The Effects of Investigation Teaching Strategy Based on Multiple Intelligences in Raising the Van Hiele Levels of Geometric Thinking

Samir Najdi1, Randa El Sheikh2 1 Vice president of Alquds Open University, Palestine snajdi@qou.edu 2 Education Faculty, Alquds Open University, Palestine rnajdi@qou.edu ABSRTACT
The effects of Investigation Teaching Strategy (ITS) based on Multiple Intelligences (MI) in Raising Van Hiele (VH) levels of geometric thinking were studied on a seventh grade sample of 33 student.The students were first tested for their (VH) levels and (MI) to substantiate the relationship between these two variables. Then the effects of Investigation Teaching Strategy (ITS) based on (MI) in raising the (VH) Levels of thinking was studied on the sample as they were taught a geometric unit according to the (ITS). The results showed that: There was no statistically significant evidence that (VH) levels are related to a specific intelligence. The (VH) levels of geometric thinking were improved significantly indicating the effectiveness of the (ITS) strategy based on (MI). Accordingly, it is recommended that geometric contents of school books be reformatted and delivered to address all multiple Intelligences in the classes to give fair opportunities to students to develop their (VH) geometrical levels.

KEY WORDS:
Multiple Intelligences (MI), Van Hiele levels (VH), Investigation Teaching Strategy (ITS).

BACKGROUND Many students encounter difficulties and perform poorly in geometry, when their Van Hiele (VH) level of thinking is lower than should be (Knight, 2006; Halat, 2008). The (VH) Model of thinking has been extensively used in studies to conceptualize students' thinking in geometry at various levels (Chan, H., Tsai, P., & Huang, T.-Y. 2006). Van Hiele proposed five hierarchical levels that describe growth in students' thinking (Halat,E., 2006, 2008). These Levels are visualization, analysis, ordering or informal deduction, deduction, and rigor. Each level has its own langue and characteristics. They are instructional dependent rather than age-dependent (Van Hiele,1986). Researchers claim that students in grades 6-8 should be at the ordering level (Knight ,2006). Multiple intelligences (MI) is another educational model. It describes an array of different kinds of "intelligences" exhibited by human beings. It suggests that each individual manifests

varying levels of intelligences, and thus each person has a unique "cognitive profile" (Gardner & Hatch, 1989). Gardner claimed that the eight intelligences (Linguistic, Logical/Mathematical, Spatial, Musical, Bodily/Kinesthetic, Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Naturalist) do not exclude each other, on the contrary, they complement each other (Gardner 1999, 41-43). Traditionally, schools have emphasized the development of logical and linguistic intelligences (Gardner 1983; 1993). Gardner's theory argues that students will be better served by a broader vision of education, wherein teachers use different methodologies, to reach all students to promote high quality students' thinking, taking advantage of the uniqueness conferred on them as species exhibiting several intelligences' (ibid.: 45). Gardners (MI) model and (VH) Model, are two distinct areas of research, they do not oppose each other and can be used together to improve learning. The tactic used to integrate these two models is the (ITS) based on (MI) in raising (VH) of geometric thinking . (ITS) or as some educators called Social Investigation Strategy could be elucidated as follows:

D epartment of Education Queensland (1993), P12 Environmental Education Guide. Brisbane, p 2627

PURPOSE

This study aimed at achieving the following goals: To determine the (VH) levels of geometric thinking of seventh grade students sample. To illustrate the (MI) profile of the sample. To verify the relationship between the (VH) levels of geometric thinking and the (MI) profiles of the sample. To determine the effect of (ITS) based on (MI) model in raising (VH) levels of geometric thinking.

THE QUISTIONS OF THE STUDY The following questions guided this study: 1. What are the (VH) levels of geometric thinking of the seventh grade students? 2. What are the (MI) profiles of the seventh grade students? 3. Is there a relationship between (VH) levels of geometric thinking and the (MI) profiles of the seventh grade students? 4. Is there a difference between the (VH) geometric thinking levels of the seventh grade students before and after applying (ITS) based on (MI) model?

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STYD This study clarified the importance of implementing both (VH) and (MI) models in geometric curricula to enhance skills, knowledge, and to encourage higher-order of thinking so that students can make meaningful associations among information acquired during studying that are truly desirable in Palestine. METHODOLOGY Participants Since it was difficult to select a random sample of individuals, a convenience sampling was used as an experimental group. The sample was the seventh grade students from a private high school located in Jerusalem. The sample was 33 students, ages 12-14 years old. The experimental group were taught a geometric unit designed according to the (ITS) based on (MI). Measuring Tools Two instruments were used in the study to gather data; (VH) Geometric thinking level Test, and (MI) questionnaire. 1. (VH) Geometric Thinking Level Test

In order to determine students geometric thinking levels, a (VH) geometric thinking levels test included 25-multiple choice questions was developed and used as pre- and posttest. The levels were evaluated by five questions each. Cronbach Alpha reliability measures were found as 0.82, 0.51, 0.70, 0.69, and 0.68 for the first, second, third, forth and fifth level, respectively 2. (MI) questionnaire.

To assess students' multiple intelligences, in order to provide description of the capacities of students who display proclivities in specific intelligences. (MI) questionnaire composed of eighty one dichotomy (Yes or No) questions, was designed and used. In the questionnaire, each of the eight intelligences was assessed by nine questions out of the eighty one respectively. One point for each (yes) answer and zero point for each (no) answer were given. Thus, the possible score of each particular intelligence ranged from 0 to 9 points. Procedure The two measuring tools used in this study, the (VH) test and the (MI) questionnaire were developed and tested for reliability and validity and were piloted before the study. The final form of (VH) test was administered as pretest and posttest. Students were classified to eight separate groups according to the intelligence they were distinguished by. A pretest of the (VH) geometric thinking levels of the students was carried out in order to variety their geometric thinking levels. The seventh grade students involved in mathematics course using (ITS), all the questions and activities modified to cover all the eight intelligences, and to address each group of students according to their distinguish intelligence, providing a favorable environment for students to learn. Upon the completion of the treatment (VH) posttest was administered. The averages and standard deviation for each group as well as for the whole students, in the pre- and posttest were calculated. Data Analyses The data gathered through the (VH) geometric thinking levels pretest, posttest, and (MI) questionnaire were analyzed using Spss. To answer the first question: What are the VH levels of geometric thinking of the students? The results of (VH) pretest of the 33 students were collected; the percentages of each level were calculated as shown in table1. 39.3% of the 33 students were below (Visualization), 24.2% were at that level, 30.3% were at (Analysis) and only 6.2% were at (Ordering) the level

that seventh grade students should be at, while none of them reached the last two levels. These findings were in line with the findings of Knight (2006).
Table 1: Students' (VH) levels distribution. VH Levels No students Proportion Below Visualization 13 39.3% Visualization 8 24.2% Analysis 10 30.3% Ordering 2 6.2% deduction 0 0% Rigor 0 0%

The distribution of seventh grade students shown in fig 1

14 12 No of students 10 8 6 4 2 0 Below Visualization Analysis Ordering deduction Rigor le ve ls

Fig 1: The distribution of seventh grade students The second question: What are the (MI) profiles of the participants? The students were profiled according to the MI theory. The results showed that the linguistic intelligence was predominant followed by the Logical-mathematical intelligence. This was expected since most school mathematics text books and instruction are based on verbal and logical pedagogy. The spatial intelligence came third, and on the forth place came the interpersonal intelligence. On the fifth place came the bodily kinesthetic intelligence, and on the sixth place came the intrapersonal. Musical and natural intelligences came last which could be due to the lack of musical instruments at schools because of harsh economic situation educational system goes through in Palestine, along with the political siege that restricts natural trips and travel. The average, percentage, and standard deviation for each intelligence were calculated, as shown in table 2.
Table 2: The average and standard deviation of the (MI) questionnaire of the sample

questionnaire

Logicalmathematical

Intrapersonal

Interpersonal

Bodilykinesthetic

No of Stud No of Quest
Sum of responses

SD Average percentage Rank

The third question: Is there a relationship between (VH) levels of geometric thinking and the (MI) profiles of the seventh grade students? The average and standard deviation of the (VH) pretest and posttest were calculated for each group after finishing the experiment. The corresponding null hypotheses: There is no significant difference between the mean of (VH) pretest and the mean of posttest of each group at) p=0.05) due to the (ITS) based on (MI), was tested. Table 3 showed results of the Wilcoxon test for dependent samples. Table 3: Wilcoxon for dependent samples results grou p
Spatial Intrapersonal Interpersonal Logicalmathematica l Bodilykinesthetic Linguistic Naturalist

Mean Pretest Mean Posttest Wilcoxon

P=0.05

The results specified that there were significantly improvement in all the groups' (VH) levels of geometric thinking. This indicates that there is no significant relationship between a specific intelligence and a certain level of geometric thinking, which means that if a group of students are instructed according to their favorite intelligences regardless of what these intelligences are, an improvement in their (VH) geometric levels will occur. The fourth question: What is the effect of (ITS) based on (MI) model in raising (VH) levels of geometric thinking? The corresponding null hypotheses: There is no significant difference between the means of (VH) pretest and posttest at (p=0.05) due to the (ITS) based on (MI) model, was tested. The mean of (VH) pretest of the 33 students was (1.1) and the mean of (VH) posttest was (2.1). The T-Test for dependent samples was conducted. The results of this analysis appear in table 4.

Data of MI

Linguistic

Naturalist

Musical

Spatial

MI

339 209 2.01 6.33 14.6 1

339 197 1.96 5.96 13.8 2

339 194 2.3 5.87 13.6 3

339 172 1.99 5.21 12.0 5

339 143 2.08 4.33 10.0 8

339 188 2.30 5.69 13.2 4

339 169 1.99 5.12 11.8 6

339 152 2.00 4.6 11.0 7

3381 1424 2.07 5.38 100

Musical

1.7 2.3 0.02

1.08 1.93 0.007

1.05 2.05 0.038

1.33 2.4 0.03

0.7 1.25 0.016

1.01 1.96 0.044

1.10 2.2 0.03

1.25 2.2 0.010

Table 4: Paired Sample T-Test

Paired Differences Std. Deviati on Std. Error Mean 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference Lower upper Sig. (2tailed

Mean

T 0.8

Df 29
0.0

Pos-pre

1.0

0.8

1.6

0.4

0.7

According to the results of T-Test, significant differences were found (T= 0.8, p= 0.05) indicated that the effect of (ITS) based on (MI) instruction was significant in raising students' (VH) geometric thinking level.
DISCUSSION AND RECOMONDATIONS

The findings of the study confirmed that the (ITS) based on (MI) instruction has a positive significant effect on students (VH) levels of geometric thinking, this is in line with (Tepo, 1991), (Borasi, 1996). It also indicated the efficiency of (ITS) based on (MI) instruction in facilitating an explicit understanding of geometric concepts and in raising the (VH) levels of geometric thinking. This is partly attributed to the capability of (ITS) based on (MI) instruction to personalize learning methods. This finding is prominent when considering the suggestions of (Halat, 2007), (Geddes & Fortunato, 1993), (Najdi, 2009) that students can learn best when mathematical topics are presented in an enjoyable and interesting way that challenges their intellectual development. Based on the results of this study we recommend that elementary school teachers provide their students with experiences to help them move to deduction level by the end of the eighth grade. More quantitative studies should be conducted on the effects of (ITS) in different mathematical topics. Researches on the comparison of the effects of (ITS) based on (MI) instruction and other teaching methods would be profitable.

REFERENCES
Borasi, R. 1996. Reconceiving Mathematics Instruction Focus on Errors. Ablex Publishing Corporation Norwood, New York. Chan, H., Tsai, P., & Huang, T.-Y. (2006). Web-based Learning in a Geometry Course. Educational Technology & Society, 9(2), 133-140. Gardner, Howard (1999). The Disciplined Mind: Beyond Facts And Standardized Tests, The K-12 Education That Every Child Deserves, New York: Simon and Schuster (and New York: Penguin Putnam). Gardner, Howard (1983; 1993) Frames of Mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, New York: Basic Books. The second edition was published in Britain by Fontana Press. Gardner, H., & Hatch, T. (1989). Multiple intelligences go to school: Educational implications of the theory of multiple intelligences. Educational Researcher, 18(8), 4-9.

Halat,E. (2006). Sex-related differences in the acquisition of the Van Hiele levels and motivation in learning geometry. Asia Pacific Education Review, vol 7(2), 173-183 Halat,E. (2007). Reform-based curriculum & acquisition of the levels. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education.vol.3(1):41-49. Halat,E. (2008). In-Service Middle and High School Mathematics Teachers: Geometric Reasoning Stages and Gender. The Mathematics Educator. 2008, Vol. 18, No. 1, 8. Najdi.S & Elsheikh, R (2009). The Effects of Multiple Intelligence Theory in Rasing the Van Heile Levels of Thinking of Alquds Open University Learner. Abstract proceeding of the 1st international conference of living theorists "Howerd Gardner" may 23-24,2009 Burdur/Turky. Knight, K.C. (2006). An investigation into the change in the Van Hiele level of understanding geometry of pre-service elementary and secondary mathematics teachers. Unpublished Masters Thesis. University of Main. Teppo, A. 1991. Van Hiele of Geometric Thought Revisited. Mathematics Teacher, Vol. (84), No (3): 210-221.

Van Hiele, P. M. (1986). Structure and insight: A theory of mathematics education. New York: Academic Press.
Department of Education Queensland (1993), P12 Environmental Education Guide. Brisbane, p 26 27.http://education.qld.gov.au/tal/curriculum_exchange/teachers/sose/docs/inqu_soc.pdf.

7/6/2009.