초등학생들의 문제풀이 과정에 나타난 등호 이해유형에 관한 연구 = Analysis of elementary-school students understanding of the equal sign

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 연구는 초등학생들이 사칙계산문제를 푸는 과정에서 나타난 등호 이해유형을 알아보고자 하였다. 서울 소재 초등학교 4, 5, 6학년생 214명이 본 연구에 참여하였다. 학생들은 좌변 계산식 문제, 양변 계산식 문제, 우변 계산식 문제, 혼합 계산식 문제를 풀고, 등호의 의미를 서술하였다. 등호의 뜻에 대한 학생들의 반응은 관계성, 결과, 기타로 코딩되었다. 주요 연구결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 기호 ‘=’ 명을 정확히 대답한 학생은 총 응답자의 20.6%(44명)이며, 학년 간에 유의한 차이가 나타났다. 둘째, 각 문제별 정답률은 99.1%(좌변 계산식), 77.1%(양변 계산식), 92.1%(우변 계산식), 85.0%(혼합 계산식)이며, 각 문제에 대하여 학년별 정답자 수에는 유의한 차이가 없었다. 셋째, 학생들의 등호 이해유형을 분석한 결과 등호를 양변 관계성으로 이해한 학생들이 좌변 계산식에서는 64.5%, 양변 계산식에서는 80.8%, 우변 계산식에서는 76.2%, 혼합 계산식 앞쪽 등호에 대해서는 87.4%, 혼합 계산식 뒤쪽 등호에 대해서는 66.8%인 것으로 나타났다. 넷째, 각 문제에서 학년에 따라 등호에 대한 이해유형(관계성 vs. 관계성 외) 간에는 유의한 차이가 없었다. 다섯째, 각 문제에서 수학능력자기평가 수준(상, 중, 하)에 따라 학생들이 이해하는 등호유형(관계성 vs. 관계성 외) 간에는 유의한 차이가 나타났다. 이러한 연구결과를 바탕으로 학생들이 등호를 관계성의 의미로 올바르게 이해할 수 있는 방안을 제시하였다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study explores elementary school students understanding of the equal sign as they solve arithmetic problems. 214 4th, 5th, 6th grade elementary school students participated in this study. A four-problem set to diagnose students conception of equality was designed based on previous studies. Students solved an operations equals answer equation, operations on both sides equation, an operations on right side equation, and a two equal signs equation and explained how they understood the equal sign. Students responses on the equal sign were coded into three categories of a relational understanding, an operational understanding, and others. The following are the results of this study; First, the proportion of students who named equality on the equal sign was 20.6%(44 students) and there s a significant difference among the grades. Second, the proportion of students who gave correct answers was 99.1%(operations equals answer), 77.1%(operations on both sides), 92.1%(operations on right side), 85.0%(two equal signs). There was no significant difference among the grades in how correctly they solved the 4 types of problems respectively. Third, the proportion of students who understood the equal sign as a relational symbol was 64.5% for the operations equals answer, 80.8% for the operations on both sides, 76.2% for the operations on right side, 87.4% for the front equal sign of the two equal signs, and 66.8% for the back one of it. Fourth, for the four problems there was no significant difference between the grades and their understanding of the equal sign(relational vs. no relational) respectively. Fifth, there was a significant correlation between the level(high, middle, low) of the perceived math abilities of the students and their understanding of the equal sign(relational vs. no relational) respectively. Based on these results, I make a number of proposals helping them understand the relational concept of the equal sign. Key words: elementary school mathematics, learning, equal sign, mathematical thinking

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서 론
• Ⅱ. 이론적 배경
• Ⅲ. 연구방법
• Ⅳ. 연구결과
• Ⅴ. 결론 및 제언
• 참고문헌

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 도종훈, "수학적 개념으로서의 등호 분석" 한국수학교육학회 42 (42): 8-706, 2003

2 김경희, "수학․과학 성취도 추이변화 국제비교 연구: TIMSS 2007 결과보고서" 한국교육과정평가원 2008

3 강명희, "사고력 신장을 위한 초등수학 교과서 개발과 교수-학습방법에 관한 고찰" 학습자중심교과교육학회 8 (8): 1-19, 2008

4 기정순, "등호 문맥에 따른 초등학생의 등호 개념 이해와 지도방법 연구"

5 이종희, "등호 개념의 분석 및 학생들의 등호 이해 조사" 대한수학교육학회 13 (13): 4-307, 2003

6 강명희, "개정 교육과정에 따른 수학 교과서 개발과 교사의 전문성 개발의 과제" 학습자중심교과교육학회 7 (7): 1-20, 2007

7 Seo, K. H, "You've got to carefully read the math sentence...:Classroom context and children's interpretations of the euqal sign. In:The development of arithmetic concepts and skills"

8 ttwer, J, "Why instructional explanations often do not work: A framework for understanding the effectiveness of instructional explanations" 43 (43): 49-64, 2008

9 Carpenter, T. P, "Thinking mathematically: Integrating arithmetic and algebra in elementary school" Heinemann 2003

10 Baroody, A. J, "The effects of instruction on children's understanding of the "equals" sign" 84 : 199-212, 1983

11 Li, X, "Sources of differences in children's understandings of mathematical equality: Comparative analysis of teacher guides and student texts in China and the United States" 26 : 195-217, 2008

12 Munakata, Y., "Rethinking infant knowledge: Toward an adaptive process account of successes and failures in object permanence tasks" 104 : 686-713, 1997

13 McNeil, N. M., "Middle-school students'understanding of the equal sign: The books they read can't help" 24 (24): 367-385, 2006

14 Knuth, E. J, "Middle school students' understanding of core algebraic concepts: Equivalence & variable" 37 (37): 1-9, 2005

15 McNeil, N. M, "Knowledge change as a function of mathematics experience: All contexts are not created equal" 6 : 265-306, 2005

16 Behr,M.,Erlwanger,S.,& Nichols,E, "How children view the equal sign.Mathematics" 92 : 13-15, 1980

17 Denmark, T., "Final report: A teaching experiment on equality" Florida State University, Tallahassee: Project for the Mathematical Development of Children 1976

18 Knuth, E. J., "Does understanding the equal sign matter? Evidence from solving equations" 37 (37): 297-312, 2006

19 Carpenter, T. P, "Developing conceptions of algebraic reasoning in the primary grades"

20 Rittle-Johnson, B., "Conceptual and procedural understanding: Does one lead to the other?" 91 : 175-189, 1999

21 Falkner, K. P, "Children's understanding of equality: A foundation for algebra" 6 : 56-60, 1999

22 Grandau, L, "Algebraic thinking and geometry" 11 (11): 344-349, 2006

23 Steinberg, R., "Algebra students' knowledge of equivalence of equations" 22 (22): 112-121, 1990

24 고정화, "2007년 국가수준 학업성취도 평가 연구: 수학" 한국교육과정평가원 2008