Abstract

In this study on concepts of geometry, the gestures and mimics used by the mathematics teachers working in school for the deaf to define some mathematical concepts with the sign language were investigated. The research employed the structured interview technique, a qualitative research method. Data were collected through interviews and video recordings with participants. The data were analyzed using the descriptive analysis method in accordance with the parameters set by French linguist Christian Cuxac. Semiotics was utilized to conceptualize and make sense of the ideas behind the signs. As a result of the analysis, signs representing the concepts of “angle, area, diameter, circumference, and perpendicular” were suggested. It was observed that the signs shown in the Turkish Sign Language Dictionary, prepared and distributed to deaf schools by the General Directorate of Special Education and Guidance Services of the Ministry of National Education, are the same. However, the signs for the five concepts show differences. Additionally, during the interviews, teachers stated that many mathematical terms are not included in this dictionary, making it difficult for them to teach effectively. Teachers emphasized that a dictionary containing mathematical terms would be very useful in their courses.  

Keywords

References

• Akçakoca, T. (2018). The investigation of secondary school students' embodied cognitions of some mathematical concepts through gestures (Publication no. 526666) [Master’s thesis, Gazi University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
• Akıncı, M., & Arıkan, A. (2017). The investigation of the pre-service mathematics teachers' gestures of some geometric concepts. Elementary Education Online, 16(4), 1357-1383. https://doi.org/10.17051/ilkonline.2017.342960
• Alibali, M. W., Kita, S., & Young, A. J. (2000). Gesture and the process of speech production: We think, therefore we gesture. Language and Cognitive Processes, 15(6), 593–613. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909600750040571
• Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners’ and teachers’ gestures. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21, 247-286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.611446
• Arnheim, R. (1997). Visual thinking. University of California Press.
• Arzarello, F., Ferrara F., Robutti, O., & Paola, D. (2005). The genesis of signs by gestures the case of Gustavo. H. L. Chick & J. L. Vincent (Eds.), Proceedings of the 29th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, (Vol.1, pp. 127-131). PME.
• Arzarello, F., Paola, D., Robutti, O. & Sabena, C. (2009). Gestures as semiotic resources in the mathematics classroom. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(2), 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9163-z
• Aydın, S. (2014). Evaluation of students’ opinions on the spoken language used by teachers in classrooms. Buca Faculty of Education Journal, 37, 45-57.
• Ayık, C. (2000). Situation determination of the efficient use of individual hearing aids used by hearing impaired students in school environment. Çukurova University Journal of the Social Sciences Institute, 6(6), 59-70.
• Bloom, L. & Lahey, M. (1978). Language Development and Language Disorders. John Wiley & Sons.
• Chacón, G. R., & Hayes, C. (2023) Challenges for deaf students in mathematics graduate school. Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 70(8), 1289-1293. https://doi.org/10.1090/noti2751
• Cuxac, C. (1993). Iconicité des langues des signes [Iconicity of sign languages]. Faits de Langues, 1(1), 47-56. https://doi.org/10.3406/flang.1993.1034
• De Giacomo, A., Craig, F., Terenzio, V., Coppola, A., Campa, M. G. ve Passeri, G. (2016). Aggressive Behaviors and Verbal Communication Skills in Autism Spectrum Disorders. Global Pediatric Health, 3, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/2333794x16644360
• Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis: A user friendly guide for social scientists. Routledge.
• Dikyuva, H., Makaroğlu, B. ve Arık, E. (2015). Türk İşaret Dili Dilbilgisi Kitabı. Aile ve Sosyal Politikalar Bakanlığı Yayınları.
• Dreher, A., Kuntze, S., & Lerman, S. (2016). Why use multiple representations in the mathematics classroom? Views of English and German preservice teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14, 363-382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-015-9633-6
• Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1969). The repertoire of nonverbal behavior: Categories, origins, usage, and coding. Semiotica, 1(1), 49-98. https://doi.org/10.1515/semi.1969.1.1.49
• Eren, E. (1998). Yönetim ve organizasyon [Management and organization]. Beta Publishing.
• Glaser, P. (2005). A study of perceptions of mathematics sign: Implication for teaching [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Rochester Institute of Technology.
• Goldin-Meadow, S., Shield, A., Lenzen, D., Herzig, M., & Padden, C. (2012). The gestures ASL signers use tell us when they are ready to learn math. Cognition, 123(3), 448-453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2012.02.006
• Gregory, S. (2012). Mathematics and deaf children. In S. Gregory, P. Knight, W. McCracken, S. Powers & L. Watson (Eds.), Issues in deaf education (pp. 119-126). David Fulton Publishers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203064801
• Gürboğa, C., & Kargın, T. (2003). Investigation of communication methods/skills used by hearing impaired adults in different environments. Ankara University Journal of Faculty of Educational Sciences, 36(1-2), 51-64.
• Gürefe, N. (2015). The use of semiotic resources on description process some geometric concepts of deaf students (Publication no. 397369) [Doctoral dissertation, Gazi University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
• Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2012). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. Sage.
• Karal, H., & Çiftçi, E. (2008, May). Use of computer aided animation in the training of hearing impaired [Paper presentation]. 8th International Educational Technology Conference, Eskişehir, Türkiye.
• Keyton, J. (2005). Communication and organizational culture: A key to understanding work experiences. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.
• Kita, S. (2009). Cross-cultural variation of speech-accompanying gesture: A review. Language and Cognitive Processes, 24(2), 145–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690960802586188
• Klenke, K. (2016). Qualitative research in the study of leadership studies. Emerald.
• Krause, C. M., & Wille, A. M. (2021). Sign language in light of mathematics education. American Annals of the Deaf, 166(3), 352-377. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2021.0025
• Krauss, R. M. (1998). Why do we gesture when we speak? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 7(2), 54–54. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.ep13175642
• Leybaert, J., & Van Cutsem, M. (2002). Counting in sign language. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 81(4), 482–501. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2002.2660
• Lucas, C., Bayley, R., & Valli, C. (2003). What's your sign for pizza? An introduction to variation in American Sign Language. Gallaudet University Press.
• McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago.
• Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass.
• Mitchell, M. L. & Jolley, J. M. (2009). Research Design Explained. Wadsworth/Thomson.
• Nunes, T., & Moreno, C. (2002). An intervention program for promoting deaf pupils' achievement in mathematics. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 7(2), 120-133. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/7.2.120
• Oral, A. Z. (2015). Some strategies employed in the translation of non-equivalent word in Turkish sign language (TİD). Journal of Faculty of Letters, 32(2), 205-214.
• Özlav, E. (2019). Development of gestures of basic concepts in mathematics (Publication no. 548439) [Master’s thesis, Zonguldak Bülent Ecevit University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.
• Pagliaro, C. M. (2010). Mathematics instruction and learning of deaf and hard-of-hearing students: What do we know? Where do we go. In M. Marschark & P. E. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education (Vol. 2, pp. 156–171). Oxford University Press.
• Seeger, F. (2008). Intentionality and Sign: A developmental perspective. In L. Radford, G. Schubring, & F. Seeger (Eds.), Semiotics in Mathematics Education (pp. 1-18). Sense Publishers.
• Tanrıdiler, A. (2013). A literaure review on teaching mathematics to hearing-impaired students. Education Sciences, 8(1), 146-163.
• Titus, J. C. (1995). The concept of fraction number among deaf and hard of hearing students. American Annals of the Deaf, 140, 255–263.
• Traxler, C. B. (2000). The Stanford Achievement Test, 9th edition: National norming and performance standards for deaf and hard-of-hearing students. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 5(4), 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/5.4.337
• Worth, R. (1998). Communication skills. New York: Facts On File.
• Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods. Sage.
• Zhang, J. (2024). Cross-cultural communication of Chinese brands. Singapore: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-1371-4
• Zorkun Çağlayan, N. H. (2017). Semiotic approaches in Hittites Civilization and their application on ceramics (Publication no. 460530) [Master’s thesis, Marmara University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.

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.