RESEARCH PAPER
The interplay of affect and cognition in the mathematics grounding activity: Forming an affective teaching model
,
 
,
 
,
 
,
 
,
 
 
 
More details
Hide details
1
National Chengchi University, Taipei City, TAIWAN
 
2
National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei City, TAIWAN
 
3
Ming Chuan University, Taipei City, TAIWAN
 
 
Publication date: 2022-10-26
 
 
EURASIA J. Math., Sci Tech. Ed 2022;18(12):em2187
 
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
This study aims to build a framework for affect-focused (or affective) mathematical teaching (AMT), while promoting higher-order mathematical learning (e.g., pattern finding and deep understanding). The data sources were the class mathematics grounding activity designed by Taiwan’s mathematics educators, aiming to enhance students’ affective performances in learning mathematics with a theoretical base on the enactivist perspective. Qualitative methodology identified features of affective mathematics teaching and formed a framework for AMT, which defines AMT as transforming natural languages to mathematical languages, highlighting student agenda of upward learning (interest, sense, utter, and present), met by teacher agenda of caring (cultivate, amuse, reflect, and explain). Finally, the enactivist embodiment activities are embedded in the pedagogical structure of 4E phases: entry, entertainment, enlightenment, and enrichment. Affect and cognition interplay in each phase.
REFERENCES (52)
1.
Askew, M., Brown, M., Rhodes, V., Johnson, D., & Wiliam, D. (1997). Effective teachers of numeracy: Final report. King’s College, School of Education.
 
2.
Burton, L. (1994). Children learning mathematics: Patterns and relationships. Simon & Schuster Education.
 
3.
Chang, Y.-P., Lin, F.-L., & Yang, K.-L. (2021). The development of a workshop for cultivating leaders of mathematics-grounding activities in class. Educational Designer, 4(14).
 
4.
Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509-535). SAGE.
 
5.
Chiu, M.-S. (2009). Approaches to the teaching of creative and non-creative mathematical problems. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 55-79. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763....
 
6.
Chiu, M.-S. (2020). Exploring models for increasing the effects of school information and communication technology use on learning outcomes through outside-school use and socioeconomic status mediation: The ecological techno-process. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 413-436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423....
 
7.
Chu, Z.-C. (2020). Some people say manipulation is too time-consuming in mathematics class. Up To Date. Post Dated September 1, 2020. https://www.facebook.com/goech....
 
8.
DeBellis, V. A., & Goldin, G. A. (2006). Affect and meta-affect in mathematical problem solving: A representational perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63(2), 131-147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
 
9.
Derry, S. J., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G., & Sherin, B. L. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3-53. https://doi.org/10.1080/105084....
 
10.
Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science. Studies in Science Education, 13, 105-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/030572....
 
11.
Duval, R. (2000). Basic issues for research in mathematics education. In T. Nakahara, & M. Koyama (Eds.), Proceedings of the 24th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 55-69). Nishiki Print.
 
12.
Duval, R. (2006). A cognitive analysis of problems of comprehension in a learning of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 61, 103-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
 
13.
Empson, S. B. (2003). Low-performing students and teaching fractions for understanding: An interactional analysis. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 34, 305-343. https://doi.org/10.2307/300347....
 
14.
Francisco, J. M. (2013). Learning in collaborative settings: Students building on each other’s ideas to promote their mathematical understanding. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(3), 417-438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
 
15.
Fusch, P. I., & Ness, L. R. (2015). Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 20, 1408-1416. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-....
 
16.
Goldin, G. A. (2000). Affective pathways and representation in mathematical problem solving. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2, 209-219. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327....
 
17.
Goldin, G. A. (2004). Problem solving heuristics, affect, and discrete mathematics. ZDM, 36, 56-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0265....
 
18.
Gomez-Chacon, I. M. (2000). Affective influences in the knowledge of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 43, 149-168. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017....
 
19.
Hannula, M. S. (2012). Exploring new dimensions of mathematics-related affect: Embodied and social theories. Research in Mathematics Education, 14, 137-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/147948....
 
20.
Hannula, M. S. (2019). Young learners’ mathematics-related affect: A commentary on concepts, methods, and developmental trends. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 100, 309-316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
 
21.
Hidi, S., & Renninger, K. A. (2006). The four-phase model of interest development. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 111-127. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326....
 
22.
Kopcha, T. J., Ocak, C., & Qian, Y. (2020). Analyzing children’s computational thinking through embodied interaction with technology: A multimodal perspective. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69, 1987-2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423....
 
23.
Maher, C. A., Palius, M. F., Maher, J. A., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Sigley, R. (2014). Teachers can learn to attend to students’ reasoning using videos as a tool. Issues in Teacher Education, 23(1), 31-47.
 
24.
Marmur, O., & Koichu, B. (2021). Between expert and student perspectives: On the intersection of affect and heuristic-didactic discourse in the undergraduate classroom. Mathematical Thinking and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/109860....
 
25.
Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177-200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0013....
 
26.
Mason, J., Burton, L., & Stacey, K. (1996). Thinking mathematically. Addison-Wesley.
 
27.
McLeod, D. B. (1992). Research on affect in mathematics education: A reconceptualization. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the national council of teachers of mathematics (pp. 575-596). Macmillan.
 
28.
Menon, V., & Chang, H. (2021). Emerging neurodevelopmental perspectives on mathematical learning. Developmental Review, 60, 100964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2....
 
29.
Middleton, J. A. (1995). A study of intrinsic motivation in the mathematics classroom: A personal constructs approach. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26, 254-279. https://doi.org/10.2307/749130.
 
30.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. SAGE.
 
31.
Ministry of Education in Taiwan (2014). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education. https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload....
 
32.
Ministry of Education in Taiwan (2018). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education: Mathematics. https://cirn.moe.edu.tw/Upload....
 
33.
Nunes, T. (1997). Systems of signs and mathematical reasoning. In T. Nunes, & P. Bryant (Eds.), Learning and teaching mathematics: An international perspective (pp. 29-44). Psychology Press.
 
34.
OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results (volumes I and III). OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/pisa/abou....
 
35.
OECD. (2021). Beyond academic learning: First results from the survey of social and emotional skills. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/92a110....
 
36.
Polya, G. (1945). How to solve it. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/978140....
 
37.
Powell, A. B., Francisco, J. M., & Maher, C. A. (2003). An analytical model for studying the development of learners’ mathematical ideas and reasoning using videotape data. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22(4), 405-435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmat....
 
38.
Rodríguez‐Aflecht, G., Jaakkola, T., Pongsakdi, N., Hannula‐Sormunen, M., Brezovszky, B., & Lehtinen, E. (2018). The development of situational interest during a digital mathematics game. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 259-268. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.1....
 
39.
Schulman, S. M. (2013). According to Davis: Connecting principles and practices. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(2), 230-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmat....
 
40.
SDiME. (2022). Just do math. Department of Mathematics, National Taiwan Normal University. https://www.ime.ntnu.edu.tw/in....
 
41.
Stigler, J. W., & Perry, M. (1990). Mathematics learning in Japanese, Chinese and American classrooms. In J. W. Stigler, R. A. Shweder, & G. Herdt (Eds.), Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development (pp. 328-353). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO978....
 
42.
Stipek, D., Salmon, J. M., Givvin, K. B., Kazemi, E., Saxe, G., & MacGyvers, V. L. (1998). The value (and convergence) of practices suggested by motivation research and promoted by mathematics education reformers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 465-488. https://doi.org/10.2307/749862.
 
43.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. SAGE.
 
44.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Grounded theory methodology: An overview. In N. K. Denzin, & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 158-183). SAGE.
 
45.
Sun, Z., Xie, K., & Anderman, L. H. (2018). The role of self-regulated learning in students’ success in flipped undergraduate math courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 36, 41-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihed....
 
46.
Voskoglou, M. G. (2011). Problem solving from Polya to nowadays: A review and future perspectives. Progress in Education, 22(4), 65-82.
 
47.
Wang, T. Y., Lin, F. L., & Yang, K. L. (2021). Success factors for a national problem-driven program aimed at enhancing affective performance in mathematics learning. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 53, 1121-1136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858....
 
48.
Wilkinson, L. C., Bailey, A. L., & Maher, C. A. (2018). Students’ mathematical reasoning, communication, and language representations: A video-narrative analysis. ECNU Review of Education, 1(3), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.30926/ecnur....
 
49.
Wilmes, S. E., & Siry, C. (2021). Multimodal interaction analysis: A powerful tool for examining plurilingual students’ engagement in science practices. Research in Science Education, 51, 71-91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165....
 
50.
Yang, K. L., Lin, F. L., & Tso, T. Y. (2021). An approach to enactivist perspective on learning: Mathematics-grounding activities. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31, 657-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299....
 
51.
Yeager, D. S., Hanselman, P., Walton, G. M., Murray, J. S., Crosnoe, R., Muller, C., Tipton, E., Schneider, B., Hulleman, C. S., Hinojosa, C. P., Paunesku, D., Romero, C., Flint, K., Roberts, A., Trott, J., Iachan, R., Buontempo, J., Yang, S. M., Carvalho, C. M., ..., & Dweck, C. S. (2019). A national experiment reveals where a growth mindset improves achievement. Nature, 573(7774), 364-369. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586....
 
52.
Zan, R., Brown, L., Evans, J., & Hannula, M. S. (2006). Affect in mathematics education: An introduction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 63, 113-121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649....
 
eISSN:1305-8223
ISSN:1305-8215
Journals System - logo
Scroll to top