| dc.description.abstract | This thesis analyzes and compares the areas of plane geometry and plane analytic geometry in junior and high school mathematics textbooks from one publisher of Mainland China (hereinafter referred to as the China edition) and two publishers of Taiwan (Chinese Taipei, hereinafter referred to as the Taiwan edition). Find out the similarities and differences of the textbooks in both editions, and find out their respective advantages and disadvantages, in order to provide reference and reference for the compilation and use of the textbooks in the two places.
This research mainly uses literature research method, content analysis method and comparative research method to explore the differences between Chinese edition and Taiwanese edition in the contents of plane geometry and coordinate geometry in terms of arrangement order, number of units, number of pages, number of topics and teaching activities, level of cognitive needs of topics, concept introduction method, and method of theorem proof. In addition, the chapters that are not completely corresponding are sorted out, and the connection between the function and the figure knowledge structure is also discussed.
Through comparative research, this paper has the following findings.
First, in terms of arrangement order, knowledge arrangement between Chinese edition chapters is more scattered, while knowledge arrangement between Taiwan edition chapters is more concentrated. The different order of chapter arrangement will lead to different proof methods of the same property and formula.
Second, in terms of the proportion of textbooks, in the junior high school stage, the distribution ratio of relevant units and pages, the number of teaching activities related to the content and the total number of teaching activities in the Chinese edition are higher than those of the Taiwan edition, while the average number of questions per page is similar. In the high school stage, the distribution ratios of relevant units and pages in the two editions are similar. The average number of questions per page in the Taiwan edition is more than that in the Chinese edition, and the number of related content teaching activities, total teaching activities and related distribution ratio in the Chinese edition are more than that in the Taiwan edition.
Thirdly, in terms of the level of cognitive needs for the distributing questions, the distributing questions of the two editions of the textbooks are all concentrated on specific question types: regardless of the overall content or most of the content categories, they are concentrated on unrelated procedural problems.
Fourthly, the reason why the chapters of the two editions of the textbooks are not completely corresponding to the topics within the scope of this thesis are: the establishment of knowledge points does not affect the course structure, or the relevant knowledge points are arranged in the textbook narrative or sample questions, and there is no independent chapter.
Fifth, in terms of the way of concept introduction, the two editions of textbooks have roughly the same definitions and descriptions of the same concept, but the ways of introducing the same concept are still quite different. Among them, the Chinese edition mostly introduces in the way of mathematical problems and reviewing old knowledge, while Taiwan edition mostly introduces directly.
Sixth, in terms of theorem proving, the different descriptions of the definition and the different order of chapters will lead to different methods of proving the properties, judgments, and formulas in the chapters.
Seventh, in terms of the connection between the function and the figure knowledge structure, compared with Taiwan edition, the Chinese edition of ＂the connection between linear function and linear knowledge structure＂ is slightly insufficient, while the two editions of ＂the connection between quadratic function and parabola knowledge structure＂ have their own strengths.
Finally, based on the differences and characteristics of the two editions of textbooks, the suggestions for mutual reference are as follows.
1．The Chinese textbooks can be used for reference: To enhance the inherent integrity of mathematical knowledge; increasing the number of examples and focus on the process of knowledge formation; increasing the set of related procedural problems and mathematical problems to improve the level of cognitive needs; paying attention to the intuitiveness of geometric figures; paying attention to the integration of information technology and textbooks, cultivate students′ inquiry spirit and practical ability; Optimizing the knowledge structure connection of mathematics textbooks in junior and high schools.
2．Taiwan edition of the textbook can be used for reference: Increasing the situational setting of example exercises to improve students′ ability to solve practical problems; increasing the number of teaching activities to improve students′ operational ability; increasing the set of exercises related procedural problems and mathematical problems to improve the level of cognitive needs. | en_US |