Abstract
The aim of this research was to examine the attitudes of pupils about avoidance strategies in mathematics and their perception of the way mathematics teachers work. The research was conducted in the Republic of Serbia on a sample of 1165 primary school pupils. A quantitative approach was applied with a standardized instrument made up of five subscales which examined three avoidance strategies (novelty avoidance, providing assistance and self-handicapping) and two categories which include the style and method of the teacher’s work (targeted structured teaching and mastery). The results have shown that pupils are mostly inclined towards the novelty avoidance strategy. The research has also revealed some differences when it comes to pupils’ attitudes about avoidance strategies and their perception of the teacher’s approach in relation to their success at school and grade levels in mathematics. It was shown that the school location was a significant independent variable in determining the differences in pupils’ perceptions of the mastery of the teacher. It can be concluded that good didactic methodical organization of teaching, continuous monitoring of pupil progress, the teacher’s pedagogical approach, developing pupils’ skills in overcoming learning difficulties and monitoring their own work are some of the primary prerequisites for overcoming avoidance strategies and improving the educational work of teachers.
Publisher
FSFEI HE Don State Technical University
Reference33 articles.
1. Akilli, M., & Genç, M. (2017). Modelling the effects of selected affective factors on learning strategies and classroom activities in science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 16(4), 599-611. http://dx.doi.org/10.33225/jbse/17.16.599
2. Akin, A., Abaci, R., & Akin, Ü. (2011). Self-handicapping: A conceptual analysis. Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(3), 1155-1168.
3. Antonijević, R. (2012). Contextual factors of the students’ achievements in the area of mathematics. Inovacije u nastavi-časopis za savremenu nastavu [Innovations in teaching- Journal of Contemporary Teaching], 25(3), 5-14.
4. Baran, M. (2019). Identifying barriers when teaching science and mathematics in low economy regions: swansea and hakkari as case studies. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 18(6), 848-865. https://doi.org/10.33225/jbse/19.18.848
5. Cēdere, D., Jurgena, I., & Targamadze, V. (2018). Interest of latvian and lithuanian students in science and mathematics. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 17(1), 31-42. https://dx.doi.org/10.33225/jbse/18.17.31