The effects of geometry teaching accompained by history to secondary school students' images of geometry and scientists

In this research, in which the effect of geometry teaching approach corroborated with both in terms of content and historical development on students? images(in their minds) about of geometry and scientists studying on geometry was examined, geometry teaching supported by historical events/information and researches about students? images of scientists have been investigated through literature review. This study has been carried out by using quasi-experimental design with pretest-posttest control group.This research was conveyed in a secondary school attending located in Kepez district in Antalya with 66 students in 2011- 2012 educational year. The students represent a lower socio-economic level group. In the research Academic Achievement Test (AAT), Geometry Attitude Scale (GAS) and Draw a Scientist (Geometrician) Test have been used.To determine whether the students assigned to experimental and control groups have matching features the AAT and GAS have been used. The AAT has been developed by the researcher to evaluate the successes of students in the first unit of their course book entitled ?Basic Geometrical Concepts and Introduction to Analytical Geometry?. The scope validity of the AAT has been tried to be assured by taking the unit?s objectives into consideration. GAS has been used to evaluate student? attitudes towards geometry lesson. The original scale was developed by Utley(2007) and it consists of 32 items. This scale was translated into Turkish and applied to 283 students for scale reliability and factor analysis. The internal consistency reliability coefficient of the scale has been found as 0,853 for this study.DAST(Geometrician) was originated from Chambers(1983) DAST and adapted by the researcher and her supervisor for this study. This scale consists of three sections; in the first section, there are questions to determine the demographical characteristics of students, in the second section, there is a part in which students are asked to draw to decide their image in their minds about a scientist and another part that contains open-ended questions to describe this drawing. In the third and the last section, there are questions about how students perceive themselves as a researcher who does scientific research about geometry, scientists in their close environment and their favourite scientists.While it was observed that the students in the experimental group imagined the geometrician as a ?teacher? and the students in the control group as a ?scientist? as a result of the pretest analyses, according to the posttest results, the situation become vice versa and it was observed that the students in the experimental group imagined the geometrician as a ?scientist? and the students in the control group as a ?teacher?. After the treatment, the most frequent features that students reflected in their drawings in both groups in terms of physical appearance were ?tidiness? and ?long hair?. It was observed that before the experimental process, the students in the experimental group imagined a geometrician ?at a young age? and there was a statistically significant difference between groups in favour of experimental group in terms of this dimension. In addition, it was observed that the students in the experimental group draw geometricians with negative-drawn/sulky face more than the students in the control group after the experimental process. In terms of the work place, it was observed that the students in the control group draw scientists in ?indoor places? more than the students in the experimental group. Before the experimental process, the students in both groups drew the ?information resources? the most in their drawings. Besides the students in the control group draw geometricians with ?information resources? and ?geometrical shapes? at the same frequency. As a result of the experimental process, there was not any significant difference observed between groups in terms of the types and variety of resources that geometricians use while working in the drawings of students from both groups. Before and after the experimental process, it was observed that the students in both groups imagined geometricians as an individual who ?works on foot?.A rise in the types activities geometrician does was observed in the drawings of students in comparison with the situation before the study. It was seen that apart from the ?research? activity, the students imagined the geometrician with ?problem solving, question-discussion, studying, measuring an area, drawing geometrical shapes, thinking dealing with working equipments and not knowing what to do? activities.Before the study while the cognitive associations of students in the control group were directed more to ?negative personality characteristics(unpermissive, firm, asocial, etc.) and there was a statistically significant difference between groups in favour of the control group in this dimensional, after the experimental process, it was observed when their cognitive associations about a geometrician were investigated that most frequently the words about ?positive personality characteristics and fun? in the experimental group and the words about ?geometrical tools? in the control group were stated. In addition, the differences between groups in these two dimensions were statistically significant.When the images of students in both experimental and control groups about what does a geometrician do in a day were investigated after the experimental process, it was observed that there were statically significant differences between the groups in the dimensions of ?occupational activities? and ?problem solving- calculating- measuring?, and these differences were in favour of experimental group.Before the study, while it was observed that the students in the experimental group was affected a lot from ?geometry teachers? and the students in the control group was affected more from ?stories?, and there was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of ?other resources?, after the study, it was seen that there was no statically significant difference between the groups in terms of resources that comprises of their scientist- geometrician image in their minds that they reflected in their drawings. The students in the experimental group defined ?scientist? and the students in the control group defined ?their teachers? as the geometrician- scientist that they draw in their close environment after the study.When the answers to the open-ended question via the reasons of students in both experimental and control groups of choosing and respecting scientists- geometricians they know in their close environment was asked were investigated, it was seen that as different from the pretest apart from the reasons of ?scientific occupational works, characteristic features and teaching well?, reasons like ? respect to the scientist-geometrician, hardwork and determination of the scientist-geometrician, being a Turk of the scientist-geometriciani being famous of the scientist- geometrician and other reasons? were added.When they are asked which researches do they want to do in geometry fields in the future as a scientist-geometrician before the study, it was observed that while the students in the experimental group wanted to research more about ?geometry teaching?, the students in the control group wanted to research more about ?geometrical shapes?. A statistically significant difference was observed in those dimensions. Although the difference was not statistically significant between groups in terms of the answers obtained after the study, it was seen that in both groups students interests about ?doing research on geometrical shapes? predominantly continued and the item ?to satisfy their curiosity and willing to research about the topic came as the first reason to choose research topic.Before the experimental process, when they are asked to state their favourite scientist-geometrician, it was seen that there was not a statistically significant difference between groups in terms of the answers of students in both groups. The students in both experimental and control groups were not generally specify a name, however, the ones who seated wrote the name of ? Einstein? the most. It was seen that there was a statistically significant difference between groups in terms of their answers to the question via which was asked to state their favourite scientist-geometricians. In the experimental group the name of ?Leonardo da Vinci? and in the control group the name of ?Ali Kuşçu? came front.After the study, although there was not a statistically significant difference observed between groups, in both groups it was stated the most that students? favourite scientist-geometrician was chosen because of their ?scientific and occupational knowledge?. It is thought that the findings of this research will contribute to educational politicians, program development and evaluation experts, mathematics-geometry teachers and other educationists studies. Key words: Geometricians, History of Mathematics, Teaching Mathematics, Image