A Literature Review Exploring the use of Programming in Mathematics Education
Abstract
Programming is now included in mathematics curricula in several countries; thus, the purpose of this literature review is to determine the research-based justifications for these educational decisions. From a selection of relevant articles, 15 articles were identified and analyzed, each of which had varying study types, themes, and designs. Three themes from the studies were identified: the motivation to learn mathematics, student performance in mathematics, and the collaboration between students and the changed role of the teacher. It was found that in certain circumstances, including programming in mathematics education could improve student motivation to learn mathematics and improve student performance in mathematics. To gain a better understanding of the potential of programming in mathematics education, the entire collective learning process should be considered by discussing the roles of the teacher and the collaboration between students as part of these roles.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.17.12.2
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ardito, G., Mosley, P., & Scollins, L. (2014). We, robot: Using robotics to promote collaborative and mathematics learning in a middle school classroom. (Report). Middle Grades Research Journal, 9(3), 73.
Balanskat, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding - Priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. Brussel: European Schoolnet
Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: Students’ achievements in assignments according to the P3 Task Taxonomy—practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 121–144. doi: 10.1007/s10798-016-9385-9.
Bartolini Bussi, M., & Baccaglini-Frank, A. (2015). Geometry in early years: Sowing seeds for a mathematical definition of squares and rectangles. Mathematics Education, 47(3), 391–405. doi: 10.1007/s11858-014-0636-5
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978–988. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
Benitti, F. B. V., & Spolaôr, N. (2017). How have robots supported STEM teaching? In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Robotics in STEM Education: Redesigning the Learning Experience (pp. 103–129). Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-57786-9_5
Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., & Earp, J. (2018). The Nordic approach to introducing Computational Thinking and programming in compulsory education. Report prepared for the Nordic@BETT2018 Steering Group. doi:https://doi.org/10.17471/54007
Falloon, G. (2016). An analysis of young students' thinking when completing basic coding tasks using Scratch Jnr. on the iPad. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(6), 576–593. doi: 10.1111/jcal.12155
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K—12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 38–43. doi: 10.3102/0013189X12463051
Husain, H., Kamal, N., Ibrahim, M. F., Huddin, A. B., & Alim, A. A. (2017). Engendering problem solving skills and mathematical knowledge via programming. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 12(12), 1–11.
Hussain, S., Lindh, J., & Shukur, G. (2006). The effect of LEGO training on pupils' school performance in mathematics, problem solving ability and attitude: Swedish data. Educational Technology & Society, 9(3), 182–194.
Ke, F. (2014). An implementation of design-based learning through creating educational computer games: A case study on mathematics learning during design and computing. Computers & Education, 73, 26. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.010
Khasawneh, A. A. (2009). Assessing Logo programming among Jordanian seventh grade students through Turtle geometry. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 40(5), 619–639. doi: 10.1080/00207390902912845
La Paglia, F., La Cascia, C., Francomano, M., & La Barbera, D. (2017). Educational robotics to improve mathematical and metacognitive skills. Annual review of Cypertherapy and telemedicine, 15, 70–75.
Lambic, D. (2011). Presenting practical application of mathematics by the use of programming software with easily available visual components. Teaching Mathematics and Its Applications: An International Journal of the IMA, 30(1), 10–18. doi: 10.1093/teamat/hrq014
Leonard, J., Buss, A., Gamboa, R., Mitchell, M., Fashola, O., Hubert, T., & Almughyirah, S. (2016). Using robotics and game design to enhance children’s self-efficacy, STEM attitudes, and computational thinking skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(6), 860–876. doi: 10.1007/s10956-016-9628-2
Lindh, J., & Holgersson, T. (2007). Does lego training stimulate pupils' ability to solve logical problems? Computers & Education, 49(4), 1097–1111. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.12.008
Misfeldt, M., & Ejsing-Duun, S. (2015). Learning mathematics through programming: An Instrumental Approach to Potentials and Pitfalls. In K. Krainer & N. Vondrová (Eds.), CERME9: Proceedings of the Ninth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 2524–2530). Prague, Czech Republic: Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Education and ERME.
Moreno-León, J., Robles, G., & Román-González, M. (2016). Code to learn: Where does it belong in the K-12 curriculum? Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 15, 283–303. doi: 10.28945/3521
Nugent, G., Barker, B., & Grandgenett, N. (2008). The Effect of 4-H robotics and geospatial technologies on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and attitudes. Paper presented at the EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology 2008, Vienna, Austria.
Nugent, G., Barker, B., Grandgenett, N., & Adamchuk, V. (2009). The use of digital manipulatives in K-12: Robotics, GPS/GIS and programming. Paper presented at the Frontiers in Education Conference. doi: 10.1109/FIE.2009.5350828
Opetushallitus. (2014). Perusopetuksen opetussuunnitelman perusteet [Core curriculum for basic education]. Helsinki. Retrieved 12.07, 2018, from https://www.oph.fi/download/163777_perusopetuksen_opetussuunnitelman_perusteet_2014.pdf
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Badic Books, Inc.
Schwab, K. (2017). The fourth industrial revolution. Crown Business.
Sinclair, N., & Patterson, M. (2018). The Dynamic Geometrisation of Computer Programming. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 54–74. doi: 10.1080/10986065.2018.1403541
Skolverket. (2018). Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare 2011, revised 2018. Retrieved 12.10, 2018, from https://www.skolverket.se/sitevision/proxy/publikationer/svid12_5dfee44715d35a5cdfa2899/55935574/wtpub/ws/skolbok/wpubext/trycksak/Blob/pdf3984.pdf?k=3984
Taylor, M., Harlow, A., & Forret, M. (2010). Using a computer programming environment and an interactive whiteboard to investigate some mathematical thinking. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8, 561–570. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.12.078
Yelland, N. (1995). Mindstorms or a storm in a teacup? A review of research with Logo. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 26(6), 853–869. doi: 10.1080/0020739950260607
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
e-ISSN: 1694-2116
p-ISSN: 1694-2493