MATHEMATICAL SPATIAL REASONING ANALYSIS ON SURFACE OF REVOLUTION AND ELLIPSOIDS USING AUTOGRAPH

Hedi Budiman

Abstract


The essence of analytic geometry of space course consists in setting up a correspondence between the points of the space and real numbers. With the rapid development of technology, the students need technology supported mathematics learning to solve geometry problems. The aims of this study are to measure students' mathematical spatial reasoning abilities on surface of revolution and ellipsoids using Autograph software. The samples were 43 mathematics education students in second year. This research used quantitative descriptive method. The results showed that 85% of students obtained good category in formula concept of surface of revolution, 80% of students obtained good category on developing object arrangement and parts correlation. 75% of students obtained good enough category on the ellipsoid concept of object rotating and formula on ellipsoid, 65% of students obtained not good enough category on object observing and analyzing from rotating, equations and conclusions. Student attitude showed positive towards surface of revolution and ellipsoids using autograph

Full Text:

PDF 34-43

References


Baki, A. (2001). Evaluation of mathematics education under the light of information technology. Journal of National Education, 149, 26-31.

Battista. (1990). Spatial Visualization and gender differences in high school geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21 (1990), pp. 47-60

Carroll, J. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York: Cambridge University Press

Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning: A project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (p. 420–464). Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc.

Dixon, J. P. (1983). The spatial child. Springfield, IL: C.C. Thomas.

Ertekin. (2014). Is Cabri 3D effective for the teaching of special planes in analytic geometry?. International Journals Education Study Mathematics, 1(1):27-36.

Glück J., & Fitting S. (2003). Spatial strategy selection: Interesting incremental information. International Journal of Testing, 3, 293-308

Hannafin, R. D., Truxaw, M. P., Vermllion, J. R., & Liu, Y. (2008). Effect of Spatial Ability and Instructional Program on Geometry Achievement. The Journal of Educational Research, 148-156.

Hegarty, M., & Waller, D. A. (2005). Individual differences in spatial abilities. In P. Shah, & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 121-169). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hohenwarter, M. & Fuchs, K. (2004). Combination of Dynamic Geometry, Algebra, and Calculus in the Software System Geogebra., http://www.geogebra.org/publications/ pecs_2004.pdf.

JMC (2001), English national document, Teaching and learning geometry 11–19, Report of a Royal Society, Joint Mathematical Council working group, https://royalsociety.org/topics-policy/publications/2001/ teaching-geometry/.

Kovačević, N. (2017). Spatial reasoning in mathematics. In Z. Kolar-Begović, R. Kolar-Šuper, & L. Jukić Matić (Eds.), Mathematics education as a science and a profession (pp. 45–65). Osijek: Element.

Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., & Hegarty, M. (2007). Spatial visualisation in physics problem solving. Coognitive Science, 31, 549-579.

Kösa, T. (2016). Effects of using dynamic mathematics software on pre-service mathematics teachers’ spatial visualization skills: The case of spatial analytic geometry. Academic Journals. Vol. 11(7), pp. 449-458.

Kubiszyn, T., and Gary Borich. (1990). Educational Testing and Measurement:

Classroom Application and Practice. 3rd Ed. USA: HarperCollins

Linn, M. C., and Petersen, A,C. (1985). Emergence and Characterization of Sex Differences in Spatial Ability: A Meta-Analysis. Child Development, 1985, 56, 1479-1498.

Lohman, D.F. (2000). Complex information processing and intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of Intelligence (pp−340).285.New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.

National Academy of Science. (2006). Learning to Think Spatially. Washington: NAP.

National council of teacher of mathematics. (2000). Principles and standard for school mathematics (Reston: The national council of teacher of mathematics).

Olkun, S. (2003). Making connections: Improving spatial abilities with engineering drawing activities. International Journal of Mathematics Teaching and Learning, http://www.cimt.plymouth.ac.uk/ journal/ sinanolkun. pdf.

Pittalis, M. & Christou, C. (2010). Types of reasoning in 3D geometry thinking and their relation with spatial ability. Education Study Mathemetics, 75:191–212

Presmeg, N. (2008). Spatial abilities research as a foundation for visualization in teaching and learning mathematics. In P. Clarkson & N. Presmeg (eds.), Critical Issues in Mathematics Education, Springer, New York.

Schumann, H. (2003). Computer aided treatment of 3D problems in analytic geometry. Zentralblatt für Didaktik der Mathematik (ZDM), 35 (1), 7-13.

Smith, E.E., Langston, C., & Nisbett, R.E. (1992). The case for rules in in reasoning, Cognitive Science. 16. 1-40.

Unal, H., Jakubowski, E., & Corey, D. (2009). Differences in learning geometry among high and low spatial ability pre-service mathematics teachers. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 4(8). 997-1012




DOI: https://doi.org/10.35194/cp.v0i0.1315

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.