Abstract

The study aims to investigate prospective middle school mathematics teachers’ mental actions related to debugging, which is one of the computational thinking skills in the modeling process. The study was conducted with a nested multiple-case model. The study group consisted of three prospective mathematics teachers selected by criterion sampling. The data were collected from the video analysis, screen excerpts, and GeoGebra files explaining the solution process of three mathematics teacher candidates for the designed two mathematical modeling problems (experimental and theoretical). According to the results obtained from the data through content analysis based on the theoretical framework, it was identified that the student teachers conducted sub-activities such as recognizing/detecting the error, extracting the error, and correcting the error, which is one of the dimensions of computational thinking in technology-supported mathematical modeling. These skills as the basic steps of interpretation, verification, and revision were developed in the process of technology-supported mathematical modeling. GeoGebra was involved as an important mental trigger in the debugging process. In further studies, computational thinking studies describing all the components in the process of technology-supported mathematical modeling can be conducted, and computational thinking skills can be revealed in the process of mathematical modeling in non-computerized environments.

Keywords

References

• Aktaş, S. E. (2022). Investigation of mental actions of mathematics teacher candidates regarding computational thinking in the technology-asisted mathematical modeling process (Publication no. 764447) [Master’s thesis, Pamukkale University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
• Ang, K. C. (2020). Computational thinking as habits of mind for mathematical modelling. In W. C. Yang & D. Meade (Eds.), Electronic proceedings of the 25th Asian technology conference in mathematics (pp. 126-137). Mathematics and Technology, LLC.
• Angeli, C., Voogt, J., Fluck, A., Webb, M., Cox, M., Marly-Smith, J., & Zagami, J. (2016). A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: Implications for teacher knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 47-57.
• Autor, D. H., Levy, F., & Murnane, R. J. (2003). The skill content of recent technological change: An empirical exploration. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(4), 1279-1333. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355303322552801
• Baki, A. (2002). Kuramdan uygulamaya matematik eğitimi [Mathematics education from theory to practice]. Ceren Publishing.
• Ball, L., & Stacey, K. (2005). Teaching strategies for developing judicious technology use (first edition). In W. Masalski & P. Elliott (Eds.), Technology-supported mathematics learning environments (pp. 3-15). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
• Barcelos, T. S., & Silveira, I. F. (2012). Teaching computational thinking in initial series: An analysis of the confluence among mathematics and Computer Sciences in elementary education and its implications for higher education [Paper presentation]. 2012 XXXVIII Conferencia Latinoamericana En Informatica (CLEI), Medellin, Colombia.
• Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads, 2(1), 48-54. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905
• Bartolini, M. G., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classroom: Artefacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. In L. D. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 746-783). Routledge.
• Baykul, Y. (2012). İlkokulda matematik öğretimi [Teaching mathematics in primary school]. Pegem Akademi.
• Berry, J., & Houston, K. (1995). Mathematical modelling. Arrowsmith Ltd.
• Bers, M. U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E. R., & Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.020
• Blum, W. (2002). ICMI study 14: Applications and modelling in mathematics education - Discussion document. Zentralblatt Für Didaktik Der Mathematik, 34(5), 229-239. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02655826
• Blum, W., & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2009). Mathematical modelling: Can it be taught and learnt? Journal of Mathematical Modelling and Application, 1(1), 45-58.
• Borromeo Ferri, R. (2007). Personal experiences and extra-mathematical knowledge as an influence factor on modelling routes of pupils. In D. Pitta – Pantazi & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 2080-2089). Erme.
• Buteau, C., Gadanidis, G., Lovric, M., & Mueller, E. (2017). Computational thinking and mathematics curriculum. In S. Oesterle, D. Allan, & J. Holm (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2016 annual meeting of the Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group Conference (pp. 119-136). Canadian Mathematics Education Study Group.
• Büyüköztürk, Ş., Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş. & Demirel, F. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri [Scientific research methods].Pegem Akademi.
• Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press.
• Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2011). Common core state standards for mathematics. Author.
• Corlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM Education: Implications for Educating Our Teachers for the Age of Innovation. Education and Science, 39(171), 74-85.
• Costa, E. J. F., Campos, L. M. R. S., & Dario Serey Guerrero, D. (2017). Computational thinking in mathematics education: A joint approach to encourage problem-solving ability. 2017 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2017, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2017.8190655
• Csizmadia, A., Curzon, P., Dorling, M., Humphreys, S., Ng, T., Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2015). Computational thinking: A guide for teachers [Project Report]. Computing at School.
• Drijevers, P., Godino, J. D., Font, V., & Trouche, L. (2013). One epsiode, two lenses: A reflective analysis of student learning with computer algebra from instrumental and onto-semiotic perspectives. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(1), 23-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-012-9416-8
• English, L. (2003). Mathematical modelling with young learners. In S. Lamon, W. Parker, & K. Houston (Eds.), Mathematical modelling: A way of life (pp. 3-17). Horwood Publishing.
• English, L. (2018). On MTL’s second milestone: Exploring computational thinking and mathematics learning. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 20(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2018.1405615
• English, L., & Gainsburg, J. (2016). Problem solving in a 21st-century mathematics curriculum. In L. D. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 313-335). Routledge.
• Fernandez, M. L., Hadaway, N., Wilson, J. W., & Graeber, A. O. (1994). Connecting research to teaching: Problem solving: Managing it all. The Mathematics Teacher, 87(3), 195-199. https://doi.org/10.5951/MT.87.3.0195
• Fitzgerald, S., Lewandowski, G., McCauley, R., Murphy, L., Simon, B., Thomas, L., & Zander, C. (2008). Debugging: Finding, fixing and failing a multi-institutional study of novice debuggers. Computer Science Education, 18(2), 93-116. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993400802114508
• Flehantov, L., & Ovsiienko, Y. (2019). The simultaneous use of excel and GeoGebra to training the basics of mathematical modeling. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2393, 864–879. https://doi.org/10.31812/123456789/3173
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
• Gadanidis, G., Hughes, J. M., Minniti, L., & White, B. J. G. (2017). Computational thinking, grade 1 students and the binomial theorem. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 3, 77-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-016-0019-3
• Galbraith, P., Stillman, G., Brown, G., & Edwards, I. (2007). Facilitating middle secondary modelling competencies. In C. Haines, P. Galbraith, W. Blum, & S. Khan (Eds.), Mathematical modelling (ICTMA 12): Education, engineering and economics (pp. 222-231). Horwood Publishing.
• Gehring, W. J., Goss, B., Coles, M. G. H., Meyer, D. E., & Donchin, E. (1993). A neural system for error detection and compensation. Psychological Science, 4(6), 385-390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00586.x
• Gray, A. (2016). The 10 skills you need to thrive in the fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum.
• Greefrath, G., & Siller, H. S. (2017). Modelling and simulation with the help of digital tools. In G. A. Stillman, W. Blum, & G. Kaiser (Eds.), Mathematical modelling and applications: crossing and researching boundaries in mathematics education (pp. 529-539). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62968-1_44
• Greefrath, G., Hertleif, C., & Siller, H. S. (2018). Mathematical modelling with digital tools—A quantitative study on mathematising with dynamic geometry software. ZDM, 50(1), 233-244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0924-6
• Gugerty, L., & Olson, G. (1986). Debugging by skilled and novice programmers. ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 17(4), 171-174. https://doi.org/10.1145/22339.22367
• Hickmott, D., Prieto-Rodriguez, E., & Holmes, K. (2018). A scoping review of studies on computational thinking in K–12 mathematics classrooms. Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education, 4, 48-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40751-017-0038-8
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. & Bukova Güzel, E. (2013). Different approaches clarifying mathematical modeling process. Bartin University Journal of Faculty of Education, 2(1), 127-145.
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. (2012). Analysing mathematical modelling problems solving processes in the technology-aided environment: An explanation on approaches and thought processes (Publication no. 313232) [Master’s thesis, Dokuz Eylül University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. (2015). Analysing problem solving processes of mathematical modelling in the technology aided environment: an explanation on cognitive and meta cognitive structures (Publication no. 395250) [Doctoral dissertation, Dokuz Eylül University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. (2021). Secondary/High school mathematics teachers’ and mathematics teacher candidates’ opinions about HTTM (History/Theory/Technology/Modeling) Learning process. Acta Didactica Napocensia, 14(2), 346-375. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.14.2.25
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. (2022). Mathematics student teachers’ task design processes: The case of History, Theory, Technology, and Modeling. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 6(5), 17-53. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.202217094
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N., & Bukova-Güzel, E. (2014). Using GeoGebra in mathematical modeling: the height-foot length problem. Pamukkale University Journal of Faculty of Education, 36(2), 29-44. https://doi.org/10.9779/PUJE607
• Hıdıroğlu, Ç., & Özkan Hıdıroğlu, Y. (2016). Modelleme yaklaşımlarına bütüncül bir bakış ve yeni bir öğrenme modeli önerisi: HTTM modeli ve kuramsal temeli [A holistic view of modeling approaches and a new learning model proposal: HTTM model and its theoretical foundation]. In Ö. Demirel, & S. Dinçer (Eds.), Eğitim bilimlerinde yenilikler ve nitelik arayışı [Innovations in educational sciences and the search for quality] (pp. 1109–1142). Pegem. https://doi.org/10.14527/9786053183563.068
• Hoyles, C., Noss, R., Kent, P., & Bakker, A. (2010). Improving mathematics at work: The need for techno-mathematical literacies. Routledge.
• Kallia, M., van Borkulo, S. P., Drijvers, P., Barendsen, E., & Tolboom, J. (2021). Characterising computational thinking in mathematics education: A literature-informed Delphi study. Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 159-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2020.1852104
• Kaput, J., Noss, R., & Hoyles, C. (2008). Developing new notations for a learnable mathematics in the computational era. In L. D. English (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 51-75). Routledge.
• Kurtuluş, A. & Öztürk, B. (2017). The analysis of the effect of metacognitive awareness and mathematics self-efficacy perceptions on mathematics achievement of middle school students. Dicle University Journal of Ziya Gökalp Faculty of Education, 31, 762-778. https://doi.org/10.14582/DUZGEF.1840
• Lesh, R. A., & Doerr, H. M. (2003). Beyond constructivism: models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning and teaching. Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Lewis, C. M. (2012). The importance of students’ attention to program state: A case study of debugging behavior. In A. Clear, K. Sanders, & B. Simon (Eds.), Proceedings of the ninth annual international conference on international computing education research (pp. 127-134). Association for Computing Machinery.
• Maaß, K. (2006). What are modelling competencies? ZDM, 38(2), 113-142. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02655885
• Maharani, S., Kholid, M. N., Pradana, L. N., & Nusantara, T. (2019). Problem solving in the context of computational thinking. Journal of Mathematics Education, 8(2), 109-116. https://doi.org/10.22460/infinity.v8i2.p109-116
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Sage.
• Murphy, L., Lewandowski, G., McCauley, R., Simon, B., Thomas, L., & Zander, C. (2008). Debugging: The good, the bad, and the quirky – a qualitative analysis of novices’ strategies. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40(1), 163-167. https://doi.org/10.1145/1352322.1352191
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics [NCTM]. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Author.
• National Research Council [NRC]. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. National Academy Press.
• Ndlovu, M., Wessels, D., & de Villiers, M. (2011). An instrumental approach to modelling the derivative in Sketchpad. Pythagoras, 32(2), 1-15.
• Özkan Hıdıroğlu, Y., & Hıdıroğlu, Ç. N. (2021). The relationship between mathematics teachers' mind types and computational thinking skills. Pamukkale University Journal of Faculty of Education, 52, 301-325. https://doi.org/10.9779/pauefd.696511
• Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(1), 95-123. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00191473
• Partnership for 21st Century Skills [P21]. (2010). Framework for 21st century skills. Author.
• Pea, R. D. (1987). Computers and excellence in the future of education. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 517(1), 125-138. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1987.tb52789.x
• Peter-Koop, A. (2004). Fermi problems in primary mathematics classrooms: Pupils’ Interactive modelling processes. In I. Putt, R. Faragher, & M. McLean (Eds.), Mathematics education for the third millennium: Towards 2010. Proceedings of the 27th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Townsville (pp. 454-461). MERGA. https://pub.uni-bielefeld.de/record/2938166
• Pugalee, D. K. (2001). Writing, mathematics, and metacognition: Looking for connections through students’ work in mathematical problem solving. School Science and Mathematics, 101(5), 236-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2001.tb18026.x
• Rabbitt, P. (1997). Methodology of Frontal and Executive Function. Taylor and Francis Group.
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). On paradigms and methods: What do you do when the ones you know don’t do what you want them to? Issues in the analysis of data in the form of videotapes. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 179-214. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_3
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1994). Reflections on doing and teaching mathematics. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical thinking and problem solving (pp. 53-70). Academic Press.
• Selby, C., & Woollard, J. (2013). Computational thinking: The developing definition [Project Report]. University of Southampton.
• Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22, 142-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
• Stillman, G., Brown, J. P., Edwards, I., & Galbraith, P. (2007). A framework for success in implementing mathematical modelling in the secondary classroom. In J. Watson & K. Beswick (Eds.), Mathematics: Essential Research, Essential Practice. Proceedings of the 30th Annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. (pp. 688-707). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
• Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Sage.
• Sunendar, A., Santika, S., Supratman, & Nurkamilah, M. (2020). The analysis of mathematics students’ computational thinking ability at Universitas Siliwangi. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1477, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1477/4/042022
• Taylor, R. P. (1980). The computer in school: tutor, tool, tutee. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(2), 240-252.
• Tekin Dede, A & Yılmaz, S. (2013). Examination of primary mathematics student teachers’ modelling competencies. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 4(3), 185-206.
• Voskoglou, M. G. (2012). An application of fuzzy logic to computational thinking. Annals of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 2(1), 18-32.
• Wiedemann, K., Chao, J., Galluzzo, B., & Simoneau, E. (2020). Mathematical modeling with R: embedding computational thinking into high school math classes. ACM Inroads, 11(1), 33-42. https://doi.org/10.1145/3380956
• Wiley, J., & Lingefjärd, T. (2017). Mathematical modeling: Applications with GeoGebra. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
• Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communication of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
• Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods. Sage.

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.