Teaching Mathematics in Open Distance Learning (ODL): Does it make a Difference with Teaching in the Traditional Approach?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61538/huria.v13i0.96Abstract
Teaching mathematics through open distance learning (ODL) has been a challenge to mathematics educators due to the nature of communication with learners and material delivery during instruction. Traditionally, mathematics was taught mainly through face-to-face interaction and the learners were able to interact with materials provided and also interact among themselves in the classroom. Some critics of ODL doubt whether ODL modes can impart adequate mathematical critical thinking and solving problem skills to learners as has been considered in the traditional approach. In this paper, as a case study, we look at the performance of one mathematics module offered through ODL and determine whether the module offered was to the expected quality. A sample of 50 student-teachers’ examination results in the module written in year 2010 was analyzed on the six levels of the Bloom’s taxonomy in the cognitive domain and the set exam evaluated in the same levels of the taxonomy. The findings showed that while the general performance was averagely good, most students performed well in lower levels of cognitive domain while performing poorly in the higher levels. These findings indicated that while students had a general good average score in the module, they had not achieved adequate knowledge in higher levels important for critical thinking and problem solving required for a mathematics student-teacher in a teacher training programme. It was believed by the researcher that current modes of module delivery were not adequate enough to prepare mathematics student-teachers become competent in higher levels in cognitive achievement. It was concluded that current ODL modes of delivery in mathematics did not make any significant difference with the traditional approach of face-to-face mode of instruction to improve performance in the subject. It was recommended that current ODL modes of the module delivery at UNISA and also other maths modules be improved and renovated by involving current technologies, to conduct research on effective online programmes, and to equip regional centers with enough learning resources for easy access to learnersReferences
Abrams, G. and Haefner, J. (2002). Blending Online and Traditional Instruction in the Mathematics Classroom. The Technology Source. http://ts.mivu.org/ default.asp?show=article&id=1034. Retrieved 4th January 2011.
Agbelekawe, (2010). The challenges of open learning in the developing world. International Conference on Open and distance learning. University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria, March 24, 2010. http://www.checkpoint-elearning.com/article/8308.html
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc. http://www.nwlink. com/~ donclark/hrd/bloom.html
Bukova-Güzel, E. (2010). An investigation of pre-service mathematics teachers’
pedagogical content knowledge, using solid objects. Scientific Research and Essays Vol. 5(14), pp. 1872-1880. http://www.col.org/resources/speeches/2005presentations/Pages/2005-11-11.aspx
Gilmer, P.J. (2001). Opalescence at the triple point: Teaching, research and service. In P.C. Taylor, P.J. Gilmer, and K.G. Tobin (Eds.), Transforming undergraduate science teaching. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Kaino, L.M. (2007). Mathematical investigations using mathematica. An innovative way in teaching and learning mathematics. Lonaka Bulletin. October Issue 2007
Kaino, L.M. (2008). Technology in instruction: narrowing the gender gap? Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education (EJMSTE),4(3),263-268.
Liu, Y. and Kaino, L. M. (2007). Geometer’s Sketchpad and MSW Logo in Mathematics
classroom instruction. A comparative analysis. Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics 2, 112-118.
Mashharawi, I. (2000). Teaching Mathematics through Distance Learning. In Al- Quds Open University. International Conference on Mathematics Education into the 21st century: mathematics for living. Aman, Jordan, November 18-23, 2000.
http://math.unipa.it/~grim/EMashhawai7.PDF. Retrieved 16.03.2011
Maor, D. (1999). Teacher and student reflections on interactions in an Internet based unit. In K. Martin, N. Stanley and N. Davison (Eds), Teaching in the Disciplines/ Learning in Context, 257-261. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, The University of Western Australia, February 1999. Perth: UWA.
http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/asu/pubs/tlf/ tlf99/km/maor.html
Maor, D. (1998). How does one evaluate students' participation and interaction in an Internet-based unit? In Black, B. and Stanley, N. (Eds), Teaching and Learning in Changing Times, 176-182. Proceedings of the 7th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, The University of Western Australia, February 1998. Perth: UWA. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/asu/pubs/tlf/tlf98/maor .html
Open University (2011). Online Teaching Degree With Mathematics at the Open University.
http://www.suite101.com/content/online-teaching-degree-with-mathematicsat-the-open-university-a180699#ixzz1GmDUVdYW. Retrieved on 16.03.2011
Perraton, H. (2000). Open Distance Learning in the developing world. Taylor & Francis Group Publishers.
Pityana, B.N. (2009). Open Distance Learning in the developing world: trends, progress and challenges. Keynote speech delivered on the occasion of the M – 2009 23rd ICDE World Conference on Open Learning and Distance Education. “Flexible Education for All: Open –Global – Innovative†7 – 10 June 2009, Maastricht, the
Netherlands. http://www.unisa.ac.za/contents/about/principle/docs/ICDEMaastricht250609.pdf
Porter, M. E. (2008). The Five Forces That Shape Strategy. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2000). Implementing Standards-based Mathematics Instruction: A Casebook for Professional Development. New York: Teachers College Press.
Taylor, P. and Maor, D. (2000). Assessing the efficacy of online teaching with the Constructivist On-Line Learning Environment Survey. In A. Herrmann and M.M. Kulski (Eds), Flexible Futures in Tertiary Teaching. Proceedings of the 9th
Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 2-4 February 2000. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2000/taylor.html
Taylor, P., Dawson, V., Geelan, D., Stapleton, A., Fox, R., Herrmann, A. and Parker, L. (1999). Virtual teaching or virtually teaching? Does Internet-based teaching require multiple metaphors of mind? In K. Martin, N. Stanley and N. Davison (Eds), Teaching in the Disciplines/ Learning in Context, 429-432. Proceedings of the 8th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, The University of Western Australia, February 1999. Perth: UWA. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/asu/pubs/tlf/tlf99/tz/taylor-p.html
Tobin, K.G. (2001). Learning to teach science using the internet to connect communities of learners. In P.C. Taylor, P.J. Gilmer, and K.G. Tobin (Eds.), Transforming Undergraduate Science Teaching. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
