Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques

หนงสอเรอง การออกแบบการวจย: วธการวจยเชงคณภาพ วธการวจยเชงปรมาณ และวธการวจยแบบผสม (Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches) เปนหนงสอทเรยบเรยงเพออธบายเกยวกบความแตกตางของกระบวนทศนการวจยทง 2 แบบ ไดแก การวจย เชงปรมาณ และการวจยเชงคณภาพ และความจำเปนของประเดนปญหาการวจยทตองนำกระบวนทศนทง 2 มารวมกนหาขอคนพบเพอนำไปสผลการวจยทสามารถนำผลการวจยไปใชประโยชนไดอยางจรงมากยงขน เรยกวา “การวจยแบบผสมผสาน” ซงเปนหนงสอทอธบายวธการวจยทง 2 ประเภทไดอยางชดเจน และการรวมกนของกระบวนทศนการวจยทง 2 แบบอยางลงตว

Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches

This article is a sequel to the conversation on learning initiated by the editors of Educational Researcher in volume 25, number 4. The author’s first aim is to elicit the metaphors for learning that guide our work as learners, teachers, and researchers. Two such metaphors are identified: the acquisition metaphor and the participation metaphor. Subsequently, their entailments are discussed and evaluated. Although some of the implications are deemed desirable and others are regarded as harmful, the article neither speaks against a particular metaphor nor tries to make a case for the other. Rather, these interpretations and applications of the metaphors undergo critical evaluation. In the end, the question of theoretical unification of the research on learning is addressed, wherein the purpose is to show how too great a devotion to one particular metaphor can lead to theoretical distortions and to undesirable practices.

https://www.it.uu.se/edu/course/homepage/cosulearning/st11/reading/Sfard_ER1998.pdf

On Two Metaphors for Learning and the Dangers of Choosing Just One

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/5/110/206.full.pdf

The american psychological association.

미국의 “전국 수학 교사 협의회”(National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, NCTM)는 1989년부터 〈학교 수학의 교육과정과 평가 규준〉(1989), 〈수학 가르침(교수)의 전문성 규준〉(1991), 〈학교 수학의 평가(시험) 규준〉(NCTM, 1995), 〈학교 수학의 원리와 규준〉(2000)을 출판하여 미국의 수학 교육 의 전망(목표, 나아갈 길)과 규준(실행 지침)을 제시하였다. 수학 교사들로 구성된 미국의 NCTM은 학생, 학부모, 학교 행정가 등 많은 사람들과 힘을 합하여 모든 학생들에게 수준 높은 수학 교육을 받을 수 있는 여건(환경, 기회)을 조성하는 데 구심점의 역할을 하였다. 한편 많은 관련 단체들은 여러 배경과 능력을 가진 학생들이 전문성을 지닌 교사(특수 교사를 일컫는 밀이 아니다. 수학 교과를 이해하고 수학의 전문성과 특수성을 가르칠 수 있는 일반 교사를 일컫는 말이다.)로부터 미래를 대비해 평등하고, 진취적이며, 지원이 잘 이루어지고, 공학 도구(IT)가 잘 갖춰진 환경에서 중요한 수학적 아이디어를 이해하면서 학습할 수 있는 수학 교실(미국에서는 우리나라처럼 수학 교사가 수학 시간에 학생의 방(교실: Homeroom)에 찾아가지 않고 학생들이 선생의 방(수학 교실: Classroom)을 찾아온다. 전형적인 수학 교실의 사진은 2쪽에 나와 있다.)을 만들기 위해 함께 힘썼다. NCTM에서 출간한 여러 규준들은 우리나라의 제6차와 제7차 교육과정에도 큰 영향을 미쳤다. 이 글에서는 NCTM(2000)에서 제시한 학습 원리를 간단히 살펴본 다음 이를 중심으로 현재 미국 수학 교육의 교수ㆍ학습 이론의 동향을 살펴본다.

미국 NCTM의 Principles and Standards for School Mathematics에 나타난 수학과 교수,학습의 이론

This state-of-the-art Handbook brings together important mathematics education research that makes a difference in both theory and practice--research that: *anticipates problems and needed knowledge before they become impediments to progress; *interprets future-oriented problems into researchable issues; *presents the implications of research and theory development in forms that are useful to practitioners and policymakers; and *facilitates the development of research communities to focus on neglected priorities or strategic opportunities. The volume represents a genuine attempt by contributors from around the world to advance the discipline, rather than simply review what has been done and what exists. The Handbook was developed in response to a number of major global catalysts for change, including the impact of national and international mathematics comparative assessment studies; the social, cultural, economic, and political influences on mathematics education and research; the influence of progressively sophisticated and available technology; and the increasing globalization of mathematics education and research. From these catalysts have emerged specific priority themes and issues for mathematics education research in the 21st century. Three key themes were identified for attention in this volume: *life-long democratic access to powerful mathematical ideas; *advances in research methodologies; and *influences of advanced technologies. Each of these themes is examined in terms of learners, teachers, and learning contexts, with theory development as an important component of all these aspects. Dynamic and forward looking, the Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education is distinguished by its focus on new and emerging theoretical models, perspectives, and research methodologies; its uniformly high standard of scholarship; and its emphasis on the international nature of mathematics education research. It is an essential volume for all researchers, professionals, and students interested in mathematics education research in particular and, more generally, in international developments and future directions in the broad field of educational research.

Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education

This commentary was stimulated by Yeping Li’s first editorial (2014) citing one of the journal’s goals as adding multidisciplinary perspectives to current studies of single disciplines comprising the focus of other journals. In this commentary, I argue for a greater focus on STEM integration, with a more equitable representation of the four disciplines in studies purporting to advance STEM learning. The STEM acronym is often used in reference to just one of the disciplines, commonly science. Although the integration of STEM disciplines is increasingly advocated in the literature, studies that address multiple disciplines appear scant with mixed findings and inadequate directions for STEM advancement. Perspectives on how discipline integration can be achieved are varied, with reference to multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches adding to the debates. Such approaches include core concepts and skills being taught separately in each discipline but housed within a common theme; the introduction of closely linked concepts and skills from two or more disciplines with the aim of deepening understanding and skills; and the adoption of a transdisciplinary approach, where knowledge and skills from two or more disciplines are applied to real-world problems and projects with the aim of shaping the total learning experience. Research that targets STEM integration is an embryonic field with respect to advancing curriculum development and various student outcomes. For example, we still need more studies on how student learning outcomes arise not only from different forms of STEM integration but also from the particular disciplines that are being integrated. As noted in this commentary, it seems that mathematics learning benefits less than the other disciplines in programs claiming to focus on STEM integration. Factors contributing to this finding warrant more scrutiny. Likewise, learning outcomes for engineering within K-12 integrated STEM programs appear under-researched. This commentary advocates a greater focus on these two disciplines within integrated STEM education research. Drawing on recommendations from the literature, suggestions are offered for addressing the challenges of integrating multiple disciplines faced by the STEM community.

/pdf/stem-education-k-12-perspectives-on-integration-1wi5vh4w34.pdf

STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration

Contents: Preface. Cognitive Psychology and Mathematics Education. Cognition and Cognitive Development. Cognitive Models and Processes in Mathematics Education. Numerical Models and Processes. Elementary Computational Models and Processes: Addition and Subtraction. Elementary Computational Models and Processes: Multiplication and Division. Advanced Computational Models and Processes. Problem Solving, Problem Posing, and Mathematical Thinking. Reflections and Recommendations.

Mathematics Education: Models and Processes

Children's Problem Posing within Formal and Informal Contexts.

This one-year study involved designing and implementing a problem-posing program for fifth-grade children. A framework developed for the study encompassed three main components: (a) children's recognition and utilisation of problem structures, (b) their perceptions of, and preferences for, different problem types, and (c) their development of diverse mathematical thinking. One of the aims of the study was to investigate the extent to which children's number sense and novel problem-solving skills govern their problem-posing abilities in routine and nonroutine situations. To this end, children who displayed different patterns of achievement in these two domains were selected to participate in the 10-week activity program. Problem-posing interviews with each child were conducted prior to, and after the program, with the progress of individual children tracked during the course of the program. Overall, the children who participated in the program appeared to show substantial developments in each of the program components, in contrast to those who did not participate.

Lyn D. English

Papers

Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education

STEM education K-12: perspectives on integration

Mathematics Education: Models and Processes

Children's Problem Posing within Formal and Informal Contexts.

The Development of Fifth-Grade Children's Problem-Posing Abilities