Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 32

Chapter IV

Data Analysis and Research Findings

4.1 Introduction

This chapter describes the analysis of data followed by a discussion of

research findings. The findings relate to research questions that guided the study.

The data were analysed to identify and describe the Mathematics belief of student

teachers in the nature of mathematics, learning mathematics, and teaching

effectiveness in mathematics and to determine how beliefs in the nature and

learning mathematics affect the beliefs in teaching efficacy of student teachers.

Data were obtained from self-administered questionnaires, completed by 36

student teachers (n=36), a 36% response rate. Based on the information that came

from the class presidents of the Fourth Year BSE Mathematics students that all of

them had undergone their practice teaching, this mean that 99 students is the total

population (N=99).

A total of 36 questionnaires had been received and all of these 36

questionnaires for this study had met the required inclusion criteria as discussed in

the previous chapter. This represented 36% of the total population.

The questionnaire is comprised of three sections and data gathered will be

presented as follows:

 The first section is the Beliefs about the Nature of Mathematics.

 The second section is the Beliefs about Learning Mathematics.

24
 The third section is the Beliefs about Teaching Efficacy in

Mathematics.

4.2 Methods of Data Analysis and Presentation of Data

Descriptive statistical analysis was used to identify frequencies and

percentages to answer all of the questions in the questionnaire. All of the

respondents answered all the questions therefore percentages reported correspond

to the number of sample (n=36).

4.3 Discussion of Findings

4.3.1 The Beliefs about the Nature of Mathematics

A. Mathematics is a collection of rules and procedures that prescribe

how to solve of problem.

B. Mathematics involves the remembering and application of

definitions, formulas, mathematical facts, and procedures.

C. Mathematics involves creativity and new ideas.

D. In mathematics, many things can be discovered and tried out by

oneself.

E. When solving mathematical task, you need to know the correct

procedure or else you would be lost.

F. If you engage in mathematical tasks, you can discover new

things (e.g., connections, rules, concepts).

G. Fundamental to mathematics is its logical rigor and preciseness.

25
H. Mathematical problems are can be solved correctly in many

ways.

I. Many aspects of mathematics have practical relevance.

J. Mathematics helps solve everyday problems and tasks.

K. To do mathematics requires much practice, correct application of

routines, and problem-solving strategies.

L. Mathematics means learning, remembering, and applying.

All questions generated positive responses (agree or strongly agree)

indicating a favourable response (positive attitude) towards the beliefs in the

nature of mathematics.

The following results were obtained indicating a support with regards to

the beliefs about the nature of mathematics.

 Question A – 72% of the participants (n=26) either agreed or strongly

agreed that Mathematics is a collection of rules and procedures that

prescribe how to solve of problem.

 Question B – 69% of the participants (n=25) either agreed or strongly

agreed that Mathematics involves the remembering and application of

definitions, formulas, mathematical facts, and procedures.

 Question C – 92% of the participants (n=33) either agreed or strongly

agreed that Mathematics involves creativity and new ideas.

26
 Question D – 86% of the participants (n=31) either agreed or strongly

agreed that in mathematics, many things can be discovered and tried out

by oneself.

 Question E – 61% of the participants (n=22) either agreed or strongly

agreed that when solving mathematical task, you need to know the correct

procedure or else you would be lost.

 Question F – 86% of the participants (n=31) either agreed or strongly

agreed that if you engage in mathematical tasks, you can discover new

things (e.g., connections, rules, concepts).

 Question G – 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

agreed that fundamental to mathematics is its logical rigor and

preciseness.

 Question H - 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

agreed that Mathematical problems are can be solved correctly in many

ways.

 Question I - 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

agreed that many aspects of mathematics have practical relevance.

 Question J - 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

agreed that Mathematics helps solve everyday problems and tasks.

 Question K - 86% of the participants (n=31) either agreed or strongly

agreed that to do mathematics requires much practice, connect application

of routines, and problem-solving strategies.

27
 Question L - 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

agreed that Mathematics means learning, remembering, and applying.

Thus, the above findings manifest a positive response from the

respondents since the percentage of responses is greater than 50%. The

statement Mathematics involves creativity and new ideas got more than 90%

of responses and is said to be strongly supported by the participants (see page

23).

4.3.1.1. Classification of Each Item

The items included in this area include questions that explore how

future teachers perceive mathematics as a subject. Based on the work of

Grigutsch, et.al. (1998), the items were classified into four subgroups:

a) Mathematics as formal

b) Mathematics as procedural

c) Mathematics as structural; and

d) Mathematics as applied

a. Mathematics as formal subject

The first subgroup includes the first three items (A, B, and C

respectively). The third item as stated a while ago, got the strongest

support from the respondents. Generally, this subgroup was supported and

therefore, can be said to be accepted by the respondents. Also, this

28
subgroup got an endorsement mean of 5.05 that indicate a strong support

from the respondents (See page 23).

b. Mathematics as procedural subject

The second subgroup that is comprised of items D, E, and F was

also seemed to be supported by the respondents (See page 27 ) , items D

and F got the same endorsement from the respondents (86%) while it is

noticeable that item E got the least support yielding only 61%. Also,

notice that even if items D and F got some percentage (86%) of support, it

cannot be necessarily denoted that the endorsement mean of items D and F

are also the same (refer to Appendix A.1.2.2). Item D got an endorsement

mean of 5.31 while item F got 5.39. This is due to deviation of

respondents between their decisions whether to agree or strongly agree on

the items. This subgroup gathered an endorsement mean of 5.13,

generally, agreed by most respondents.

c. Mathematics as structural subject

The third subgroup is composed of the consecutive items G, H, and

I which were remarkably seen on page 27 because of the same support

(5/6 of the sample) gathered from the respondents. Hence, this subgroup

also gained endorsement from the sample. As stated, in the previous

discussion, it is evident that items under this subgroup got same support

but the endorsement mean differs significantly. Item G got an average of

5.17, H and I got 5.36 specifically. But still, this subgroup seemed not to

change its position and gathered a favourable and highest among the four

29
subgroups and got total endorsement mean of 5.30. Notice also that items

H and I are still having the same mean but as compared to the deviation of

scores the statement many aspects of mathematics have practical

relevance (Item I), got a lower standard deviation equal to 0.76 (see

Appendix A.1.1). This means that the respondents favoured item I than

item H, but still, as stated, both gathered the support of the participants.

d. Mathematics as applied subject

The fourth subgroup includes the last three items specifically items J, K,

and L. This subgroup of items also gathered strong support from the

respondents. As noticed in pages 27 and 28, no item got an endorsement

less than 80%. Notice that items J and L gathered same percentage of

endorsement but item J got a lower mean than item L. This gradually

implies that item L which is, mathematics means learning, remembering,

and applying is more favourableto the respondents. Generally, this

subgroup got an endorsement mean of 5.24 which indicate a strong

support from the respondents. Thus, it can be said that student teacher

holds a belief that Mathematics is an applied subject.

4.3.1.2 The Two scales of Beliefs about the Nature of Mathematics

Aside from the perception of Mathematics as a subject, the items

are used in this research are separated into two scales:

1. Mathematics as a set of Rules and Procedures

2. Mathematics as a Process of Enquiry

30
The respondents were not forced to choose between the two sets of beliefs

about the nature of Mathematics; it is quite possible for them to endorse both set

of propositions that is to believe that Mathematics is a set of Rules and

Procedures and a Process of Enquiry. Using these two scales, the research team

expected that future teachers would lean toward one on other view of the nature of

Mathematics which implies that there should be a negative correlation between

the two scales.

4.3.1.2.1Mathematics as a set of Rules and Procedures

Respondents who typically agree with statements are precisely the

ones who score highly in this scale and therefore tend to see mathematics

as a set of procedures to be learned, with strict rules as to what is correct

and what is incorrect. The items included in this scale are the following:

1. Item A - Mathematics is a collection of rules and procedures that

prescribe how to solve of problem.

2. Item B - Mathematics involves the remembering and application of

definitions, formulas, mathematical facts, and procedures.

3. Item E - When solving mathematical task, you need to know the correct

procedure or else you would be lost.

4. Item G - Fundamental to mathematics is its logical rigor and preciseness.

5. Item K - To do mathematics requires much practice, correct application of

routines, and problem-solving strategies.

6. Item L - Mathematics means learning, remembering, and applying.

31
Findings:

Items included in this scale tend to have lower endorsement than

other items (specifically A, B, and E) but this scale got an overall

response mean of 5.01 indicating an evidence that the respondents hold a

strong belief that Mathematics is a set of rules and procedures. Similarly,

this also denotes that the student teachers believe that there are rules to be

strictly followed as what is correct and what is not. Evidently, on the

results of the study conducted by Tatto et al. (2008), out of 17

participating countries, Philippines remarkably set the highest percentage

of support from this scale ranging from 88.6% to 89.8% respectively.

4.3.1.2.2 Mathematics as a Process of Enquiry

Respondents who typically agree with the statement included in this

scale are definitely the ones who scored the items highly. They see

mathematics as a means of answering questions and solving problems.

They see mathematical procedures as tools of enquiry. This scale is

comprised with the following statements:

1. Item C - Mathematics involves creativity and new ideas.

2. Item D - In mathematics, many things can be discovered and tried out by

oneself.

3. Item F - If you engage in mathematical tasks, you can discover new

things (e.g., connections, rules, concepts).

32
4. Item H - Mathematical problems are can be solved correctly in many

ways.

5. Item I - Many aspects of mathematics have practical relevance.

6. Item J - Mathematics helps solve everyday problems and tasks.

Findings:

Items in this scale on the other hand, tend to have higher

endorsement than other items. Similarly, this scale got an overall response

mean of 5.34 indicating a stronger support compared to the first scale

from the respondents. Thus, student teachers hold that Mathematics is a

process of enquiry this denotes that student teachers see mathematics as a

means of answering questions and solving problems. An evidence of this

finding is the result of the study conducted by Tatto et al. (2008), that

Philippines had shown strong support for this scale ranging from 89% to

92%.

Overall Findings

As expected by the researchers, the two aforementioned scales should be

negatively correlated but the coefficient of correlation for these two scales yields

0.51 from which, as stated by Garret (1981) that this coefficient indicates a

substantial or marked correlation. Likewise, as stated by Sevilla et al. (1992) that

this coefficient is indicating a moderate correlation. Thus, this finding signifies

that the student teachers prove the possibility that they can endorse the same

proposition at the same time.

33
The items are found to be really substantial in general when it comes to

the practice of teaching since the student teachers possess beliefs that are

beneficial to their future profession.

The further analyses will determine if these beliefs in nature of

Mathematics affect the teaching efficacy of student teachers.

4.3.2. The Beliefs about Learning Mathematics

In this section, the researchers focus on the appropriateness of particular

instructional activities, questions about the purposes of mathematics as a school

subject.

The items on this scale are as follows:

A. The best way to do well in mathematics is to memorize all the

formulas.

B. Pupils need to be taught exact procedures for solving mathematical

problems.

C. It doesn’t really matter if you understand a mathematical concept.

D. To be good in mathematics you must be able to solve problems

quickly.

E. Pupils learn mathematics best by attending to teacher’s explanations.

F. When pupils are working on mathematical problems, more emphasis

should be put on getting the correct answer than on the process

followed.

34
G. In addition to getting a right answer in mathematics, it is important to

understand why the answer is correct.

H. Teachers should allow pupils to figure out their own ways to solve

mathematical problems.

I. Non-standard procedures should be discouraged because they can

interfere with learning the correct procedure.

J. Hands-on mathematics experiences aren’t worth the time and expense.

K. Time used to investigate why a solution to a mathematical problem

works is time well spent.

L. Pupils can figure out a way to solve mathematical problems without a

teacher’s help.

M. Teachers should encourage pupils to find their own solutions to

mathematical problems even if they are inefficient.

N. It is helpful for pupils to discuss different ways to solve particular

problems.

Not all questions generated positive responses towards the beliefs in

learning mathematics. The following results were obtained indicating the

percentage response of the respondents.

 Question A - 8.33% of the participants (n=3) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that the best way to do well in mathematics is to memorize all

the formulas.

35
 Question B – 27.78% of the participants (n=10) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that pupils need to be taught exact procedures for solving

mathematical problems.

 Question C – 2.78% of the participants (n=1) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that it doesn’t really matter if you understand a mathematical

concept.

 Question D - 2.78% of the participants (n=1) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that to be good in mathematics you must be able to solve

problems quickly.

 Question E – 36.11% of the participants (n=13) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that pupils learn mathematics best by attending to teacher’s

explanations.

 Question F –25% of the participants (n=9) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that when pupils are working on mathematical problems, more

emphasis should be put on getting the correct answer than on the process

followed.

 Question G – 75% of the participants (n=27) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that in addition to getting a right answer in mathematics, it is

important to understand why the answer is correct.

 Question H – 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that teachers should allow pupils to figure out their own ways to

solve mathematical problems.

36
 Question I – 11.11% of the participants (n=4) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that non-standard procedures should be discouraged because

they can interfere with learning the correct procedure.

 Question J – 5% of the participants (n=2) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that hands-on mathematics experiences aren’t worth the time

and expense.

 Question K - 83% of the participants (n=30) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that time used to investigate why a solution to a mathematical

problem works is time well spent.

 Question L – 36% of the participants (n=13) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that pupils can figure out a way to solve mathematical problems

without a teacher’s help.

 Question M – 50% of the participants (n=18) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that teachers should encourage pupils to find their own solutions

to mathematical problems even if they are inefficient.

 Question N – 86% of the participants (n=31) either agreed or strongly

disagreed that it is helpful for pupils to discuss different ways to solve

particular problems.

Based on the findings above, it can be evidently seen that most items

generated negative responses from the respondents. Only items G, H, K, and M

were supported based on the percentage of responses. In addition, items A, C, D,

I, and J received little support from the respondents.

37
4.3.2.1 Classifications of Each Item

The items in this area are classified into three:

a) appropriateness of particular instructional activities,

b) cognitive processes of students, and

c) purposes of Mathematics as a school subject

a. Appropriateness of Particular Instructional Activities

This subgroup includes five items (E, F, H, M, and N). As seen on

page 36-37, only items H and N got the support of the respondents. Items

E, F, and M did not get the support of the respondents. Item E got a mean

of 4.00 while item F got 3.17 similarly, item F got 4.53. These three

statements from this subgroup got minimal disagreement on the part of the

respondents. Items H and M on the other hand both yielded a mean of 5.36

which reveals that these items are supported by the respondents.

Generally, this subgroup yielded a mean of 4.18 that signifies

minimal disagreement from the respondents due to the low support of the

participants on other statements included in this subgroup.

b. Cognitive Processes of Students

The second subgroup is comprised of items B, C, G, K, and L

respectively. Items B, C and L did not got the endorsement from the

respondents while items G and K were favoured by the participants

gathering an at least 75% of the support.

38
Items B, C, and L, as stated, were not endorsed by the respondents.

Aside from low frequency of participants who either agreed or strongly

agreed these three items only gathered the following averages: 3.78, 2.53,

and 4.22. On contrary, items G and K, also as stated, were seemed to be

endorsed by the student teachers that gathered high averages (5.13 and

5.19) that resulted to a conclusion that student teachers believe that it is

also important to understand why the answer is correct aside from only

getting it correctly, and the time used to investigate why a solution to a

mathematical problem works is time well spent.

Generally, this subgroup yielded a mean of 4.18 that indicates a

minimal disagreement from the respondents. Again, as stated a while ago

that the mean that was computed from this subgroup was affected by the

statements which were not agreed by the respondents.

c. Purposes of Mathematics as a School Subject

This subgroup is composed of four items- items A, D, I, and J

respectively. As seen on pages 36 and 37, none of these items were

endorsed by the student teachers. Similarly, all these items got low mean

(see Appendix A.2.4).

Generally, this subgroup yielded a mean of 2.65 that denotes

disagreement on the part of the respondents. Thus, this shows that the

respondents do not accept the statements that were proposed to them.

39
4.3.2.2 Two Scales of Beliefs about Learning Mathematics

There were two scales developed under this area and these are as follows:

1. Learning Mathematics through Following Teacher Direction.

2. Learning Mathematics through Active Involvement.

As with the scales reflecting the beliefs about the nature of

mathematics, respondents are not forced to choose between the two sets of

beliefs about mathematics learning, and can thus endorse both sets of

propositions, believing that mathematics is learned both through active

student involvement and by following teacher directions. Our expectation

was that future teachers would learn toward one or the other view of

learning, and that the two sets would be negatively correlated. This proved

to be the case.

4.3.2.2.1. Learning Mathematics through Following Teacher

Direction

Respondents who score highly on this scale tend to see

mathematics as being heavily teacher-centred: the students’ role is to

follow instructions from the teacher, and through doing so learn

mathematics. These respondents typically agree with the following

statements which were included in this scale:

1. The best way to do well in mathematics is to memorize all the

formulas.

40
2. Pupils need to be taught exact procedures for solving mathematical

problems.

3. It does not really matter if you understand a mathematical problem,

if you can get the right answer.

4. To be good in mathematics you must be able to solve problems

quickly.

5. Pupils learn mathematics best by attending to the teacher’s

explanation.

6. When pupils are working on mathematical problems, more

emphasis should be put on getting the correct answer than on the

process followed.

7. Non-procedures should be discouraged because they can interfere

with learning the correct procedure.

8. Hands on mathematics experience aren’t worth the time and

expense.

Findings:

Items in this scale have relatively low mean (see Appendix

A.2.5). Considering the items, the first statement was disagreed by

the respondents. This may imply that the best way to excel in

Mathematics is not to memorize all the formulas. Similarly, pupils

should not always be taught the exact procedure for solving

mathematical procedures because there are easier ways in solving

mathematical problems. Another thing that can be implied from

41
this result is that the students still need to understand the problem

even if they got the right answer. With regards to the fourth

statement, respondents do not believe that solving mathematics

problems quickly implies being good in mathematics itself.

Another, student teachers did not also agree about putting more

emphasis on getting the correct answer than on process that

supposed to be followed. Student teachers also disagreed about

discouraging non-standard procedures because it can interfere with

the correct learning procedure. Lastly, many respondents did not

agree that the time and amount of money spent for hands on

experience are not worth.

Generally, the mean of this scale is 3.01 which directly

imply that these respondents tend not to see mathematics learning

as heavily teacher-centred. In this finding, the student teachers

consider the role of the students as to not directly following all the

instructions given by the teachers in solving problem. An evidence

of this finding is can be seen on the research conducted by Tatto et

al. (2008) that the student teachers from the Philippines do not

consider teacher-centred instruction in learning Mathematics.

4.3.2.2.2. Learning Mathematics through Active Involvement

Respondents who score highly on this scale tend to see

mathematics learning as being active learning; students must do

42
mathematics, conduct their own enquiries, and develop ways to solve

problems if their mathematics learning is to be effective. These

respondents usually agree with statements such as the following, included

in the scale:

1. In addition to getting a right answer in mathematics, it is important to

understand why the answer is correct.

2. Teachers should allow pupils to figure out their own ways to solve

mathematical problems.

3. Time used to investigate why a solution to a mathematical problem

works is time well spent.

4. Pupils can figure out a way to solve mathematical problems without a

teacher’s help

5. Teachers should encourage pupils to find their own solutions to

mathematical problems even if they are inefficient.

6. It is helpful for pupils to discuss different ways to solve particular

problems.

Findings:

Items in this scale have relatively high mean (see Appendix A.2.6)

and thus can be inferred as accepted by the student teachers compared to

the preceding scale presented. Respondents agreed on the statements

presented in this scale except items L and M.

Generally, this scale got a mean of 4.97 which implies that student

teachers believe that students learn mathematics through active

43
involvement and therefore see mathematics learning as being active

learning; students must do mathematics, conduct their own enquiries, and

develop ways to solve problems if their mathematics learning is to be

effective. In other terms, respondents believe that learning takes place

more effectively using a student-centred classroom. On the study carried-

out by Tatto et. al (2008), it has been revealed that student teachers from

the Philippines hold a belief that students are learning mathematics

through active participation and involvement.

Overall Findings

As expected by the researchers, the two aforementioned scales should be

negatively correlated and the coefficient of correlation for these two scales yields

-0.17 from which, as stated by Garret (1981) that this coefficient indicates a

negligible or inverse correlation. Likewise, as stated by Sevilla et al. (1992) that

this coefficient is indicating a negligible correlation. Thus, this finding signifies

that the student teachers lean on one belief ,that is, learning mathematics is best

whenever students are actively involved in classroom discussion.

The items are found to be really substantial in general when it comes to

their practice teaching since the student teachers possess beliefs that are beneficial

to their future profession.

The further analyses will determine if these beliefs in learning of

Mathematics affect the teaching efficacy of student teachers.

44
4.3.3 Mathematics Teaching Efficacy Beliefs

In this section, the researchers focus on the beliefs of student teachers

based on their personal efficacy beliefs and the outcome expectancy. The

following items are the statements included in this scale:

1. When a student does better than usual in mathematics, it is often because

the teacher exerted a little extra effort.

2. I will continually find better ways to teach mathematics.

3. Even if I try very hard, I do not teach mathematics as well as I do most

subjects.

4. When the mathematics grades of students improve, it is often due to their

teacher having found a more effective teaching approach.

5. I know the steps necessary to teach mathematics concepts effectively.

6. I am not very effective in monitoring mathematics activities.

7. If students are underachieving in mathematics, it is most likely due to

ineffective mathematics teaching.

8. I generally teach mathematics ineffectively.

9. The inadequacy of a student’s mathematics background can be overcome

by good teaching.

10. The low mathematics achievement of some students cannot generally be

blames on their teachers.

11. When a low-achieving child progresses in mathematics, it is usually due to

extra attention given by the teacher.

45
12. I understand mathematics concepts well enough to be effective in teaching

mathematics.

13. Increased effort in mathematics teaching produces little change in some

students’ mathematics achievement.

14. The teacher is generally responsible for the achievement of students in

mathematics.

15. Students’ achievement in mathematics is directly related to their teacher’s

effectiveness in mathematics teaching.

16. If parents comment that their child is showing more interest in

mathematics at school, it is probably due to the performance of the child’s

teacher.

17. I find it difficult to use manipulatives to explain to students why

mathematics works.

18. I am typically able to answer students’ mathematics questions.

19. I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach mathematics.

20. Given a choice, I would not invite the principal to evaluate my

mathematics teaching.

21. When a student has difficulty understanding a mathematics concept, I am

usually at a loss as to how to help the student understand it better.

22. When teaching mathematics, I usually welcome student questions.

23. I do not know what to do to turn students on to mathematics.

46
Not all questions generated positive responses (agree or strongly agree)

indicating a favourable response (positive attitude) towards the teaching efficacy

in Mathematics.

The following results were obtained indicating a support with regards to

the beliefs about the nature of mathematics.

 Question 1 – 58.33% of the participants (n=21) either agreed or strongly

agreed that when a student does better than usual in mathematics, it is

often because the teacher exerted a little extra effort.

 Question 2 –97.22% of the participants (n=35) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they will continually find better ways to teach mathematics.

 Question 3 – 2.78% of the participants (n=1) either agreed or strongly

agreed that even if they try very hard, they do not teach mathematics as

well as they do most subjects.

 Question 4 – 86.11% of the participants (n=31) either agreed or strongly

agreed that when the mathematics grades of students improve, it is often

due to their teacher having found a more effective teaching approach.

 Question 5 – 88.89% of the participants (n=32) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they know the steps necessary to teach mathematics concepts

effectively.

 Question 6 – 8.33% of the participants (n=3) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they are not very effective in monitoring mathematics

activities.

47
 Question 7 – 41.67% of the participants (n=15) either agreed or strongly

agreed that if students are underachieving in mathematics, it is most likely

due to ineffective mathematics teaching.

 Question 8 – 5.56% of the participants (n=2) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they generally teach mathematics ineffectively.

 Question 9 – 91.67% of the participants (n=33) either agreed or strongly

agreed that the inadequacy of a student’s mathematics background can be

overcome by good teaching.

 Question 10 – 66.67% of the participants (n=24) either agreed or strongly

agreed that the low mathematics achievement of some students cannot

generally be blames on their teachers.

 Question 11 – 47.22% of the participants (n=17) either agreed or strongly

agreed that when a low-achieving child progresses in mathematics, it is

usually due to extra attention given by the teacher.

 Question 12 – 94.44% of the participants (n=34) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they understand mathematics concepts well enough to be

effective in teaching mathematics.

 Question 13 – 55.56% of the participants (n=20) either agreed or strongly

agreed that increased effort in mathematics teaching produces little change

in some students’ mathematics achievement.

 Question 14 – 72.22% of the participants (n=26) either agreed or strongly

agreed that the teacher is generally responsible for the achievement of

students in mathematics.

48
 Question 15 – 77.78% of the participants (n=28) either agreed or strongly

agreed that students’ achievement in mathematics is directly related to

their teacher’s effectiveness in mathematics teaching.

 Question 16 - 75% of the participants (n=27) either agreed or strongly

agreed that if parents comment that their child is showing more interest in

mathematics at school, it is probably due to the performance of the child’s

teacher.

 Question 17 – 8.33% of the participants (n=3) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they find it difficult to use manipulatives to explain to students

why mathematics works.

 Question 18 – 91.67% of the participants (n=33) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they are typically able to answer students’ mathematics

questions.

 Question 19 – 19.44% of the participants (n=7) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they wonder if they have the necessary skills to teach

mathematics.

 Question 20 – 5.56% of the participants (n=2) either agreed or strongly

agreed that given a choice, they would not invite the principal to evaluate

their mathematics teaching.

 Question 21 – 8.33% of the participants (n=3) either agreed or strongly

agreed that when a student has difficulty understanding a mathematics

concept, they are usually at a loss as to how to help the student understand

it better.

49
 Question 22 – 97.22% of the participants (n=35) either agreed or strongly

agreed that when teaching mathematics, they usually welcome student

questions.

 Question 23 – 8.33% of the participants (n=3) either agreed or strongly

agreed that they do not know what to do to turn students on to

mathematics.

Furthermore, this belief scale had been divided into two sub scales:

1. Personal Mathematics Teaching Efficacy.

2. Mathematics Teaching Outcome Expectancy.

The researchers expect that personal beliefs and outcome expectancy should

accompany each other and thus can be established as positively correlated.

Further, the researchers also expect that the student teachers should not lean on

one subscale from another.

4.3.3.1 Personal Mathematics Teaching Efficacy

Respondents who scored higher in this subscale tend to hold on

that their beliefs about personal teaching efficacy were substantial in their

teaching practices. These respondents usually agree with statements such

as the following, included in the scale:

1. I will continually find better ways to teach mathematics. (Item 2)

2. Even if I try very hard, I do not teach mathematics as well as I do most

subjects. (Item 3)

50
3. I know the steps necessary to teach mathematics concepts effectively.

(Item 5)

4. I am not very effective in monitoring mathematics activities. (Item 6)

5. I generally teach mathematics ineffectively. (Item 8)

6. The inadequacy of a student’s mathematics background can be

overcome by good teaching. (Item 9)

7. I understand mathematics concepts well enough to be effective in

teaching mathematics. (Item 12)

8. I find it difficult to use manipulatives to explain to students why

mathematics works. (Item 17)

9. I am typically able to answer students’ mathematics questions. (Item

18)

10. I wonder if I have the necessary skills to teach mathematics. (Item 19)

11. Given a choice, I would not invite the principal to evaluate my

mathematics teaching. (Item 20)

12. When a student has difficulty understanding a mathematics concept, I

am usually at a loss as to how to help the student understand it better.

(Item 21)

13. When teaching mathematics, I usually welcome student questions.

(Item 22)

14. I do not know what to do to turn students on to mathematics. (Item 23)

51
Findings:

Of the 14 items included in this subscale, six items (items 2, 5, 9,

12, 18, and 22) were agreed by the respondents while eight items (items 3,

6, 8, 17, 19, 20, 21, and 23) were not agreed by the respondents (see

Appendix A.3.1-A.3.2: statistical treatment on page 23).

According to the student teachers, good teaching can overcome the

inadequacy of a students’ mathematics background. When teaching

mathematics, they usually welcome students’ questions. They typically

able to answer students’ mathematics questions at the same time, they

understand mathematics concept well enough to be effective in teaching

mathematics. Further, these student teachers know the steps necessary to

teach mathematic effectively and they will continually find better ways to

teach mathematics.

The response of the student teachers also denoted their refusal to

agree on other statements presented into them in this subscale. They

believe that they have the necessary skill in teaching mathematics and thus

teach mathematics effectively to their students and effectively monitor the

mathematics activities. They are always ready for an evaluation, if given a

choice, from the principal. Further, they also believe that they teach

mathematics well to their students. They find it not difficult to use

manipulatives in explaining students why mathematics works. They know

what to do to turn students on to mathematics and that whenever the

52
student has difficulty in mathematics; they know how to help the student

understand it better.

On the test conducted by the researchers, the results showed that

the personal mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs of student teachers

really affect their beliefs in their teaching effectiveness in mathematics.

Therefore, student teachers tend to have positive beliefs about their

personal teaching efficacy in mathematics.

4.3.3.2 Mathematics Teaching Outcome Expectancy

Respondents who scored higher in this subscale tend to hold on

that their beliefs about their mathematics teaching outcome expectancy

were substantial in their teaching practices. These respondents usually

agree with statements such as the following, included in the scale:

1. When a student does better than usual in mathematics, it is often

because the teacher exerted a little extra effort. (Item 1)

2. When the mathematics grades of students improve, it is often due to

their teacher having found a more effective teaching approach. (Item

4)

3. If students are underachieving in mathematics, it is most likely due to

ineffective mathematics teaching. (Item 7)

4. The low mathematics achievement of some students cannot generally

be blames on their teachers. (Item 10)

5. When a low-achieving child progresses in mathematics, it is usually

due to extra attention given by the teacher. (Item 11)

53
6. Increased effort in mathematics teaching produces little change in

some students’ mathematics achievement. (Item 13)

7. The teacher is generally responsible for the achievement of students in

mathematics. (Item 14)

8. Students’ achievement in mathematics is directly related to their

teacher’s effectiveness in mathematics teaching. (Item 15)

9. If parents comment that their child is showing more interest in

mathematics at school, it is probably due to the performance of the

child’s teacher. (Item 16)

Findings:

Of the 9 items included in this subscale, six items (items 4, 10, 11,

14, 15, and 16) were agreed by the respondents while three items (items 1,

7, and 13) were not agreed by the respondents (see Appendix A.3.1-A.3.2:

statistical treatment on page 23).

According to the student teachers, a new found more effective

teaching approach may lead to the improvement of the students’ grade;

similarly, extra attention given by the teachers to the low-achieving

children may result to progresses in Mathematics. More interest shown in

Mathematics by the child may also be probably due to the performance of

the teacher. But, the students low mathematics achievement cannot

generally be blamed on their teachers even though the latter has generally

the responsible for the students’ achievement. Hence, students’

54
achievement in Mathematics is directly related to the teacher’s

effectiveness in Mathematics teaching.

Also, according to the student teachers, when a student does better

than usual in Mathematics, it is often because the teacher exerted a more

extra effort; similarly, increased effort in Mathematics teaching produces a

big change in the students’ mathematics achievement. Hence, students’

achievement in Mathematics is most likely due to effective Mathematics

teaching.

55

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi