Published
May 18, 2023
| Pages: 613-629 | Views: 1088
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to predict the mathematical literacy levels of the students participating in the research, through the data obtained from PISA 2015 exam organized by OECD using data mining and artificial neural network methods and to determine the variables that affect mathematics literacy. For this purpose, students' mathematics literacy levels and the variables that affect their mathematics literacy levels were analyzed separately for 6 different countries at different proficiency levels. The universe of the research is 519,334 students from 72 countries, who have taken PISA 2015 exam. The sample that was determined according to the purpose of the study consists of a total of 34,565 students from Singapore, Japan, Norway, USA, Turkey and the Dominican Republic, which have been observed to be at different proficiency levels. In the first stage of the study, analyzes were performed using data mining prediction methods. At this stage WEKA program was employed and M5P algorithm, which is one of the mostly used methods, was used. In the second stage of the research, the output variable was predicted from the input variables using Artificial Neural Networks methods to determine the extent to which decision trees obtained by M5P prediction method produce valid results. In the analyzes carried out in MATLAB program, the relationship between students' real math literacy scores and literacy scores predicted from input variables were examined. As a result of the study, the variables that affect mathematics literacy were found to be socio-economic status index for Singapore, Norway, United States, Turkey and Dominic. On the other hand, the variables influencing mathematics literacy for Japan were found to be mathematics learning time and father's education level. The consistency of the results was as follows: 86.10% for Singapore, 40.26% for Japan, 30.10% for Norway, 39.15% for America, 26.43% for Turkey and 29.24 % for Dominic. As a result of the study, a differentiation was found among the variables that affect mathematics literacy of the countries at different proficiency levels.
Listen -
References
Ackerman, P. L., & Kanfer, R. (2009). Test length and cognitive fatigue: An empirical examination of effects on performance and test-taker reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15 (2), 163–181.
Areepattamannil, S. & Kaur, B. (2013). Mathematics teachers' perceptions of their students' mathematical competence: relations to mathematics achievement, affect, and engagement in Singapore and Australia. Proceedings of the 36th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. 52-56.
Aksu, G. & Güzeller, C. O. (2018). Matlab Yapay Zeka ve İstatistik Uygulamaları, Ankara: Maya Publishing.
Baird, J., Isaacs, T., Johnson, S., Stobart, G., Yu, G., Sprague, T. & Daugherty, R. (2011) Policy Effects of PISA. Oxford: Oxford University Centre on Educational Assessment.
Bakioğlu, A. & Göçmen. G. (2013). Singapur eğitim sistemi. Ayşen Bakioğlu (Ed.), Karşılaştırmalı eğitim yönetimi (pp. 127-155). Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
Baykul, Y., & Güzeller, C., (2013). Sosyal Bilimler İçin İstatistik SPSS Uygulamalı. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayınevi.
Bienkowski, M., Feng, M., & Means, B. (2012). Enhancing teaching and learning through educational data mining and learning analytics: An issue brief. Washington, D.C: Department of Education.
Bos, M. S., Elías, A., Vegas, E., & Zoido, P. (2016). Latin America and the Caribbean in PISA 2015: How Did the Region Perform? Inter-American Development Bank. Retrieved from http://publications.iadb.org/handle/11319/7991
Breiman, L., Friedman, J., Stone, C. J. ve Olshen, R. A. (1984). Classification and Regression Trees, USA: CRC Press.
Brown, B. J. & Baker, S. (2012) Responsible Citizens: Individuals, Health and Policy under Neoliberalism. London: Anthem Press
Carnoy, M., & Rothstein, R. (2013). What Do International Test Scores Really Show about U.S. Student Performance? Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. http://www.epi.org/files/2013/EPI-What- do-international-testsreally-show-about-US-student-performance.pdf
CIU (2008). The Center For International Understanding, Learning from Singapore.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8 (1), 1–46.
Dierkes, J. (2010). Postwar History Education in Japan and the Germanys: Guilty Lessons, Routledge: London.
Drinck, B. (2002). Marktorientierung im japanischen Bildungssystem. Zeitschrift für Erziehungswissenschaft, 5 (2), 261-278.
Entrich, S. R. (2014). Effects of investments in out-of-school education in Germany and Japan. Contemporary Japan, 26, 71–102. https://doi.org/10.1515/cj-2014-0004
Fisbein, A., & Stanton, S. (2018). The future of education in Latin America and the Caribbean: Possibilities for United States investment and engagement. Washington, DC: USAID Report, Interamerican Dialogue.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E. & Hyun, H. H. (2012). How to design and evaluate research in education (Eight Edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Heyneman, S. P. (2013). The international efficiency of American education: The bad and the not-so-bad news. PISA, power, and policy: The emergence of global educational governance, 279-302. Levin, J. (2003). Relational Incentive Contracts, Working Paper 01002, Stanford University Department of Economics.
Mausethagen S. (2013). A research review of the impact of accountability policies on teachers’ workplace relations. Educ Res Rev, 9, 16‑33.
Nisbet, R., Elder, J. F., & Miner, G. (2009). Handbook of Statistical Analysis and Data Mining Applications, Amsterdam, Boston: Elsevier Academic Press.
OECD. (2010). The High Cost of Low Educational Performance - The Long-Run Economic Impact of Improving PISA Outcomes. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD. (2011). Does Participation in Pre-Primary Education Translate into Better Learning Outcomes at School?. PISA in Focus, No. 1. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD (2016). PISA 2015 Results: Excellence and Equity in Education, Volume I, OECD, Paris.
Romero, C., & Ventura, S. (2013). Data mining in education. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 3 (1), 12–27.
Souza, J., Matwin, S. & Japkowicz, N. (2002). Evaluating data mining models: a pattern language. In: 9th Conference on Pattern Language of Programs (PLOP’02), Monticello, Illinois, 8–12 September 2002.
Stacey, K. (2012). The International Assessment Of Mathematical Literacy: Pisa 2012 Framework And Items. 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education.
UNESCO, (2011). Transforming education: the power of ICT Policies. Paris, UNESCO.
Vaitsis, C., Hervatis, V., & Zary, N. (2016). Introduction to Big Data in education and its contribution to the quality improvement processes. In Big Data on Real-World Applications. InTech. Retrieved February 20, 2020, from https://www.intechopen.com/books/big-data-on-real-world-applications/introduction-to- big-data-in-education-and-its-contribution-to-the-quality-improvement-processes.
Youbi, A., Tierney, W., G., & Zahed, A.H. (2019). Successful Global Collaborations in Higher Education Institutions, Cham, Switzerland: springer.
Keywords
PISA, Mathematics literacy, Data mining, Artificial neural networks
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
