Email this article Analysis on Geometry Mathematics Textbooks for Grade 5 of Elementary Schools in Malaysia, China, and Indonesia
Abstract
Abstract: Analysis on Geometry Mathematics Textbooks for Grade 5 of Elementary Schools in Malaysia, China, and Indonesia. Objectives: This research analyzes the differences in the geometry material presented to grade 5 students of elementary schools and determines the characteristics of the questions in mathematics textbooks. Methods: The content analysis compared the geometry materials in the best mathematics textbooks widely used in grade 5 of elementary schools in Indonesia, Malaysia, and China. The analysis discussed several important points on geometry material, including sub-chapter, chapter content, and the presentation of practice questions. Findings: The results show that 66.36 percent of questions in the Indonesian textbook asked about knowing, 24.54 percent applying, and 0.09 percent reasoning. In the Malaysian textbook, 71.42 percent of questions asked focused knowing, 23.8 percent applying, and 4.76 percent reasoning. Furthermore, 49.6 percent of questions in the Chinese textbooks asked about knowing, 30.4 percent applying, and 20 percent reasoning. Conclusions: questions on knowing had the highest percentage in the Indonesian and Malaysian textbooks but balanced in Chinese.
Keywords: mathematics textbook, geometry, Indonesian, Malaysian, China.
Abstrak: Analisis Buku Ajar Matematika Geometri Kelas 5 SD di Indonesia, Malaysia dan China. Tujuan: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perbedaan materi geometri yang disajikan kepada siswa kelas 5 SD dan menentukan karakteristik soal pada buku teks matematika. Metode: Analisis isi membandingkan materi geometri dalam buku teks matematika terbaik yang banyak digunakan di kelas 5 sekolah dasar di Indonesia, Malaysia, dan Cina. Analisis membahas beberapa poin penting pada materi geometri, antara lain sub bab, isi bab, dan penyajian soal latihan. Temuan: Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa 66,36 persen pertanyaan dalam buku teks bahasa Indonesia menanyakan tentang mengetahui, 24,54 persen menerapkan, dan 0,09 persen penalaran. Dalam buku teks Malaysia, 71,42 persen pertanyaan yang diajukan terfokus mengetahui, 23,8 persen menerapkan, dan 4,76 persen penalaran. Selanjutnya, 49,6 persen pertanyaan dalam buku teks bahasa Mandarin menanyakan tentang mengetahui, 30,4 persen menerapkan, dan 20 persen penalaran. Kesimpulan: pertanyaan tentang mengetahui memiliki persentase tertinggi dalam buku teks bahasa Indonesia dan Malaysia tetapi seimbang dalam bahasa Cina.
Kata kunci: buku teks matematika, geometri, Indonsia,Malaysia, China.
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD), O. for E. C. and D. (2016). PISA 2015 Results: Ready to Learn: Students’ Engagement, Drive and Self-Beliefs (Volume III): Preliminary Version. OECD Paris, France.
Alajmi, A. H. (2012). How do elementary textbooks address fractions? A review of mathematics textbooks in the USA, Japan, and Kuwait. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 79(2), 239–261.
Alim, J. A., Fauzan, A., Arwana, I. M., & Musdi, E. (2020). Model of Geometry Realistic Learning Development with Interactive Multimedia Assistance in Elementary School. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1471(1). https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1471/1/012053
Alim, J. A., Hermita, N., Alim, M. L., Wijaya, T. T., & Pereira, J. (2021). Developing a Math Textbook using a realistic Mathematics Education Approach to increase elementary students' learning motivation. Jurnal Prima Edukasia, 9(2).
Baker, D., Knipe, H., Collins, J., Leon, J., Cummings, E., Blair, C., & Gamson, D. (2010). One hundred years of elementary school mathematics in the United States: A content analysis and cognitive assessment of textbooks from 1900 to 2000. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 41(4), 383–423.
Boonlerts, S., & Inprasitha, M. (2013). The Textbook Analysis on Multiplication: The Case of Japan, Singapore, and Thailand. Creative Education, 04(04), 259–262. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.44038
Cai, J., & Ni, Y. (2011). Investigating curricular effect on the teaching and learning of mathematics in a cultural context: Theoretical and methodological considerations. International Journal of Educational Research, 50(2), 65–70.
Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H.-Y., & Mesa, V. (2010). A comparative analysis of the addition and subtraction of fractions in textbooks from three countries. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(2), 117–151.
Cheng, Q., & Wang, J. (2012). Curriculum Opportunities for Number Sense Development: A Comparison of First-Grade Textbooks in China and the United States. International Journal for Mathematics Teaching & Learning.
Choi, K. M., & Park, H.-J. (2013). A comparative analysis of geometry education on curriculum standards, textbook structure, and textbook items between the US and Korea. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(4), 379–391.
Clements, D., Copple, C., & Hyson, M. (2002). Early childhood mathematics: Promoting good beginnings. The National Coun-Cil of Teachers of Mathematics …, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-007-9068-2
Daud, Z. (2020). A Comparative Analysis of Fractions in Chinese and Pakistani Primary School Mathematics Textbooks. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 9(1), 14–38. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v9-i1/6849
Delaney, S., Charalambous, C. Y., Hsu, H.-Y., & Mesa, V. (2007). The treatment of addition and subtraction of fractions in Cypriot, Irish, and Taiwanese textbooks. Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, 2, 193–200.
Erbas, A. K., Alacaci, C., & Bulut, M. (2012). A Comparison of Mathematics Textbooks from Turkey, Singapore, and the United States of America. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(3), 2324–2329.
Fan, L. (2013). Textbook research as scientific research: towards the common ground on issues and research methods on mathematics textbooks. ZDM, 45(5), 765–777.
Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education:development status and directions. Zdm, 45(5), 633–646.
Han, S.-Y., Rosli, R., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2011). The textbook analysis on probability: The case of Korea, Malaysia and US textbooks. Research in Mathematical Education, 15(2), 127–140.
Hoyles, C., Foxman, D., & Kuchemann, D. (2002). A comparative study of geometry curricula. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.
Jones, D. L., & Tarr, J. E. (2007). AN EXAMINATION OF THE LEVELS OF COGNITIVE DEMAND REQUIRED BY PROBABILITY TASKS IN MIDDLE GRADES MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS. Statistics Education Research Journal, 6(2).
Jones, K., Fujita, T., & Miyazaki, M. (2013). Learning congruency-based proofs in geometry via a web-based learning system. Proceedings of the British Society for Research into Learning Mathematics, 33(1), 31–36.
Kar, T., Güler, G., Şen, C., & Özdemir, E. (2018). Comparing the development of the multiplication of fractions in Turkish and American textbooks. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(2), 200–226.
Kusmawati, P., Rusdi, R., & Agustinsa, R. (2020). ANALISIS KESESUAIAN TAHAP MENGAMATI BUKU TEKS MATEMATIKA SMP KELAS VII KURIKULUM 2013 BERDASARKAN PENDEKATAN SAINTIFIK. Jurnal Penelitian Pembelajaran Matematika Sekolah (JP2MS), 4(3), 340–349.
Miyakawa, T. (2017). Comparative analysis on the nature of proof to be taught in geometry: the cases of French and Japanese lower secondary schools. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 94(1), 37–54. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9711-x
Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. ERIC.
Ozer, E., & Sezer, R. (2014). A Comparative Analysis of Questions in American, Singaporean, and Turkish Mathematics Textbooks Based on the Topics Covered in 8th Grade in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 411–421.
Park, K., & Leung, K. S. F. (2006). A Comparative Study of the Mathematics Textbooks of China, England, Japan, Korea, and the United States. New ICMI Study Series, 9, 227–238. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-29723-5_14
Purnama, A., Wijaya, T. T., Dewi, S. N., & Zulfah, Z. (2020). Analisis buku siswa matematika sma dari indonesia dan china pada materi peluang dan statistik. Jurnal Cendekia: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 4(2), 813–822.
Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., & Chavez, O. (2004). Why Mathematics Textbooks Matter. Educational Leadership, 61(5), 61–66.
Reys, B., Reys, R., & Rubenstein, R. (2010). Mathematics Curriculum: Issues, Trends, and Future Directions, 72nd Yearbook. ERIC.
Schoen, H., Ziebarth, S. W., Hirsch, C. R., & BrckaLorenz, A. (2010). A five-year study of the First Edition of the CorePlus Mathematics Curriculum. IAP.
Stein, M. K., Remillard, J., & Smith, M. S. (2007). How curriculum influences student learning. Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, 1(1), 319–370.
Takeuchi, H., & Shinno, Y. (2020). Comparing the Lower Secondary Textbooks of Japan and England: a Praxeological Analysis of Symmetry and Transformations in Geometry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(4), 791–810.
Törnroos, J. (2005). Mathematics textbooks, opportunity to learn, and student achievement. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 31(4), 315–327.
Vula, E., Kingji-kastrati, J., & Podvorica, F. (2016). A comparative analysis of mathematics textbooks from Kosovo and Albania based on the topic of fractions To cite this version : HAL Id : Hal-01288036 A comparative analysis of mathematics textbooks from Kosovo and Albania based on the topic of fractions. 1759–1765.
Wijaya, A., van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Doorman, M. (2015). Opportunity-to-learn context-based tasks provided by mathematics textbooks. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 89(1), 41–65.
Yang, D.-C., & Lin, Y.-C. (2015). Examining the differences of linear systems between Finnish and Taiwanese textbooks. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 11(6), 1265–1281.
Yang, D.-C., & Sianturi, I. A. (2017). An analysis of Singaporean versus Indonesian textbooks based on trigonometry content. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 3829–3848.
Yang, D.-C., & Sianturi, I. A. J. (2020). Analysis of algebraic problems intended for elementary graders in Finland, Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Taiwan. Educational Studies, 1–23.
Yang, D.-C., Tseng, Y.-K., & Wang, T.-L. (2017). A comparison of geometry problems in middle-grade mathematics textbooks from Taiwan, Singapore, Finland, and the United States. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 13(7), 2841–2857.
Yang, D.-C., & Wu, W.-R. (2010). The study of number sense: Realistic activities integrated into third-grade math classes in Taiwan. The Journal of Educational Research, 103(6), 379–392.
Zhu, Y., & Fan, L. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in the intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from Mainland China and the United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(4), 609–626.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2022 Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
View My Stats
The copyright is reserved to The Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif that is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.