in Singaporean schools. A total of 58 worked-out examples were analysed based on Alshwaikh’s (2011) analytic framework for reading geometrical diagrams and TIMSS 2011 framework to categorise the cognitive domains into knowing, applying and reasoning. The findings of the study revealed that the Singaporean textbooks consistently presented more worked-out examples in the domain of reasoning as compared with the Malaysian textbooks which emphasised on the domain of knowing. The absence of worked-out examples with the reasoning in the Malaysian Series Two and Three textbooks thus robbed off some opportunities for the Malaysian students to practice questions with higher order thinking skills. When comparing the ideational meaning presented in textbooks of both countries, it was observed that only the Malaysian Series One textbook has seven narrative diagrams, while Series Two and Series Three, as well as the Singaporean textbooks, have all conceptual diagrams. Moreover, the interpersonal meaning shown in the Singaporean textbooks was more significant than those in the Malaysian textbooks. All the features used in the Singaporean textbooks presented either geometric elements, geometrical relationships or both. When comparing the compositional meaning between the verbally stated questions and diagrams, the Malaysian textbooks presented a better placement of geometrical diagrams with the verbally stated questions. However, the compositional meaning between the verbally stated questions and the geometrical diagrams was more salient in the Singaporean textbooks. The geometrical diagrams in Singaporean textbooks consistently displayed detailed information representing the diagrams to be self-explained as compared with the worked-out examples in the Malaysian textbooks. In addition, the Singaporean textbooks have better framing on worked-out examples, thus presenting a sense of unity between the verbally stated questions and geometrical diagrams. Lastly, the findings revealed that there is a direct relationship between the ideational meaning and cognitive domains, in particular on the cognitive domain of reasoning. Hence, by using one of the ideational meaning, such as the positional relations of objects in a geometrical diagram that include the Angle and Shape relation, the teachers and textbook writers can construct worked-out examples that emphases on reasoning for the topic of Lines and Angles.
Description
Keywords
Malaysian and Singaporean , mathematics Grade Seven textbooks
Citation