عنوان مقاله [English]
The aim of this study was to investigate the ability of students' spatial skills in solving one task and to analyze their responses based on SOLO Taxonomy.Solo theory is one of the theories of mathematical education, which has a great application in our cognition of mathematical understanding and math learning of students.The research method is descriptive of survey type.A question of the Purdue standard questionnaire on spatial visualization has been selected which Its formal and content validity has been confirmed by 3 math education professors and 4 teachers of geometry.By Using the criterion of Cronbach's alpha, this approximate reliability coefficient(0.9) was obtained.The Participants in this study were 498 students from the tenth,eleventh and twelfth grade students who were selected randomly in a multi-stage cluster of theoretical and technical schools in Bushehr. The results show that in the field of visualization 59% of students in ordinary schools are in a unistructural level. In this regard, none of the Technical Students reached multistructural and Relational levels. While analyzing responses, their thinking patterns, multiple solutions, strategies and common misconceptions have been analyzed. The results of the study are very important for the planners, the authors of the textbooks and the researchers.
 Rivera, F. D. (2011). Towards a visually-oriented school mathematics curriculum. Dordrecht: Springer.
 Newcombe, N. S., Uttal, D. H., & Sauter, M. (2013). Spatial development. In P. D. Zelazo (Ed.), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 564–590). New York: Oxford University Press.
 Pegg, J., & Tall, D. (2005). The fundamental cycle of concept construction underlying various theoretical frameworks. ZDM, 37(6), 468-475.
 Pegg, J. (1992). Assessing students’ understanding at the primary and secondary level in the mathematical sciences. Reshaping assessment practice: Assessment in the mathematical sciences under challenge, 368-385.
 Biggs, J., & Collis, K. F. (1980).SOLO taxonomy. Education News, 17(5), 19-23.
 Chick, H. (1998). Cognition in the formal modes: Research mathematics and the سولو taxonomy. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 10(2), 4-26.
 Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1991). Multimodal learning and the quality of intelligent behavior. Intelligence: Reconceptualization and measurement, 57-76.
 Saif ,Ali Akbar. (2015). Educational Psychology (Psychology of Learning and Education). Tehran. Agah Pub. [in Persian[
 Pegg, J., & Davey, G. (1998). Interpreting student understanding in geometry: A synthesis of two models. In R. Lehrer & D. Chazen (Ed.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp.109-135). NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah.
 Potter, M. K., & Kustra, E. (2012). A primer on learning outcomes and the SOLO taxonomy. Centre for Teaching and Learning, University of Windsor. www1. uwindsor. ca/ctl/system/files/PRIMER-on-Learning Outcomes. pdf.
 attie, J. A. C. and Brown, G. T. L. (2004). Cognitive Processes in asTTle: The SOLO Taxonomy. AsTTle Technical Report 43, University of Auckland, Ministry of Education.
 Sutton, K. J. and Williams, A. P. (2007) Spatial Cognition and its Implications for Design. International Association of Societies of Design Research, Hong Kong, China.
 Jurdak, M. (1991). Van Hiele levels and the SOLO taxonomy. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 22(1), 57-60.
 Özdemir, A. Ş., & Yildiz, S. G. (2015). The examination of elementary mathematics pre-service teachers’ spatial abilities. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 594-601.
 Wongyai, P., & Kamol, N. (2012). A framework in characterizing lower secondary school students’ algebraic thinking. Retrieved November 21, 2012 from http://www.icme-organisers.dk/tsg09/
 Guay, R., McDaniel, E., & Angelo, S. (1978).Analytic factor confounding spatial ability measurement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, August, 1978.