No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The aim of this study was to compare motivation of sixth-grade students engaged in instruction using reform-based curriculum with sixth-grade students engaged in instruction using a traditional curriculum. There were 273 sixth-grade mathematics students, 123 in the control group and 150 in the treatment group, involved in the study. This study took place in North Florida. The researchers used a questionnaire, the Course Interest Survey (CIS), administered to the students before and after a five-week of instruction. The paired-samples t-test, the independent-samples t-test, and ANCOVA with α = 0.05 were used to analyze the quantitative data. The study showed that there was a statistically significant difference in motivation between the groups favoring the treatment group. In other words, the reform-based curricula designed on the basis of van Hiele theory, compared to a traditional one, had more positive effects on students' overall motivation in learning geometry at the sixth grade level.

The aim of this study was to compare the acquisition of the van Hiele levels of sixthgrade students engaged in instruction using a reform-based curriculum with sixth-grade students engaged in instruction using a traditional curriculum. There were 273 sixthgrade mathematics students, 123 in the control group and 150 in the treatment group, involved in the study. The researcher administered a multiple-choice geometry test to the students before and after a five-week of instruction. The test was designed to detect students' reasoning stages in geometry. The independent-samples t-test, the pairedsamples t-test and ANCOVA with α = .05 were used to analyze the data. The study demonstrated that although both types of instructions had positive impacts on the students' progress, there was no statistical significant difference detected in the acquisition of the levels between the groups.