Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  generalisation
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
This paper reports on the research on year five pupils’ understanding of generalised arithmetic, which aimed to investigate the understanding of year five pupils’ commutative property and the property of zero together with its correlation with their mathematical achievement. Data for the study were collected via paper and pencil assessment answers for two items. Findings showed moderate achievement for both of the tasks. The pupils’ explanation illustrated their poor conceptual understanding of commutative property and the property of zero. However, this understanding is not correlated with their mathematical achievement in school. It shows that an outstanding student in school did not necessarily acquire conceptual understanding of commutative principle and the property of zero.
EN
This study mainly focused on the relationship between number sense and algebraic thinking. Previous studies have provided evidence that number sense plays an important role in developing algebraic thinking. The role of symbol and pattern sense are yet to discover in relation to number sense and algebraic thinking. The purpose of this study was to identify the mediating effects of symbol sense and pattern sense in year five pupils’ relationship between number sense and algebraic thinking. To do so, two mathematics tests were carried out among 720 year five pupils in the district of Malacca, Malaysia. The collected data were analysed using a partial least squares-structural equation modeling approach. The data collected were analysed using SPSS 22.0 and SmartPLS 3.0. Results demonstrated that symbol sense and pattern sense are good mediators between year five pupils’ number sense and algebraic thinking. This result of the study supports the past studies related to the role of number sense, symbol and pattern sense in developing algebraic thinking. The presented study provides suggestions as intervention to increase students’ making sense ability in numbers, symbols and patterns to develop algebraic thinking.
EN
The paper examines the problematic nature of making generalisation ambivalent or, in other words, abstraction in pedagogical consequences. The paper adds to the discussion of good and evil in education by answering two questions. The fi rst question stems from the antinomous nature of educational aims (i.e. education is to servethe society but also to develop an individual): can educational antinomies be eliminated or is education an antinomous activity and hence it is necessary to take into account its ambivalence? The second question inquires to which extent do we understand what it means to be an authentic personality and the degree to which we can educate for authenticity. The paper proposes Kierkegaard’s and Blondel’s motive of authenticity as a partial way out of contradictions which result from the mentioned antinomies. The paper also shows that looking for education for authenticity is complicated by attempts at formulating a generally acceptable principle of education and that education suffers the most when it forgets about its antinomous nature. For its attempts to avoid contradictions lead to unacceptable abstractions and formalism. The paper then introduces the problem of making generalisation ambivalent in relation to educational competencies and concludes with describing the irrevocable yet restorative nature of antinomies.
Human Affairs
|
2014
|
vol. 24
|
issue 2
178-188
EN
Interpretations of data in qualitative research may be biased for many reasons. This paper explores three commonly overlooked problems from a rather positivist point of view and deals with them mainly through the lens of cognitive psychology and survey methodology. The first problem is that researchers and readers of the research tend to trust retrospective data too much even though it is known that our memory is highly reconstructive. The second problem is that we often create interpretations too quickly and do not ground them in data well. The third problem is inappropriately generalising our findings because we underrate the variability of the phenomena studied. The aim is not to employ quantitative criteria in qualitative research but to show that especially in cases where we seek more objectivity (e.g., factual information about events) and less about the subjective phenomenal world (e.g., how people perceive these events from today’s perspective), cognitive psychology or survey methodology can offer valuable insights. Recommendations about what researchers should be careful of and how to increase the objectivity of the interpretations are offered.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.