A framework for analysing learning materials focusing on opportunities for developing mathematical competence: An application to an 8th-grade mathematics textbook
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2026.14.2.07Keywords:
mathematical competence, domain-specific competence, mathematics textbook analysis, quantitative analysis, content analysisAbstract
Eesti põhikooli riikliku õppekava ainevaldkonna "Matemaatika" kohaselt on matemaatikaõppe eesmärk kujundada õpilastel eakohane matemaatikapädevus, mida peaks toetama õppematerjalid, ent meil puudub teadmine, kuidas need seda rolli täidavad. Siinse uuringu eesmärk on luua õpilaste matemaatikapädevuse arendamisvõimalustele keskenduv õppematerjalide analüüsimise raamistik ja uurida selle alusel 8. klassi matemaatikaõpikus pakutavaid võimalusi õpilaste matemaatikapädevuse terviklikuks arendamiseks. Uuringu käigus loodud raamistik käsitleb kolme dimensiooni: matemaatikapädevus (6 kategooriat), pädevusega seotud tegevus (4) ja pädevuse arendamise potentsiaal (5). Õpiku analüüs näitab, et ülesannetest on 78% protseduurilised, 21% arendavad kommunikatsioonipädevust, 20% esituspädevust, 5% arutluspädevust, 3% probleemi lahendamise ja 3% seoste loomise pädevust ning 59% eeldavad tegevusena jäljendamist ja 44% konstrueerimist. Pädevuse arendamise seisukohast neutraalseid või sihipärast arendamist kitsendavaid ülesandeid on 12%.
Downloads
References
Ackerman, D. (2018). Textbooks and tasks in the teaching and learning of mathematics. Pythagoras: Journal of the Association for Mathematics Education of South Africa, 39(1), 1–12. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1209157.pdf
Bieda, K. N., Ji, X., Drwencke, J., & Pickard, A. (2014). Reasoning‑and‑proving opportunities in elementary mathematics textbooks. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.06.005
Bingolbali, F., & Bingolbali, E. (2019). One curriculum and two textbooks: Opportunity to learn in terms of mathematical problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31, 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0250-x
Charalambous, C. Y., Delaney, S., Hsu, H. Y., & Mesa, V. (2010). A comparative analysis of the addition and subtraction of fractions in textbooks from three countries. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 12(2), 117–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060903460070
Elazzabi, A. A. K., Kaçar, A. (2018). A comparative analysis of ratio and proportion problems in Libyan and Turkish mathematics textbooks. International Journal of Educational Studies in Mathematics, 5(4), 132–139.
Durmus, S., & Kirenli, S. (2024). The investigation of middle school mathematics textbooks in terms of mathematics’ connection to nature and science. Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education, 9(1), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v9i1.3858
Fan, L. (1998). Applications of arithmetic in the United States and Chinese textbooks: A comparative study. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna, & I. Huntly (Eds.), International comparison in mathematics education (pp. 151–162). Falmer Press.
Fan, L., Zhu, Y., & Miao, Z. (2013). Textbook research in mathematics education: Development status and directions. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 45, 633–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0539-x
Feinstein, A. R., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1990). High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43(6), 543–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-L
Glasnović Gracin, D. (2018). Requirements in mathematics textbooks: A five-dimensional analysis of textbook exercises and examples. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 49(7), 1003–1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1431849
Große, C. S., & Renkl, A. (2006). Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 122–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.02.001
Gwet, K. L. (2014). Handbook of inter-rater reliability: The definitive guide to measuring the extent of agreement among raters (4th ed.). Advanced Analytics, LLC.
Hadar, L. L. (2017). Opportunities to learn: Mathematics textbooks and students’ achievements, Studies in Educational Evaluation, 55, 153–166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2017.10.002
Hemmi, K., Lepik, M., Madej, L., Bråting, K., & Smedlund, J. (2019). Introduction to early algebra in Estonia, Finland and Sweden – Some distinctive features identified in the textbooks for Grades 1–3. In U. T. Jankvist, M. van denHeuvel-Panhuizen, & M. Veldhuis (Eds.), Proceedings of the Eleventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education, CERME11 (pp. 2039–2046). Freudenthal Group & Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University and ERME.
Huntley, M. A., Terrell, M. S., & Fonger, N. L. (2024). A content analysis of the algebra strand of six commercially available U.S. high school textbook series. Education Sciences, 14(8), 845. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14080845
Johanson, M., Pedaste, M., & Baucal, A. (2023). Matemaatikapädevuse dimensioonid ja nende hindamine põhikoolis. Estonian Journal of Education/Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 11(2), 129–165. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2023.11.2.06
Johanson, M., Pedaste, M., Pastak, M., Täht, K., Sõrmus, M., & Jukk, H. (2021). Matemaatikapädevuse hindamine Eesti e-tasemetöödega. Estonian Journal of Education/Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 9(2), 100–126. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2021.9.2.05
Jäder, J., Lithner, J., & Sidenvall, J. (2020). Mathematical problem solving in textbooks from twelve countries. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(7), 1120–1136. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1656826
Kaldmäe, K., Kontson, A., Matiisen, K., & Pais, E. (2025). Matemaatika 8. klassile: 1. osa. Avita. ISBN 978-9985-2-2490-8
Kaljas, T., Lepik, M., Nurk, E., Telgmaa, A., & Undusk, A. (2022). Matemaatika 8. klassile: 2. osa. Koolibri. ISBN 978-9985050446
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Lepik, M., Grevholm, B., & Viholainen, A. (2015). Using textbooks in the mathematics classroom – the teachers’ view. Nordic Studies in Mathematics Education, 20(3–4), 129–156. https://doi.org/10.7146/nomad.v20i3-4.148695
Li, S., Fan, L., & Luo, J. (2025). How STEM content is presented in mathematics textbooks from the U.S. and China: A comparative study. International Journal of STEM Education, 12, 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-025-00563-1
Li, Y. (2000). A comparison of problems that follow selected content presentations in American and Chinese mathematics textbooks. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(2), 234–241. https://doi.org/10.2307/749754
Lithner, J. (2008). A research framework for creative and imitative reasoning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 67, 255–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-007-9104-2
Lithner, J., Bergqvist, E., Bergqvist, T., Boesen, J., Palm, T., & Palmberg, B. (2010). Mathematical competencies: A research framework. In The seventh mathematics education research seminar, Stockholm, January 26–27, 2010 (pp. 157–167). SMDF.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics NCTM (2000). Executive Summary. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Külastatud aadressil https://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/Standards_and_Positions/PSSM_ExecutiveSummary.pdf
Niss, M. (2003). Mathematical competencies and the learning of mathematics: The Danish KOM project. In A. Gagatsis & S. Papastavridis (Eds.), 3rd Mediterranean Conference on Mathematical Education, pp. 116–124.
Nurk, E., Telgmaa, A., Undusk, A., & Kaljas, T. (2022). Matemaatika 8. klassile: I osa. Koolibri. ISBN 978-9985049259.
O’Keeffe, L. (2013). A framework for textbook analysis. International Review of Contemporary Learning Research, 2(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.12785/irclr/020101
Pedaste, M., Palts, T., Kraav, T., & Orav-Puurand, K. (2021). Komplekssete probleemide lahendamise oskus ning selle hindamine ja arendamine gümnaasiumis. Estonian Journal of Education / Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri, 9(1), 138–161. https://doi.org/10.12697/eha.2021.9.1.06
Pehkonen, L., Piht, S., Pakkas, K., Laine, A., & Krzywacki, H. (2019). Estonian and Finnish teachers’ views about the textbooks in mathematics teaching. http://hdl.handle.net/10138/247826
Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13398
Pickle, M. C. C. (2012). Statistical Content in Middle Grades Mathematics Textbooks (Doctoral dissertation). University of South Florida. https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/etd/4203
Põhikooli riiklik õppekava (2024). Riigi Teataja I, 2024, 2. Külastatud aadressil https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/110082024002
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211–246. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075002211
Reys, B. J., Reys, R. E., & Koyama, M. (1996). The development of computation in three Japanese primary-grade textbooks. The Elementary School Journal, 96(4), 423–437. https://doi.org/10.1086/461837
Rezat, S. (2024). Research on curriculum resources in mathematics education: a survey of the field. ZDM Mathematics Education 56, 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01559-x
Rezat, S., Fan, L., & Pepin, B. (2021). Mathematics textbooks and curriculum resources as instruments for change. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53, 1189–1206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-021-01309-3
Rychen, D. S., & Salganik, L. H. (Eds.). (2003). Key Competencies for a Successful Life and a Well-Functioning Society. Hogrefe & Huber.
Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., & Raizen, S. A. (1997). A splintered vision: An investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education. Kluwer Academic.
Sevinc, S., Kohanová, I., Isiksal‑Bostan, M., Kubáček, Z., Isler‑Baykal, I., Lada, M., Cakiroglu, E., & Di Paola, B. (2022). Developing an integrated framework for analyzing ways of reasoning in mathematics. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (ICERI 2022) (pp. 2082–2089). IATED. https://doi.org/10.21125/iceri.2022.0529
Son, J. W., & Senk, S. L. (2010). How reform curricula in the United States and Korea present multiplication and division of fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74, 117–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9229-6
Stylianides, G. J. (2009). Reasoning-and-proving in school mathematics textbooks. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11(4), 258–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986060903253954
Sun, X. (2011). "Variation problems" and their roles in the topic of fraction division in Chinese mathematics textbook examples. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 76, 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9263-4
Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design, Learning and Instruction, 4, 295–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5
Zhu, Y., & Fan, L. (2006). Focus on the representation of problem types in intended curriculum: A comparison of selected mathematics textbooks from mainland China and the United States. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4, 609–626. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-006-9036-9
Tárraga-Mínguez R., Tarín-Ibáñez J., Lacruz-Pérez I. (2021). Analysis of Word Problems in Primary Education Mathematics Textbooks in Spain. Mathematics. 9(17):2123. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9172123
Utami, N. S., Prabawanto, S., & Dahlan, J. A. (2023). An analysis of mathematics textbook of Indonesian curriculum based on functional thinking framework. JRAMathEdu (Journal of Research and Advances in Mathematics Education), 8(4), 199–212. https://doi.org/10.23917/jramathedu.v8i4.1928
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. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
Watson, A., & Ohtani, M. (2015). Task design in mathematics education: An ICMI study 22. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09629-2
Weinert, F. E. (2001). Concept of competence: A conceptual clarification. In D. S. Rychen & L. H. Salganik (Eds.), Defining and Selecting Key Competencies. OECD.
Özer, E., & Sezer, R. (2014). A comparative analysis of questions in American, Singaporean, and Turkish mathematics textbooks based on the topics covered in 8th grade in Turkey. Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice, 14(1), 411–421.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors who publish in Eesti Haridusteaduste Ajakiri. Estonian Journal of Education agree to the following terms:
- This journal provides immediate open access to its content. All the articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License.
- Authors grant the journal right of (1) first publication and distribution of the article, (2) making it available to public, (3) public presentation.
- Authors have the right to enter into separate contractual arrangements for posting the article to an institutional repository or publish it in a book with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted to post citations from their work online (e.g. on their website) with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal (see Open Access).
