Abstract #2- 1st Grade Virtual Manipulatives

Summary
This article focused on how virtual manipulatives impact the learning of first grade students. The researchers of this article looked at other studies at various grade levels and determined that these virtual manipulatives were effective with developing mathematical knowledge. However, they were concerned about younger children. “One concern regarding young children using computers is that computer environments are not concrete, asserting the belief that children construct knowledge through interaction with materials and people, and that children cannot handle the symbolic representations present in a computer environment” (Steen, Brook, Lyon, 2006, p. 374). From this concern, these researchers focused on first grade students’ development of mathematical knowledge through virtual manipulatives.

To determine if first grade students can develop mathematical knowledge through virtual manipulatives, the researchers took two first grade classrooms to compare. The first classroom used hands-on manipulatives and the other class used virtual manipulatives to learn about geometry concepts. The researchers found that the students using virtual manipulatives had a significantly greater improvement during the geometry unit than the hands-on manipulatives. They concluded that students were able to use the computers as a concrete material and were able to develop their knowledge. In addition, the immediate feedback from the virtual manipulative helped students see their misconceptions and worked through them. Overall, virtual manipulatives are a positive tool to use with students in the early grades.

Reflection
Prior to reading this article, I thought that virtual manipulatives would benefit all students, even the younger ones. I didn’t think about the fact that students benefit from concrete practice and that the computer may not be a concrete tool. However, as the article did show the computer is a good tool to use while instructing about math. Actually, I think the virtual manipulatives are a better tool because students at this age tend to have difficulty with the small interlocking cubes and other small tools because their motor skills are not fully developed. However, with the virtual manipulatives the pieces the students must manipulate are the mouse and type on the keyboard (in some cases). This allows students to focus on the math instruction and not their motor skills.

This study really supports the use of virtual manipulatives in the elementary classroom, but I have one problem with implementing this type of learning in my classroom. In the study, each student had their own laptop that they used during the lesson. I would only imagine that of course students would develop their knowledge quickly with virtual manipulatives because they are working at their level, their pace and with immediate feedback. However, having one computer per student is not possible in my classroom. We do have laptop carts at my school, but they are reserved for fourth and fifth grade classrooms. I do have a laptop with a projector like the teacher in the study to show the virtual manipulatives, but is that enough? I don’t think it is. The students need to be able to access the virtual manipulatives themselves. I would like to implement virtual manipulatives into my daily math lessons, but until I have laptops for all or most of my students they will not be able to get the experience they need to excel like these first grade students.

References
Steen, K., Brooks, D., & Lyon, T. (2006). The Impact of Virtual Manipulatives on First Grade Geometry Instruction and Learning. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(4), 373-391.

Abstract 1: Computer Games

This article, Computer Games Application within Alternative Classroom Goal Structures, focused on how the use of computer games as a way to review mathematical ideas. In addition, the researcher looked at how different classroom structures can effect computer game achievement. This study worked with 5^th grade students in different classroom structures. The students were first divided into two main groups, (1) computer game use to review and (2) paper-pencil practice. Students were then further divided into sub-groups of (1) cooperative structure where students worked in teams to complete tasks, (2) individualistic competitive structure where students competed against each other, and (3) individualistic structure where students worked by themselves and did not compete against other students. The researcher hoped to find a correlation not only between computer games and developing mathematical learning, but that the cooperative classroom structure would further that learning.

The researcher found that computer games as compared to paper pencil practice did promote motivation for the students, but it did not develop their knowledge of the content any further than the paper-pencil group. “Findings suggested that computer games afforded greater retention over time than paper and pencil drills: game-playing participants demonstrated focused attention and enjoyment and expressed reluctance to lave computer labs when gaming session was ended (Ke, 2008).” The study also found that a cooperative structure enhances the effects of computer games on student motivation. The individualistic structure actually improved student cognitive learning, but the increase was not significant. Therefore, the effects of the computer games have limited impact on student academic performance.

Prior to reading this article, I thought that computer games would have some effect on student academic performance and would motivate my students, but I didn’t know how to effectively incorporate computer games into the classroom. The researcher brought up a valuable study that looked at structures of the classroom and its influence on computer games. I have always considered just using computer games with students at independent stations without interacting with others. However, this study shows that student interaction can motivate students even further. Currently, I have several students that have little to no motivation to do math. Though, if I begin using math computer games as review in small group settings, I may have a better chance of increasing student motivation and participation. Of course, that means I must find engaging and academically challenging computer games for my students that can be a challenge.

This research mentioned that the students were on a computer game that focused on measurement, graphing, comparing whole numbers and solving simple equations. The article explained that this computer game was not set up for students to work cooperatively, but students had to sit around one computer and try to get the highest score. I think it would be more beneficial to have students doing a whole group competition where all students are working on the same problems (maybe using a Smartboard) and the teacher can interact with the students. I understand that these computer games are just for review, but I find it important as students are reviewing for me to be around and helping them through those problems. I think having 5 students around a computer will first, not let all students be active in working on the problems and secondly, not allow misunderstandings be corrected.

There are so many different types of computer games in math that students could use, but are they needed to deliver a review. After reviewing this article, I don’t think they are absolutely needed, but I am happy to start using them if they will motivate my students.

Reference

Ke, F. (2008). Computer games application within alternative classroom goal structures: cognitive, metacognitive, and affective evaluation. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(5/6), 539-556. doi:10.1007/s11423-008-9086-5.