Didactic Praxeological Analysis of Indonesian and Singaporean Mathematics Textbooks: Mathematical Practices in Transformation Geometry
)
| 
Country:
(1) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
(2) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
(3) Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia, Indonesia
Corresponding Author
10.23960/jpmipa.v26i2.pp905-923
| Metrics→ |
| Indexing Site→ |  |
 |
 |
 |
Copyright (c) 2025 Nur Eva Zakiah, Didi Suryadi, Suhendra Suhendra
This study aims to compare the contents of mathematics textbooks from Indonesia and Singapore, focusing on the activities of learning mathematics on transformation geometry material at the junior secondary level. We adopt the concept of didactic praxeology, which is a sub-theory of the Anthropological Theory of The Didactic (ATD). Using the ATD framework, our approach considers textbooks as empirical sources that can reveal knowledge that will be taught in the didactic transposition process. This study uses content analysis techniques with a qualitative approach. Textbooks are analyzed using praxeological analysis; types of tasks and techniques (praxis block) and technology and theory (logos block). The results of the didactic praxeological analysis show that there are differences in mathematical practices between the two textbooks. These differences can be used to complement the activity section in understanding the material. We further discuss our findings to outline the theoretical and methodological aspects of this study, which can potentially contribute to future research on textbooks in mathematics education.
Keywords: ATD, praxeology, textbook, transformation geometry.
Achiam, M (2014). Didactic transposition: from theoretical notion to research programme. Paper presented at the biannual ESERA (European Science Education Research Association) doctoral summer school August 25-29 in Kappadokya, Turkey.
Boaler, J. (2015). Mathematical mindsets: unleashing students' potential through creative math, inspiring messages and innovative teaching. Jossey-Bass
Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2006). Twenty-five years of the didactic transposition. ICMI Bulletin, 58: 51-65.
Bosch, M., & Gascón, J. (2014). Introduction to the anthropological theory of the didactic (ATD). In A. Bikner-Ahsbahs & S. Prediger (Eds.), Networking of theories as a research practice in mathematics education (pp. 67–83). Switzerland: Springer.
Brousseau, G. (2002). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Kluwer Academi Publisher.
Chang C, Tsai L, & Wu, K. (2018). Int. J. Soc. Sci. 65 1-15.
Chegini, N., Dehghani, M., Salehi. K, & Yazdankhoo, S. (2023). A comparative study of teaching critical thinking in japanese and iranian third-grade mathematics textbooks. Iranian Journal of Comparative Education, 6(2), 2371-2402.
Chevallard, Y. (2006). Steps towards a new epistemology in mathematics education. In M. Bosch (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4th conference of the European society for research in mathematics education (pp. 21-30). Sant Feliu de Guíxols: CERME 4
Chevallard, Y., & Bosch, M. (2014). Didactic transposition in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 170-173). Dordrecht: Springer.
Chevallard, Y., & Bosch, M. (2020). Didactic transposition in mathematics education. In Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 214-218). Springer International Publishing.
Dos Santos, S. P., & Farias, L. M. S. (2022). The anthropological theory of the didactic in brazilian researches. Mathematics Enthusiast, 19(2), 501-525.
Elisya, N., Dahlan, J. A., & Yulianti, K. (2024). Epistemological obstacles of secondary school students in solving pisa-standard mathematical literacy problems related to functions. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 25(4): 1771-1786.
Erbas, A. K., Alacaci, C., & Bulut, M. (2012). A comparison of mathematics textbooks from Turkey, Singapore, and the United States of America. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 12(3), 2324-2330.
Fan, L. (2013). Textbook research as scientific research: towards a common ground on issues and methods of research on mathematics textbooks. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 765-777.
Fan, L., Trouche, L., Qi, C., Rezat, S., & Visnovska, J. (Eds.). (2018). Research on mathematics textbooks and teachers’ resources: advances and issues. Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Fathimah, N. S, Arianti, A. S., & Junaeti, E. (2024). Knowledge to be taught of computational thinking: a praxeological analysis. Jurnal Pendidikan MIPA, 25(4): 1752-1770.
Fischer, L., Hilton, J., Robinson, T. J., & Wiley, D. A. (2015). A multi-institutional study of the impact of open textbook adoption on the learning outcomes of post-secondary students. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 27(3), 159-172.
Fuadiah, N. F., Suryadi, D., & Turmudi. (2019). Teaching and learning activities in classroom and their impact on student misunderstanding: a case study on negative integers. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 407-424.
Fuys, D., Geddes, D., & Tischler, R. (1988). The van hiele model of thinking in geometry among adolescents. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education Monograph Number 3. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in english, french and german classrooms: who gets an opportunity to learn what?. British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 567-590.
Hendriyanto, A., Suryadi, D., Dahlan, J. A., & Juandi, D. (2023). Praxeology review: comparing singaporean and indonesian textbooks in introducing the concept of sets. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 19(2).
Ibrahim, Z. B., & Othman, K. I. (2010). Comparative study of secondary mathematics curriculum between Malaysia and Singapore. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 8(5): 351-355.
Jones, K., Bokhove, C., Howson, G., & Fan, L. (Eds.). (2014). Proceedings of the international conference on mathematics textbook research and development. Southampton, England: University of Southampton.
Kang, W., & Kilpatrick, J. (1992). Didactic transposition in mathematics textbooks. For the Learning of Mathematics, 12(1), 2–7.
Kaur, B. (2019). Evolution of Singapore’s school. In C. P. Vistro-Yu, & T. L. Toh (Eds.), School mathematics curricula, mathematics education-An Asian perspective (pp. 21-37). Springer Singapore.
Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.) (2001). Adding it up: helping children learn mathematics. National Academies Press.
Kristanto, A., Mustaji, Mariono, A., Sulistiowati, & Nuryati, D. W. (2018). Developing media module proposed to editor in editorial division. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 947, 012054.
Kul, U., Sevimli, E., & Aksu, Z. (2018). A comparison of mathematics questions in turkish and canadian school textbooks in terms of synthesized taxonomy. Turkish Journal of Education, 7(3): 136-155.
Miyakawa, T. (2016). Comparative analysis on the nature of proof to be taught in geometry: the cases of french and japanese lower secondary schools. Educ Stud Math.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics.
OECD. (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume I): The State of Learning and Equity in Education, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris.
Pepin, B., Gueudet, G., & Trouche, L. (2013). Investigating textbooks as crucial interfaces between culture, policy and teacher curricular practice: Two contrasted case studies in France and Norway. ZDM Mathematics Education, 45(5), 685-698.
Permendikbudristek, (2022). Standar proses pada pendidikan anak usia dini, jenjang pendidikan dasar, dan jenjang pendidikan menengah
Purnomo, Y. W., Mastura, F. S., & Perbowo, K. S. (2019). Contextual features of geometrical problems in indonesian mathematics textbooks. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1315(1).
Ramelan, M., & Wijaya, A. (2019). A comparative analysis of indonesian and singaporean mathematics textbooks from the perspective of mathematical creativity: a case statistics and probability. IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1320: 012037.
Reyhani & Izadi. (2018). Comparative content analysis of mathematics textbooks taught to the first grade students of elementary schools in Iran, Japan and America. Int. J. Industrial Mathematics. ISSN 2008-5621. 10(3).
Swan, M. (2005). Improving learning in mathematics: challenges and strategies. Department for Education and Skills, UK.
Sianturi, I. A. J., Ismail, Z., & Yang, D. C. (2021). A crossnational comparison of mathematical problems on numbers and operations-related topics in five countries. School Science and Mathematics, 121(2), 72-84.
Sievert, H., van den Ham, A. K., Niedermeyer, I., & Heinze, A. (2019). Effects of mathematics textbooks on the development of primary school children’s adaptive expertise in arithmetic. Learning and Individual Differences, 74.
Suryadi, D., Itoh, T., & Isnarto. (2023). A prospective mathematics teacher’s lesson planning: An in-depth analysis from the anthropological theory of the didactic. Journal on Mathematics Education. 14(4), 723-740.
Takeuchi, H., & Shinno, Y. (2020). Comparing the lower secondary textbooks of Japan and England: A praxeological analysis of symmetry and transformations in geometry. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(4), 791-810.
Thompson, D. R., & Senk, S. L. (2014). The same geometry textbook does not mean the same classroom enactment. ZDM Mathematics Education, 46: 781-795.
Toprak, Z., & Özmantar, M. F. (2022). A comparative study of fifth-grade mathematics textbooks used in Turkey and Singapore. International Consortium for Research in Science & Mathematics Education (ICRSME), 26(3): 106-128.
Valverde, G. A., Bianchi, L. J., Wolfe, R. G., Schmidt, W. H., & Houang, R. T. (2002). According to the book: Using TIMSS to investigate the translation of policy into practice through the world of textbooks. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and insight: a theory of mathematics education. Academic Press.
Van de Walle, J. A., Karp, K. S., & Bay-Williams, J. M. (2013). Elementary and middle school mathematics: teaching developmentally. Pearson.
Wang, Y., Barmby, P., Bolden, D. (2015). Understanding linear function: a comparison of selected textbooks from england and Shanghai. Int J of Sci and Math Educ.
Wang, C., Shinno, Y., Xu, B., & Miyakawa, T. (2023). An anthropological point of view: exploring the Chinese and Japanese issues of translation about teaching resources. ZDM Mathematics Education, 55: 705–717.
Weinberg, A., & Wiesner, E. (2011). Understanding mathematics textbooks through reader-oriented theory. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76(1), 49–63.
Winsløw, C., Barquero, B., De Vleeschouwer, M., & Hardy, N. (2014). An institutional approach to university mathematics education: From dual vector spaces to questioning the world. Research in Mathematics Education, 16(2), 95–111.
Yunianta, T. N. H., Suryadi, D., Dasari, D., & Herman, T. (2023). Textbook praxeological-didactical analysis: Lessons learned from the Indonesian mathematics textbook. Journal on Mathematics Education, 14(3), 503-524.
Zakiah, N. E. (2020). Level kemampuan metakognitif siswa dalam pembelajaran matematika berdasarkan gaya kognitif. Jurnal Riset Pendidikan Matematika, 7(2), 132-147.
Zakiah, N. E., & Fajriadi, D. (2020b). Management of authentic assessment in mathematics lessons to develop 4C skills. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 1613 012050.
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.