Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Muhammad Asif, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology Abbottabad, Pakistan Dr. Muhammad Mushtaq Khan, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology Abbottabad, Pakistan Khalid Zaman, COMSATS Institute of Information Technology Abbottabad, Pakistan Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the achievements of the students at secondary level when taught by analytical and synthetic methods of teaching mathematics. A sample of hundred students was taken from five government secondary schools and divided them into two groups: experimental and control group. The pre-test scores of the students show that there is no significant difference between the performances of two groups. Under a control environment, the students of experimental group were taught by synthetic method and students of control group by analytical method. After experiment, a researcher made post-test was conducted. The post-test result shows that there is a significant difference between the performances of students of two groups. The students of experimental group performed better than the control group.

Key words
Analytical Method, Synthetic Method, Teaching of Mathematics

1.

Introduction

A teacher of mathematics has a variety of methods and techniques which he might use in his everyday classroom teaching. The main objective of theses methods is to make teaching learning process more interactive and effective. In general, there is an interaction between the teacher and learner. To enhance or improve this interaction, a teacher uses new instructional material, new techniques and methods of teaching to make learning relevant and useful. There are various kinds of teaching methods and techniques by which a teacher can select the most relevant one keeping in view the needs of the learner and its relevance to the contents. Some of the commonly used methods are, project method, heuristic method, inductive & deductive methods and analytical & synthetic method. To grasp on the subject matter of mathematics it is necessary to use multiple methods in the teaching learning process at secondary level. It is generally observed that the students solved a question or set of questions quickly by using a technique or formula already learnt in the class but they have no understanding about the hidden logic that how it done. Prior is the deductive or synthetic approach to find a solution for a question but later is the inductive reasoning of analytic approach.

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

1.1. Analytic Approach First we understand the meanings of Analysis and then go through the Analytic Approach. According to the Webster Comprehensive Dictionary (1982), the Analysis means, the resolution of a whole unit into its parts or elements or the process of resolving a problem into its first element (inductive reasoning). According to Trowbridge (1986), Analysis is the ability to break down material to its fundamental elements for better understanding of the organization. Analysis may include identifying parts, clarifying relationships among parts and recognizing organizational principles of scientific system. The analytical method proceeds from unknown to known facts. In this method the problem is analysed to find out the relations. A statement is analysed into simpler statements and then truth is discovered. It is based on inductive reasoning and critical thinking. All the related facts are analysed to seek help in proceeding to the known conclusion. It is a logical method which leaves no doubt in the minds of students in understanding the core concept and discourages cramming and rote memory of the learner. It facilitates the understanding of the students and motivates them to discover facts by him (Rehman, 2000). It is a psychological method based on the principle of interest, which inculcates the spirit of inquiry and investigation in the students (Katozai, 2002). There are some demerits of the approach as well, stated by Rehman (2000) and Katozai (2002), that its a time taking approach because the teaching learning process through analysis take more time to impart knowledge from teacher to students. In solving a problem if known facts are not proper sequence or in a logical order, the students feel it boring and laborious. Procedure: If a/b=c/d, prove that (ac-2b2)/b= (c2-2bd)/d The unknown part is (ac-2b2)/b= (c2-2bd)/d is true, if a c d 2 b2 d = b c2 2 b2 d is true, if a c d = b c2 is true, if a d = b c is true that is, if a/b = c/d is true, which is known. 1.2. Synthetic Approach According to the Webster Comprehensive Dictionary, the Synthesis means the assembling of separate or subordinate parts into a new form. It is a process of reasoning from whole to a part and from general to the particular (deductive reasoning). According to Trowbridge (1986), the synthesis requires the formulation of new understanding of scientific systems. If analysis stresses the parts, synthesis stresses the whole components of scientific systems may be recognized into new patterns. Unlike analysis, synthesis asks your students to put parts together, to make patterns that one, new to them. Synthetic approach is just apposite to the analytical method. In this method we proceed from known to unknown as synthesis means combing together various parts. In mathematics various facts are collected and combined to find out the result which is unknown (Rehman, 2000). According to Katozai (2002), it is the process of putting together known bits of information to reach the point where unknown formation because obvious and true. According to Rehman (2000) and Katozai (2002) there are certain merits and demerits of the synthetic method. It is a short method and save time in teaching learning process. It is suitable both for intelligent and weak students. But at the other hand, it encourages the

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

memory work and does not develop any reasoning power and students are unable to discover new idea. Procedure: The known part is a/b=c/d Subtract 2b/c on both sides (But why and how the child should remember to subtract 2b/c and not any other quantity) a/b 2b/c = c/d 2b/c or, (ac 2 b2)/b c = (c2 -2 b d ) / c d or, (ac 2 b2)/b = (c2 -2 b d ) / d which is unknown. Thus, we conclude that both the methods go together. Analysis help in understanding and synthetic helps in retaining knowledge. The teacher should realise that he may offer help for the analytic form of the solution and that the synthetic work should be left to the pupils (Marwaha, 2009). The objective of this is to analyse the comparative effectiveness of the analytical and synthetic methods of teaching mathematics at secondary level. After introduction, the rest of the article is organized as follows. Section II describes the literature review and Section III includes methodology. Similarly, Section IV discusses the empirical results and finally the Section V concludes the paper.

2.

Literature Review

Many scholars have defined Education in their own ways (Khalid, 1975). According to Socrates, Education is the mean that helps in searching the truth. According to Aristotle, Education is a process necessary for the creation of sound mind in the sound body. According to the Imam Ghazali, Education is a process which enables an individual to distinguish between the true and the false, the good and bad and the right conduct and the evil doing. These definitions provide the basic concept of Education. In the new concept of education, the child is the centre of interest. So the curriculum is designed according to the needs and demands of the child. To develop the intellectual and analytical ability of the child it is necessary to design the subject matter more interactive and deliver the contents to the child with more appropriate way. Mathematics is the one of the prime subject of the any curriculum at primary and secondary level. So, a mathematics teacher uses various techniques and methods for effective learning. The method under consideration is analytic and synthetic approach of teaching mathematics. Analysis and synthesis, as scientific methods, always go hand in hand; they complement one another. Every synthesis is built upon the results of a preceding analysis, and every analysis requires a subsequent synthesis in order to verify and correct its results. In this context, to regard one method as being inherently better than the other, is meaningless. There are, however, important situations in which one method can be regarded as more suitable than the other. This concerns the question of which method is most appropriate as the primary method or chief point of departure for the study of a given system or object of scientific inquiry (Ritchey, 1996). According to Rubio (2004), the empirical research shows that the use of the analysis (numerical analysis) of the analytical method of numerical exploration fosters the development of the students ability to establish and produce meanings for: a) the numerical relationships between the unknowns; b) the relationships between them and the data; and; c)

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

the comparison between two quantities which represent the same in the problem, that is, that they are equivalent regarding their meaning. In the previous works (Filloy, Rubio, 1993 and Rubio, 2002), it has been proven that the use of a didactical model based in the analytical method of numerical exploration makes possible the unleash of analytical processes that allow the student to symbolise arithmetic-algebraic word problems with one equation, where the numerical approach plays a mediating role between the arithmetic and algebraic methods.

3.

Methodology

To analyse the comparative effectiveness of both the analytical and synthetic methods, an experiment was conducted in the 9th class. The selected population for this was all the government boys secondary schools of the district Haripur (Hazara). From these population 100 students was selected from five different schools. From each school twenty students were selected on the basis of their past performance. The students were divided into two groups (control group and experimental group) by even and odd numbering to avoid the biasness. A researcher made pre test was distributed among the students to analyse the performance of students before the experiment. The results of the pre test showed that there is no significant difference of the performance of two groups. After pre test, a sample of two chapters was selected from the text book of Mathematics taught at 9th class. The control group was taught by analytical method while experimental group was taught by synthetic method and both the groups were kept away from each other so, that one could not influence the performance of other. The duration of the classroom teaching was forty minutes and one week for whole experiment. Although the teachers were already trained, however they were guided about the analytical and synthetic methods once again to enhance their efficiency. The teachers had same academic and professional qualification and experience. The course contents for both the groups were same but the only difference between the two groups was the method of teaching. After conducting the experiment, a researcher made post test was distributed among the students of two groups. There were ten questions (Ammex B) in the post test having one mark for each question. The data was analysed through z-test statistics:

Z=

x1 x2 s 21 s 2 2 + n1 n2

Where: x1 = Means of the control group

x2 = Means of the experimental group

s 21 = Variation of the control group s 2 2 = Variation of the experimental group

n1 = Number of students of control group n2 = Number of students of experimental group

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

4.

Data Analysis

The data were analysed through Z-test statistic at the significance level of 0.05 and tabulated z-value is 1.96. In table.1, the computation of z-test for mean pre test scores for experimental and control group were presented. The results showed that the means and variance of experimental and control groups were 2.24 & 2.24 and 1.78 & 1.42 respectively. The calculated z-value is less than the tabulated z-value, which showed that the two independent groups were equivalent in performance before experiment. Table 1: Computation of Z-value for the mean pre test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 2.24 2.24 Difference of Mean 0 Variance 1.78 1.42 Z-Value 0

In table 2, the computation of z-test for mean post test scores for experimental and control group were presented. The results showed that the means and variance of experimental and control groups were 7.54 & 6.66 and 1.64 & 2.14 respectively. The calculated z-value is grater than the tabulated z-value, which showed that the two independent groups were not equivalent in performance after experiment. Table 2: Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 7.54 6.66 Difference of Mean 0.88 Variance 1.64 2.14 Z-Value 3.26

The computation of z-value for the mean post test score of both the groups for questions 1 to 10 were presented in annexure A. The positive difference of for both the groups showed that the students taught by synthetic method perform better than the students taught by analytical method and negative difference of mean showed that students taught by analytical method performed better than the other. In all questions control group perform better except questions 3 and 6. The z-value in all questions is not significant which shows that there is no significant difference of the achievements of the students when taught by analytical method or synthetic method at secondary level.

5.

Conclusion and Recommendation

The objective of this study was to present a comparative analysis of analytical and synthetic method of teaching mathematics at secondary level. For this purpose hundred students were selected from five different secondary schools of district Haripur from 9th class only. Students were divided into two groups (control and experimental groups). A pre-test was conducted before the experiment. The results of pre-test showed that there was no significant difference in the achievements of the two groups. Both the groups were taught by analytical

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

and synthetic methods respectively. After the end of treatment period, a researcher made post test was administered among the students and scored. The data were analyzed through z-test statistics. The results of the post test showed that there is a significant difference between the achievements of the students taught by analytical and synthetic methods. The mean post test scores of the experimental groups were higher than the control group, which indicated that the synthetic method of teaching mathematics have a positive and significant effect on the academic achievements of the students of 9th class. The difference of mean of both groups, in response to each question in post test did not show a significant difference, which indicated that student also take interest in the analytical approach (Annex. A). Although the students taught by the synthetic method scored high performance but not a predicted level thus, based on the results it is recommended to use a combination of analytical and synthetic method at secondary level.

6.

References

Filloy, E. and Rubio, G. (1993). Didactic Models, Cognition and Competence in the Solutions of Arithmetic & Algebra Word Problems in Hirabayashi, In. et al. (eds). Proceedings of the 17th International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol.I, pp. 154161. University of Tsukuba, Japan Katozai, M.A. (2002). Senior English Teacher: A Book for Preparation for PCS. University Publishers. Peshawar. Khalid, T.M. (1976). Education: An Introduction to Educational Psychology and History, Anmol Publishers. Karachi. Marwaha, P. (2009). The Teaching of Mathematics, Accessed on 20th of May, 2010. http://www.articlesbase.com/writing-articles/the-teaching-of-mathematics1058849.html#ixzz0oS8BiIK3 Rehman, M. (2000). Teaching of Science and Mathematics, University of Peshawar. Peshawar. Ritchey, T. (1991). Revised Version (1996). Analysis and Synthesis on Scientific MethodBased on a study by Bernhard Riemann, System Research, Vol. 8 No. 4. pp-21-24. Rubio, G. (2002). Solution of Word Problems Through a Numerical Approach. Evidences on the detachment of the arithmetical use of the unknown and the construction of its algebraic sense by pre-university students in Cockburn, A. and E.Nardi (eds), Proceedings of the 26th Conference for the PME. Vol 4, pp 145-152. Norwich, UK. Rubio, G. and Valle, R.D. (2004). The Competent use of the Analytic Method in the Solution of Algebraic Word Problems. A didactical model based on a numerical approach with junior high students, Proceedings of the 28th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. Vol. 4.pp 129-136. Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico. CCH Sur. The Webster Comprehensive Dictionary. (1982). Encyclopedic ed. Vol. I & II. Ferguson Publishing Company. Chicago. Trowbridge. (1986). Becoming a Secondary School Science Teacher, 4th ed. Merrill Publishing Company. Columbus.

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

Annexure A
Table 1 (Question 1) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.98 0.9 Difference of Mean 0.08 Variance 8.64 7.37 Z-Value 0.14

Table 2(Question 2) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.78 0.56 Difference of Mean 0.22 Variance 5.53 2.84 Z-Value 0.53

Table 3(Question 3) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.58 0.68 Difference of Mean -0.1 Variance 3.08 4.29 Z-Value 0.05

Table 4(Question 4) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.8 0.6 Difference of Mean 0.2 Variance 5.92 3.40 Z-Value 0.46

Table 5(Question 5) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.74 0.56 Difference of Mean 0.18 Variance 5.07 2.92 Z-Value 0.46

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

Table 6(Question 6) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.84 0.9 Difference of Mean -0.06 Variance 6.45 7.64 Z-Value -0.11

Table 7(Question 7) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.7 0.64 Difference of Mean 0.06 Variance 4.61 3.71 Z-Value 1.5

Table 8(Question 8)
Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.54 0.62 Table 9(Question 9) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.8 0.62 Table 10(Question 10) Computation of Z-value for the mean post test scores for experimental and control groups Variables Exp. Group Cont. Group No. of Students 50 50 Mean 0.68 0.58 Difference of Mean 0.1 Variance 4.38 3.32 Z-Value 0.66 Difference of Mean 0.18 Variance 6.24 3.67 Z-Value 0.4 Difference of Mean 0.02 Variance 3.79 3.59 Z-Value 0.05

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics

Journal of International Academic Research (2010) Vol.10, No.3.

31 December 2010

Annexure-B

Post Test
Name: ---------------------------Fill in the blanks with right answer. 1. The solution set of x 2 8 x + 15 = 0 is ----------------. 2. The solution set of 3( x 2 1) = 9( x + 1) is ----------------. 3. The solution set of ax 2 + bx + c = 0 is -------------------. 4. The solution set of 3 x 2 10 x + 2 = 0 is ------------------. x2 x 1 5. The solution set of = is -------------------. 3 12 24 6. By eliminating x from 5a 4 x = 43 and 4a + 3x = 22 , we have -----------------. 7. By eliminating x from x + 1/ x = t 2 and x 1/ x = t + 2 , we have ---------------. 8. By eliminating x from x 3 + 1/ x 3 = p and x 3 1/ x 3 = q , we have -----------------. 9. By eliminating x from 2 x + 7 y = 25 and 7 x + 2 y = 20 , we have -----------------. 10. By eliminating t from x = at 2 and y = bt 3 , we have ---------------------. Marks Obtained: ------------

Comparative Study of Analytical and synthetic methods of Teaching Mathematics