The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems

Kgaladi Maphutha; Satsope Maoto; Israel Kibirige

doi:10.29333/ejmste/12405

Full Text (PDF)

Kgaladi Maphutha ¹ ^* , Satsope Maoto ¹ , Israel Kibirige ¹

More Detail

¹ Department of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, University of Limpopo, Sovenga, SOUTH AFRICA^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

The study explored the effect of the activity-based approach (ABA) on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional (2D) trigonometric problems. A sequential explanatory design was used, starting with the quantitative, followed by the qualitative method. The experimental group (EG) and the control group (CG) were facilitated using ABA, while CG was taught using traditional teaching approach. A 2D trigonometry test was used as a pre- and post-test to measure learners’ performance. EG’s experiences of using ABA were captured through focus group interviews. The study findings reveal significant differences between EG and CG post-tests [t(100)=.3. 95; p=.05] with Cohen d=.79. Also, ABA did not segregate between boys and girls. Despite ABA being time-consuming, learners in EG developed collaborative skills, trigonometry vocabulary, the ability to solve trigonometric problems, and learning autonomy, which improved their performance. The study recommends ABA to improve learners’ performance.

Keywords

activity-based approach
enjoyed
autonomy
traditional teaching approach
learners’ performance

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.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2022, Volume 18, Issue 10, Article No: em2155

https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405

Publication date: 27 Aug 2022

Article Views: 1562

Article Downloads: 1416

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Barai, B. (2018). A study on effectiveness of learning physical science through activity-based methods at secondary level in Alipurduar district of West Bengal. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts, 6(1), 289-294. http://doi.one/10.1729/IJCRT.17295
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1997). Statistics notes: Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ, 314(7080), 572. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7080.572
Bradley, E. H., Curry, L. A., & Devers, K. J. (2007). Qualitative data analysis for health services research: developing taxonomy, themes, and theory. Health Services Research, 42(4), 1758-1772. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00684.x
Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Kluwer.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand McNally & Company.
Celik, H. C. (2018). The effects of activity-based learning on sixth grade students’ achievement and attitudes towards mathematics activities. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(5), 1963-1977.https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/85807
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203029053
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson.
DBE. (2011). Curriculum and assessment policy statement (CAPS) grades 10-12: Mathematics. Department of Basic Education.
DBE. (2017). South African Schools Act (84/1996): Amended National Norms and Standards for School Funding. Government Gazette, 622(40818).
DBE. (2020). National senior certificate-diagnostic report. Department of Basic Education.
Deringol, Y., Ugurluel, M., & Eren, S. B. (2021). The effect of activity-based teaching approach on the attitudes of math-activities and their beliefs about mathematics of elementary school fourth graders. Acta Didactica Napocensia [Napocensia Didactic Act], 14(2), 284-298. https://doi.org/10.24193/adn.14.2.21
Edmonds, W. A., & Kennedy, T. D. (2013). An applied reference guide to research designs: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. SAGE.
Emaikwu, S. O. (2012). Assessing the relative effectiveness of the three teaching methods in the measurement of students’ achievement in mathematics. Journal of Emerging Trends in Educational Research and Policy Studies, 3(4), 479-486. https://doi.org/10520/EJC126550
Estes, C. A. (2004). Promoting student-centred learning in experiential education. Journal of Experiential Education, 27(2), 141-160. https://doi.org/10.1177/105382590402700203
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education. McGraw-Hill.
Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 42-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300104
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X033007014
Kagenyi, D. G. (2016). Pedagogical factors affecting the learning of trigonometry [Doctoral dissertation, Kenyatta University].
Kaur, H., & Sankhian, A. (2017). Effect of activity-based method on achievement motivation and academic achievement in mathematics at secondary level. Educational Quest: An International Journal of Education and Applied Social Sciences, 8(2), 475-480. https://doi.org/10.5958/2230-7311.2017.00095.2
Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2001). Designing and conducting focus group interviews. Social Analysis Selected Tools and Techniques, 36, 4-23.
McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: evidence-based inquiry. Pearson.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. SAGE.
Mosese, N., & Ogbonnaya, U. I. (2021). GeoGebra and students’ learning achievement in trigonometric functions graphs representations and interpretations. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 16(2), 827-846. https://doi.org/10.18844/cjes.v16i2.5685
Moustakas, C. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658
Ngcobo, A. Z., Madonsela, S. P., & Brijlall, D. (2019). The teaching and learning of trigonometry. The Independent Journal of Teaching and Learning, 14(2), 72-91.
Noreen, R., & Rana, A. M. K. (2019). Activity-based teaching versus traditional method of teaching in mathematics at elementary level. Bulletin of Education and Research, 41(2), 145-159.
Pokhrel, T. R. (2018). Activity-based mathematics instruction: Experiences in addressing the 21st-century skills. Journal of Mathematics Education, 11(1), 46-61. https://doi.org/10.26711/007577152790020
Polit, D. F., & Beck, C. T. (2006). The content validity index: Are you sure you know what’s being reported? Critique and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health, 29(5), 489-497. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20147
Radford, L. (2008). Connecting theories in mathematics education: Challenges and possibilities. ZDM, 40(2), 317-327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-008-0090-3
Regmi, K. (2012). A review of teaching methods--Lecturing and facilitation in higher education (HE): A summary of the published evidence. Journal of Effective Teaching, 12(3), 61-76.
Serpe, A., & Frassia, M. G. (2021). Artefacts teach-math. the meaning construction of trigonometric functions. Atti della Accademia Peloritana dei Pericolanti-Classe di Scienze Fisiche, Matematiche e Naturali [Proceedings of the Peloritana Academy of Pericolanti-Class of Physical, Mathematical and Natural Sciences], 99(S1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1478/AAPP.99S1A15
Simons, M. D., & Wibawa, K. A. (2021). An ethnomethodological analysis of students’ understanding of the concept of trigonometry in a high-stakes examination in South Africa. Beta: Jurnal Tadris Matematika [Journal of Tadris Mathematics], 14(2), 93-106. https://doi.org/10.20414/betajtm.v14i2.459
Spangenberg, E. D. (2021). Manifesting of pedagogical content knowledge on trigonometry in teachers’ practice. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 5(3), 135-163. https://doi.org/10.33902/JPR.2021371325
Stein, M. K., & Smith, M. S. (1998). Mathematical tasks as a framework for reflection: From research to practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3(4), 268-275. https://doi.org/10.5951/MTMS.3.4.0268
Sullivan, G. M., & Feinn, R. (2012). Using effect size-or why the p value is not enough. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 4(3), 279-282. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-12-00156.1
Suter, W. N. (2011). Introduction to educational research: a critical thinking approach. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483384443
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioural research. SAGE.
Usman, A. N., Musta’ámal, A. H., & Muhammad, H. A. (2020). Effects of place-based and activity-based approaches in technical education, interest and retention. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(5A), 73-80. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.081911
Warfield, V. M. (2006). Invitation to didactique. http://www.math.washington.edu
Wijaya, T. T., Ying, Z., & Purnama, A. (2020a). Using Hawgent dynamic mathematic software in teaching trigonometry. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 15(10), 215-222. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v15i10.13099
Wijaya, T. T., Ying, Z., Cunhua, L., & Zulfah, Z. (2020b). Using VBA learning media to improve students’ mathematical understanding ability. Journal On Education, 2(3), 245-254. https://doi.org/10.31004/joe.v2i3.314
Zamanzadeh, V., Ghahramanian, A., Rassouli, M., Abbaszadeh, A., & Alavi, H. (2015). Design and implementation content validity study: Development of an instrument for measuring patient-centered communication. Journal of Caring Sciences, 4(5), 165-178. https://doi.org/10.15171/jcs.2015.017

How to cite this article

APA

Maphutha, K., Maoto, S., & Kibirige, I. (2022). The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(10), em2155. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405

Vancouver

Maphutha K, Maoto S, Kibirige I. The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2022;18(10):em2155. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405

AMA

Maphutha K, Maoto S, Kibirige I. The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2022;18(10), em2155. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405

Chicago

Maphutha, Kgaladi, Satsope Maoto, and Israel Kibirige. "The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2022 18 no. 10 (2022): em2155. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405

Harvard

Maphutha, K., Maoto, S., and Kibirige, I. (2022). The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 18(10), em2155. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405

MLA

Maphutha, Kgaladi et al. "The effect of the activity-based approach on grade 11 learners’ performance in solving two-dimensional trigonometric problems". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 18, no. 10, 2022, em2155. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/12405