IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i4p3584-d1069428.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investigating Special Education Teachers’ Views on Mathematics Instruction Process: Sugesstions for Sustainable Special Education in Mathematics Instruction

Author

Listed:
  • Sarem Özdemir

    (Faculty of Education, Cyprus International University, North Cyprus, Mersin 10, Nicosia 99258, Turkey)

  • Yalın Kılıç

    (Faculty of Education, Cyprus International University, North Cyprus, Mersin 10, Nicosia 99258, Turkey)

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the experiences of special education teachers’ mathematics instruction process and to present suggestions for sustainable special education in mathematics instruction. Seventeen special education teachers were interviewed in this study. Hence, a qualitative research design and content analysis were used. Three dimensions were considered in the interviews, including: teaching mathematics to students with disabilities in terms of teaching methods, manipulatives, and assessments; the mathematics curriculum; and challenges that special education teachers face throughout the process. According to the results, most teachers still use direct or explicit instruction based on the behaviorist approach. All participants stated that they use mathematics manipulatives to help learners perceive mathematical concepts. They also use Individualized Education Programs to assess their students. Participants stated that every disability group and every child need to be considered uniquely since their disabilities and levels vary. Participants also said that they are only able to teach numbers, addition, and some basic geometric shapes due to time insufficiency and crowded classrooms. Almost every participant stated that insufficient time and teacher shortage are the biggest problems of the system. The study has limitations or weaknesses. In this study, since the interviewing method was used, and the findings are the extent of what the participants have indicated, and the statements of the participants are limited to what she/he explained to the researcher. In the study, it is suggested that mathematics teachers and special education teachers should cooperate. In addition, suggestions are made, such as conducting experimental research studies to see the most efficient way to teach mathematics in homogenous groups. Finally, future researchers are advised to focus on the possible consequences of applying constructivist learning theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarem Özdemir & Yalın Kılıç, 2023. "Investigating Special Education Teachers’ Views on Mathematics Instruction Process: Sugesstions for Sustainable Special Education in Mathematics Instruction," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3584-:d:1069428
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3584/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/4/3584/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William H. Glick & George P. Huber & C. Chet Miller & D. Harold Doty & Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, 1990. "Studying Changes in Organizational Design and Effectiveness: Retrospective Event Histories and Periodic Assessments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 293-312, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mähring, Magnus, 2002. "IT Project Governance: A Process-Oriented Study of Organizational Control and Executive Involvement," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2002:15, Stockholm School of Economics.
    2. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    3. Jose G. Vargas-Hernandez, M.B.A., 2014. "Research Methodology Strategies In Strategic Management," Interdisciplinary Management Research, Josip Juraj Strossmayer University of Osijek, Faculty of Economics, Croatia, vol. 10, pages 106-147.
    4. Joseph Lampel & Ajay Bhalla & Kavil Ramachandran, 2017. "Family values and inter-institutional governance of strategic decision making in Indian family firms," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 901-930, December.
    5. Fiedler, Marina & Welpe, Isabell M., 2010. "Antecedents of cooperative commercialisation strategies of nanotechnology firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 400-410, April.
    6. Shérazade Gatfaoui, 2005. "Quelles Conceptions 1 De La Confiance Au Cours De La Relation Bancaire (Client/Banque) ? : Une Approche Par Les Etudes De Cas Retrospectives," Post-Print hal-01539947, HAL.
    7. Eddleston, Kimberly A. & Kellermanns, Franz W., 2007. "Destructive and productive family relationships: A stewardship theory perspective," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(4), pages 545-565, July.
    8. Carsten M. Syvertsen, 2016. "How Engineering and Business Schools can benefit from Using Regionalization in a Globalized World-Insights from Kant and Chaos Theory," International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, Inovatus Services Ltd., vol. 2(11), pages 7-14, October.
    9. Christian Arnold & Daniel Kiel & Kai-Ingo Voigt, 2016. "How The Industrial Internet Of Things Changes Business Models In Different Manufacturing Industries," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(08), pages 1-25, December.
    10. Hervé Dumez, 1992. "Actes du séminaire Contradictions et Dynamique des Organisations - CONDOR - III," Post-Print hal-00263275, HAL.
    11. Anna Cabigiosu & Diego Campagnolo, 2016. "The economic performance of innovations in a collaborative setting: the case of KIBS firms," Working Papers 22, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    12. Doty, D. Harold & Bhattacharya, Mousumi & Wheatley, Kathleen K. & Sutcliffe, Kathleen M., 2006. "Divergence between informant and archival measures of the environment: Real differences, artifact, or perceptual error?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 268-277, February.
    13. Alexander Frey & Manuel Trenz & Daniel Veit, 2019. "A service-dominant logic perspective on the roles of technology in service innovation: uncovering four archetypes in the sharing economy," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(8), pages 1149-1189, December.
    14. Gina Colarelli O'Connor & Mark P. Rice & Lois Peters & Robert W. Veryzer, 2003. "Managing Interdisciplinary, Longitudinal Research Teams: Extending Grounded Theory-Building Methodologies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(4), pages 353-373, August.
    15. De Massis, Alfredo & Kotlar, Josip, 2014. "The case study method in family business research: Guidelines for qualitative scholarship," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 15-29.
    16. Kausar Fiaz Khawaja & Muddassar Sarfraz & Mahmoona Khalil, 2023. "Doing good for organization but feeling bad: when and how narcissistic employees get prone to shame and guilt," Future Business Journal, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-16, December.
    17. Kimberly A. Eddleston & Franz W. Kellermanns & Steven W. Floyd & Victoria L. Crittenden & William F. Crittenden, 2013. "Planning for Growth: Life Stage Differences in Family Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 37(5), pages 1177-1202, September.
    18. Goudarz Azar & Rian Drogendijk, 2014. "Psychic Distance, Innovation, and Firm Performance," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(5), pages 581-613, October.
    19. Yan Ling & Zeki Simsek & Michael Lubatkin & John F. Velga, 2008. "Transformational Leadership's Role in Promoting Corporate Entrepreneurship : Examining the CEO - TMT Interface," Post-Print hal-02276697, HAL.
    20. Azar, Goudarz & Ciabuschi, Francesco, 2017. "Organizational innovation, technological innovation, and export performance: The effects of innovation radicalness and extensiveness," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 324-336.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:4:p:3584-:d:1069428. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.