Descriptive content analysis of studies on misconceptions in secondary mathematics education in Türkiye between 2001-2020

The purpose of this research is to reveal the trend of studies that misconceptions in secondary education mathematics education in Türkiye between 2001 and 2020 by using systematic rewiev. In the study, 62 studies were conducted between 2001-2020 (including 2001 and 2020) and complied with the limitations of the research were accessed. Of these 62 studies accessed, 28 were thesis (45%) and 34 were articles (55%). Google Scholar search engine, YÖK National Thesis Center, TR Index, Web of Science (WOS), Education Resources Information Center (ERIC) and Dergi Park were used to access the studies. Accessed studies were analysed by classifying them according to learning areas, sub-learning areas, years, study types, data collection tools used and sample sizes. In addition, some of the misconceptions obtained as a result of the studies are presented in the findings section. Descriptive content analysis, one of the data analysis methods, was used to analyse the data. In the research, it was seen that the majority of the studies were conducted in the "Numbers and Algebra" learning domain. When the studies were analysed in terms of sub-learning areas, it was concluded that the studies on misconceptions in secondary education were conducted in the sub-learning areas of "Numbers", "Functions" and "Limits and Continuity", respectively, from most to least, and that there were no studies in the sub-learning areas of "Integral and its Applications" and "Polynomials" that met the criteria of the research. While most of researches were conducted in 2013, there were no studies that met the criteria of the research in 2002, 2003 and 2020. In addition, it is seen that the number of misconceptions studies conducted in secondary education mathematics education between 2001 and 2020 has increased gradually. The studies reached were examined under 4 titles according to their types: master's thesis, doctoral thesis, TR Index article and other articles. It was concluded that the studies were conducted in the following order: master's thesis (f=24,39%), other article (f=19, 31%), TR Index article (f=15, 24%) and doctoral thesis (f=4, 6%). It was observed that more than one data collection tools were used in most of the studies. In addition, open-ended questions and interviews were the most used data collection tools. When the studies were examined in terms of the number of participants, it was seen that the majority of misconceptions studies were conducted with the number of participants between 0-50. However, the number of studies that prefer 251+ samples is also substantial. It is thought that the data collection tools used in the studies affect the sample size in the analysed studies. In line with these results, it is thought that the research will contribute to the people who will work in this field. At the end of the study, suggestions were presented to researchers who want to work in this field. Keywords: Misconceptions, Descriptive content analysis, systematic review