The Influence of Teaching Geometry by Computer Integrated Method on Self-efficacy, Attitudes toward Geometry, Classroom’s Climate and Achievements among Colleges Trainees

This article represents a quantitative research which dealt with examination of the correlation between the personality parameter - self-efficacy for learning geometry, and the emotional parameters - attitudes toward geometry and classroom’s climate during the geometry lesson as well as the cognitive parameter – geometric efficacy and the academic parameter – studies’ achievements in geometry, among teaching students in Arab collages for qualifying teachers in Israel, as an experimental function of learning surroundings: The first – traditional, and the other - a high-tech learning environment, supported by computing and Telecommunications. Thus, the research tested 224 students who learn in three Arabic collages for teachers’ qualification, the students who are taught by the two methods of instruction (traditional and computer integrated). The research’s variables measurement was used in validated and reliable questionnaires that were used in earlier researches, but were customized to this research’s subject and population, and they were analyzed by a factors’ analysis that produced new factors that built the research’s model. The findings indicate this notion because students who learned geometry in the frontal method reported more on having fun, enjoyment and content with learning geometry than students who learned with the computer integrated method. However, students who were taught by the computer integrated method reported more on clarification and observance of rules and guidelines by the teacher, than students who learned geometry by the frontal method, who also reported more on receiving encouragement and support from the teacher, unlike the computer integrated students who reported more on a discriminative treatment of the teacher - on the ground of gender or achievements. In general, the students who learned in the frontal method reported on a more positive perception of the classroom’s atmosphere than students who studied geometry by integrating computer.

It was also found that students who learned geometry by the integration of computer, were found as having a higher and a more positive self-efficacy of learning in the combination of computer than students in the frontal method’s group. Additionally, the perception of the team learning’s dimension among students who learned with a combination of a computer was higher than those learned by the frontal method, and it was also found that general self-efficacy for learning, among students who learned with a combination of a computer was higher than those who learned with the frontal method after the course. It was also found that the attitude of the frontal method’s students towards geometry was more positive than the attitude of those students who learned with the computer integrated method. As for geometric self-efficacy, it was found that students who learned geometry with the frontal method, are with a higher geometric self-efficacy than those who learned with the computer integrated method. It was also found that the achievements of the frontal method’s students are higher than those who learned by the computer integrated method.

Moreover, it was discovered that, the dimension of perceiving geometry as fun, enjoying and contenting among students taught by the integration of a computer declined when the course ended, though the dimension of the teacher’s guidelines and rules increased, and the teacher’s support and encouragement declined, and the perception of the classroom’s general atmosphere declined as well, and became less positive than in the beginning of the course. The attitude of the computer integration method’s students toward geometry also declined by the end of the course. It was found that the classroom’s atmosphere dimensions and the dimension of general self-efficacy of learning, as well as the dimensions of the attitudes toward geometry, succeed in predicting geometric efficacy. And that a positive position toward geometry, learning efficacy, understanding the solution, and self-confidence, as well as team learning, are strong and significant predictors of geometric efficacy. Another finding is that the classroom’s atmosphere’s dimensions and the dimensions of self-efficacy of learning, as well as the dimensions of the attitudes towards geometry, successfully predict achievements in geometry. The ability of geometric efficacy to predict achievements in geometry, was found as well. In light of this research’s findings, we suggest recommendations that answers the question we, as well as many teachers’ educators, are engaging: In what way students should be trained to use technology in teaching in general and in teaching science and geometry in particular?

We recommend on:

-To enlarge the number of courses that requires integrating computerization and telecommunications. In all fields, and in all apprenticeships, in all departments and in all routes.
-To combine computerization in the training of teaching students, hence, a horizontal and vertical expansion is needed, guidance; perennial courses should be planned for the instruction of different disciplines and not only Literacy and Computer Applications.
-Appropriate software and courseware should be obtained.
-A combination of computerization in the pedagogic training program and in the practical experience, by increasing the demand from the student to apply lessons programs that combine computer and telecommunications.
-A mandatory course should be dedicated to the use of a ‘smart board’ in the class, in the instruction of all subjects.
-The teachers should be trained to use a computer as well.