Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: The development of deductive reasoning in mathematics as influenced by methods of teaching a modern mathematics syllabus in some English secondary schools
Author: El-Mogti, M. A.
Awarding Body: Institute of Education, University of London
Current Institution: UCL Institute of Education (IOE)
Date of Award: 1978
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Ten mathematics projects have been developed recently for the secondary school in the U.K. From among these projects the SMP syllabus was chosen as most suitable for this research. This syllabus has been taught for a relatively long period, and deductive reasoning ability is one of the most vital objectives of teaching mathematics. None of the earlier research has investigated the development of this ability as influenced by methods of teaching the S.M.P. syllabus . The present research attempts to fill this gap. It is hypothesized that "an amalgamation of some methods of teaching could be more effective in developing of students' deductive reasoning ability than a particular and different amalgamation", To test this hypothesis two samples (O-level and A-level) were drawn at random from four secondary schools within SO miles radius of London. The students received a deductive reasoning test in the first term of the session 1977- 78 (pre-test). During the second term the teaching behaviour of the mathematics teachers, while teaching each sample, was observed using an observation system. The methods of teaching were identified and grouped to form amalgamations. According to the latter the students in each sample classified in groups. At the end of the third term the post-test was completed. Students' scores were statistically analysed. The results revealed that the second amalgamation (synthetic method and problem solving method) was more effective than the first one (synthetic method, problem solving method and lecture method) in developing a-level students' deductive reasoning ability. The three amalgamations employed in A-level (synthetic method and problem solving method), (synthetic method, problem solving method, lecture method) and (synthetic method, problem solving method, inductive method and lecture method) did not affect A-level students' ability. Consequently, the hypothesis was accepted in a-level, and rejected in A-level.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available