Investigation of Activities in Primary School Mathematics Course Book According to the Intellectual Development Principles


  • Hatice BOZKURT Gaziantep Şehit Nafi Kıvanç İlkokulu, Gaziantep, ORCID NO: 0000-0001-8345-3950
  • Begüm ÖZMUSUL Gaziantep Üniversitesi, Nizip Eğitim Fakültesi, Matematik ve Fen Bilimleri Eğitimi Bölümü, ORCID NO: 0000-0003-0163-5406



Primary school 1 math textbook, Bruner, Intellectual development principles, activity


The aim of this study is to examine the activities given in the primary school first grade mathematics textbook according to the principles of intellectual development. Document analysis method was used in the study. Primary school mathematics 1 textbook, which is used as a textbook in public schools in the 2020-2021 academic year, was used as the document. The data were analysed using descriptive analysis method. In the descriptive analysis, the theoretical framework of intellectual development principles given in Bruner (1966) was used. With the help of this framework, the activities given in the textbook were classified according to the codes of enactive, iconic and symbolic modes. In an activity, the use of one, two or three of these modes together was examined. According to the findings obtained from the research, it was concluded that there are mostly activities involving iconic mode in all learning areas in the textbook. Symbolic modes are the most common form of mode after iconic modes. It is seen that the activities including the enactive-iconic modes are mostly in the field of learning geometry and the least number of operations outcomes. It has been found that the proportion of activities involving enactive-iconic-symbolic levels activities are high. Activities where three modes are used together can contribute to students' multifaceted learning of the concept. In this respect, the hierarchical order in Bruner's intellectual development principles coincides with this principle. It can be said that it would be more appropriate to start from the lowest level of the hierarchical level in Bruner's model in terms of almost every acquisition in terms of intellectual development of primary school 1st grade students being at the beginning of the learning process. In this respect, it can be suggested that the textbooks should be rearranged and teachers design their learning processes in this direction.


Björklund, C., & Ahlskog-Björkman, E. (2017). Approaches to teaching in thematic work: early childhood teachers’ integration of mathematics and art. International Journal of Early Years Education, 25(2), 98-111.

Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document analysis as a qualitative research method. Qualitative research journal, 9(2), 27.

Bozkurt, A. (2012). Matematik öğretmenlerinin matematiksel etkinlik kavramına dair

algıları. Eğitim ve Bilim, 37(166), 101-115.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: brain,

mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Harvard University Press.

Bruner, J. S., Olver, R. R., & Greenfield, P. M. (1966). Studies in cognitive growth. Wiley.

Çekirdekçi, S., & Toptaş, V. (2017). Bruner’in Zihinsel Gelişim İlkelerine Göre İlkokul Matematik Ders ve Çalışma Kitaplarında Geometri. International Journal of Education Technology and Scientific Researches, 2(2), 72-86.

Dienes, Z. P. (1967). Building up mathematics. London: Hutchinson Education.

Eisenmann, T., & Even, R. (2011). Enacted types of algebraic activity in different classes taught by the same teacher. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(4), 867-891.

Even, R., & Olsher, S. (2014). Teachers as participants in textbook development: The Integrated Mathematics Wiki-book Project. In Mathematics curriculum in school education, 333-350. Springer, Dordrecht.

Gallenstein, N. L. (2005). Engaging Young Children in Science and Mathematics. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17(2), 27-41.

Haggarty, L., & Pepin, B. (2002). An investigation of mathematics textbooks and their use in English, French and German classrooms: who gets an opportunity to learn what? British Educational Research Journal, 28(4), 567–590.

Haidar, D. A., Hutama, F. S., & Sunardi, S. (2019). Analyzing The Presentation of Geometry Material Based on Bruner's Theory in Mathematics Textbook. Al-Jabar: Jurnal Pendidikan Matematika, 10(2), 271-284.

Henningsen, M. & Stein, M.K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: classroombased factors that support and inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning, Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28(5), 524-549.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall

Lerman, S. (1989). Constructivism, mathematics and mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 20(2), 211-223.

Martin, D. J. (2003). Elementary science methods: A constructivist approach (3rd ed.). Albany, NY: Thomson /Wadsworth.

Mas’ula, S., & Fauzan, A. (2019, November). Designing of Active-Iconic-Symbolic Problem Based Learning Model (PBM-ENIKSI) for elementary school. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1387, No. 1, p. 012065). IOP Publishing.

MEB (2005). İlköğretim Matematik Dersi Öğretim Programı ve Kılavuzu: 6-8. Sınıflar. Ankara: Devlet Kitapları Müdürlüğü.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook (2. Edition) CA: Sage. Thousand Oaks.

Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı [MEB]. (2018). İlkokul matematik dersi (1, 2, 3 ve 4. sınıflar) öğretim programı. Ankara: T.C. Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı.

Ocak, G. (2007). Öğretim ilke ve yöntemleri. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.

Olkun, S. & Toluk Uçar, Z. (2007). İlköğretimde Etkinlik Temelli Matematik Öğretimi. Ankara: Maya Akademi.

Ozdem-Yilmaz, Y., & Bilican, K. (2020). Discovery Learning—Jerome Bruner. In Science Education in Theory and Practice (pp. 177-190). Springer, Cham.

Özmantar, M.F., Bozkurt, A, Demir, S., Bingölbali, E., & Açıl E. (2010). Sınıf Öğretmenlerinin

Etkinlik Kavramına İlişkin Algıları, Selçuk Üniversitesi Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 30, 379-398.

Piaget, J. (1999). Çocukta zihinsel gelişim (H.Portakal, Çev.). İstanbul: Cem Yayıncılık.

Robson, C. (2009). Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioner researchers. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Şahin, İ. (2010). Curriculum assessment: Constructivist primary mathematics curriculum in Turkey. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(1), 51-72.

Seven, S. (2001). “İlköğretim Sosyal Bilgiler Ders Kitapları Hakkında Öğretmen ve Öğrenci Görüşleri.” Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Celal Bayar Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Manisa.

Smith, S. S. (2001). Early childhood mathematics (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Steffe, L. P., & Gale, J. E. (Eds.). (1995). Constructivism in education. Psychology Press.

TDK. Türk Dil Kurumu sözlüğü ([Online] adresinden 17.05.2011

tarihinde indirilmiştir.)

Wiwin, T. T., & Mogi, Y (2017). An Analysis of Representation Forms in Learning Mathematics on The Topic of Cuboıd’s Volume (pp. 58-71). Proceedings the 2017 International Conference on Research in Education - Sanata Dharma University.



How to Cite

BOZKURT, H., & ÖZMUSUL, B. (2021). Investigation of Activities in Primary School Mathematics Course Book According to the Intellectual Development Principles. ISPEC International Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 5(2), 129-143.