Exploring Zimbabwean A-Level Mathematics Learners’ Understanding of the Determinant Concept
Conilius Chagwiza
,
Lillias Hamufari Natsai Mutambara
,
Gladys Sunzuma
Learners bring prior knowledge to their learning environments. This prior knowledge is said to have an effect on how they encode and later retrieve ne.
- Pub. date: December 15, 2021
- Pages: 85-100
- 262 Downloads
- 496 Views
- 0 Citations
Learners bring prior knowledge to their learning environments. This prior knowledge is said to have an effect on how they encode and later retrieve new information learned. This research aimed at exploring ‘A’ level mathematics learners’ understanding of the determinant concept of 3×3 matrices. A problem-solving approach was used to determine learners' conceptions and errors made in calculating the determinant. To identify the conceptions; a paper and pencil test, learner interviews, and learner questionnaires were used. Ten learners participated in the research and purposive sampling was used to select learners who are doing the syllabus 6042/2 Zimbabwe School Examination Council (ZIMSEC). Data was analyzed qualitatively through an analysis of each learners' problem-solving performance where common themes were identified amongst the learners’ work. Results from the themes showed that Advanced level learners faced some challenges in calculating the determinant of 3×3 matrices. Learners were having challenges with the place signs used in 3×3 matrices, especially when using the method of cofactors. The findings reveal that learners had low levels of engagement with the concepts and the abstract nature of the concepts was the major source of these challenges. The study recommends that; teachers should engage learners for lifelong learning and apply some mathematical definitions in real-world problems. Teachers should address the issues raised in this research during the teaching and learning process. In addition, teachers should engage learners more through seminars where learners get to mingle with others from other schools.
Keywords: Linear algebra, matrix, and determinant, understanding.
0
References
Asiala, M., Brown, A., De Vries, D., Dubinsky, E., Mathews, D., & Thomas, K. (2004). A framework for research and curriculum development in undergraduate mathematics education. Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education, 6, 1 -21. https://doi.org/10.1090/cbmath/006/01
Aygor, N., & Ozdag, H. (2012). Misconceptions in linear algebra: the case of undergraduate learners. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 2989 – 2994. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.602
Booth, J. L., & Koedinger, K. R. (2008). Key misconceptions in algebraic problem solving. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Cognitive Science Society (pp.571–576). Cognitive Science Society.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Observation. Research methods in education, 6, 396-412. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203029053-29
Dubinsky, E. (1991). Constructive aspects of reflective abstraction in advanced mathematics. In L.P. Steff (ed.), Epistemological foundations of mathematical experience (pp. 160-202). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3178-3_9
Dubinsky, E. (1997). Some thoughts on a first course in linear algebra at the college level. In D. Carlson, C. R. Johnson, D. C. Lay, A. Duane Porter, A. Watkins & W. Watkins (Eds.), Resources for Teaching Linear Algebra (pp. 85-105). Mathematical Association of America.
Dubinsky, E., & McDonald, M. (2001). APOS: a constructivist theory of learning in undergraduate mathematics education. In: D. Holton (Ed.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level (pp. 275–282). Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47231-7_25
Egodawatte, G. (2009). Is algebra really difficult for all learners? Acta Didacta Napocensia, 2(4), 101-106.
Gilmore, C. K., & Bryant, P. (2006). Individual differences in children's understanding of inversion and arithmetical skill. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(2), 309–331. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X39125
Hillel, J. (2000). Modes of Description and the Problem of Representation in Linear Algebra. In J. -L. Dorier (Ed.), On the Teaching of Linear Algebra (pp. 191-207). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47224-4_7
Kazunga, C., & Bansilal, S. (2017). Zimbabwean in-service mathematics teachers’ understanding of matrix operations. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 47, 81-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2017.05.003
Kazunga, C., & Bansilal, S. (2018). Misconceptions about determinants. In S. Stewart, C. A Larson, A. Berman & M. Zandieh (Eds.), Challenges and strategies in teaching linear algebra (pp. 127-145). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66811-6_6
Kazunga, C., & Bansilal, S. (2020). An APOS analysis of solving systems of equations using the inverse matrix method. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 103(3), 339-358. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-020-09935-6
Mutambara, L. H. N., & Bansilal, S. (2019). An exploratory study on the understanding of the vector subspace concept. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 23(1), 14-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/18117295.2018.1564496
Naidoo, R. (2011). Rethinking development: higher education and the new imperialism. In R. King, S. Marginson, & R. Naidoo (Eds.), A Handbook of Globalization and Higher Education (pp. 40-58). Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4337/9780857936233.00012
Ndlovu, Z., & Brijlall, D. (2015). Pre-service Teachers mental constructions of concepts in Matrix Algebra. African Journal of Research in Mathematics Science and Technology Education, 19(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10288457.2015.1028717
Ndlovu, Z., & Brijlall, D. (2016). Pre-service mathematics teachers’ mental constructions of the determinant concept. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 14(1-2), 145-156. https://doi.org/10.1080/09751122.2016.11890488
Ndlovu, Z., & Brijlall, D. (2019). Pre-service mathematics teachers’ mental constructions when using Cramer’s rule. South African Journal of Education, 39(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v39n1a1550
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of education and the psychology of the child. Orion.
Sherman, J., & Bisanz, J. (2007). Evidence for use of mathematical inversion by three-year-old children. Journal of Cognition and Development, 8, 333-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248370701446798
Sierpinska, A. (2000). On some aspects of students’ thinking in linear algebra. In J. L. Dorier (Ed.), On the teaching of linear algebra (pp. 209–246). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47224-4_8
Siyepu, S. W. (2013). An exploration of learners’ errors in derivatives in a University of Technology. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 32(3), 577-592 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2013.05.001
Stewart, S., & Thomas, M. O. J. (2007). Embodied, symbolic and formal aspects of basic linear algebra. In Woo, J. H., Lew, H. C., Park, K. S. & Seo, D. Y. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 201-208). PME.
Tall, D. (2008). The transition to formal thinking in mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(2), 5 -24. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03217474
Tall, D., & Vinner, S. (1981). Concept image and concept definition in mathematics with particular reference to limits and continuity. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 12, 151-169. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00305619
Zimbabwe School Examination Council. (2015). Ordinary level mathematics syllabus. Harare.