Doing surveys in different cultures: Difficulties and differences-A case from China and Australia

Internationalisation and Globalisation in Mathematics and Science Education

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 303-320

  Cao, Zhongjun ^a   Forgasz, Helen ^b   Bishop, Alan ^b  

^a VICTORIA UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

cultural differences; international studies; sociocultural factors; students' attitudes towards mathematics; survey

Indexed keywords

EID: 78651492559     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-5908-7_17     Document Type: Chapter

References (26)

1. Australian Educational Council. (1991). A national statement on mathematics for Australian schools. Melbourne: Australian Curriculum Corporation.
2. Beaton, A. E., & Robitaille, D. F. (1999). An overview of the third international mathematics and science study. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna, & I. Huntley (Eds.), International comparisons in mathematics education (pp. 19-29). London: Falmer Press.
3. Burstein, L. (Ed.). (1993). The IEA study of mathematics III: Student growth and classroom processes. Oxford: Pergamon.
4. Cai, J. (1998). An investigation of U.S. and Chinese students' mathematical problem posing and problem solving. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(1), 37-50.
5. Cao, Z., & Bishop, A. J. (2001). Students' attributions of success and failure in mathematics: Findings in China and Australia. In J. Bobis, B. Perry, & M. Mitchelmore (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty- Fourth Annual Conferences of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. Numeracy and Beyond (pp.139-148). Sydney: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
6. Cao, Z. (2004). An Investigation of Students' Attitudes towards Mathematics in China and Australia. Unpublished PhD thesis, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
7. Cook, S. W., & Selltiz, C. (1964). A multiple indicator approach to attitude measurement. Psychological Bulletin, 62, 36-55.
8. Cunningham, G. K. (1986). Educational and psychological measurement. New York: Macmillan.
9. Forgasz, H. J. (1995). Learning mathematics: Affect, gender, and classroom factors. Unpublished PhD thesis, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
10. Hsu, F. L. K. (1981). Americans and Chinese: Passage to differences. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.
11. Husén, T. (Ed.). (1967). International study of achievement in mathematics education (Vols. I & II). Stockholm: Almqvist &Wiksell.
12. Keitel, C., & Kilpatrick, J. (1999). The rationality and irrationality of international comparative studies. In G. Kaiser, E. Luna, & I. Huntley (Eds.), International comparisons in mathematics education (pp. 241-256). London: Falmer.
13. Ling, L., Burman, E., & Cooper, M. (1998). The Australian study. In J. Stephenson, L. Ling, E. Burman, & M. Cooper (Eds.), Values in education (pp.35-60). London: Routledge.
14. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15. Mayer, R. E., Sims, V., & Tajika, H. (1995). A comparison of how textbooks teach mathematical problem solving in Japan and the United States. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 443-460.
16. Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China. (2003). Mathematics curriculum standards (for trial) [in Chinese]. Beijing: People's Educational Publishing House.
17. Neubrand, J. (2002). Characteristic features of problems: Comparing German, Japanese and US mathematics lessons from the TIMSS-Video-Study. In F. Lopez-Real (Ed.), Pre-conference proceedings of the ICMI comparative study conference 2002 (pp. 194-200). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
18. New Laws Take Effect. (2004). Retrieved September 2, 2004 from http://english.people.com.cn/200409/eng20040902/html.
19. Nunnally, J. O. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill. OCED (n.d.). Retrieved January 8, 2005 from http://www.oced.org/pages/0, 2966/html.
20. Park, K., & Leung, F. K. S. (2002). A comparative study of the mathematics books of China, England, Japan, Korea, and the United States. In F. Lopez-Real (Ed.), Pre-conference proceedings of the ICMI comparative study conference 2002 (pp. 225-234). Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
21. Robitaille, D. F., & Garden, R. A. (Eds.). (1989). The IEA study of mathematics II: Contexts and outcomes of school mathematics. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
22. Sowder, J. (2001). Connecting mathematics education research to practice. In J. Bobis, B. Perry, & M. Mitchelmore (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual conferences of the mathematics education research group of Australasia. Numeracy and beyond (pp.1-8). Sydney: Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
23. State Education Commission of the People's Republic of China. (1992). Mathematics curriculum for junior high schools [in Chinese]. Beijing: People's Educational Publishing House.
24. Stigler, J., & Perry, M. (1988). Cross-cultural studies of mathematics teaching and learning: Recent findings and new directions. In D. Grouws & T. Cooney (Eds.), Effective mathematics teaching (pp.194-223). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Travers, K. J. & Westbury, I. (Eds.). (1989). The IEA study of mathematics I: Analysis of mathematics curricula. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
26. Wong, N., Lam, C., Leung, F. K., Mok, I. A., & Wong, K. (1999). An analysis of the views of various sectors on mathematics curriculum. Unpublished research report, Hong Kong Chinese University, Hong Kong.