Title: Hands-On vs. Virtual Manipulatives for Elementary Math
Author Name: Paige Innes
Selected Case (Published Article): Kukey, E., Gunes, H. & Genc, Z. (2019). Experiences of classroom teachers on the use of hands-on material and educational software in math education. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues. 11(1), 074–086.
1. Introduction
The paper “Experiences of classroom teachers on the use of hands-on material and educational software in math education”, focuses on the implementation of Lego MoretoMath software and lessons in first and second grade classrooms. In the elementary, educational community, there is much discourse surrounding hands-on manipulatives to support math instruction. Since math in real life is centered around real-world context, the authors emphasize the importance of teaching math in relation to daily life (Kukley, 2019). A lack of application for math concepts often leads to students having a negative attitude toward math as they move into the upper grades. When students are in grades one and two, they are in what Piaget describes as the concrete operational stage. This means mental math is often too rigorous for students, and concrete items should be used to support problem-solving. It is stated that “since ancient times, people of several different civilizations have used physical objects to help them solve everyday math problems” (Boggan, 2010, p. 3). This practice has continued with tools such as the abacus to support mathematical thinking. Manipulatives also serve as the foundation for the well-known practices of Maria Montessori. Currently, educators look to the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) for guidance on using manipulatives, which they encourage across all grade levels (Boggan 2010). “Manipulatives help students learn by allowing them to move from concrete experiences to abstract reasoning” (“Research on the” n.d.). In elementary grades, this serves great importance as foundational math skills and concepts are being taught. These skills are required and serve as the foundation for students as they continue their academic careers and lives. Lego MoretoMath works to engage students with lessons implementing both hands-on as well as virtual manipulatives to support problem-solving around big ideas. This study supported the implementation of Lego MoretoMath with students and surveyed engagement and how well it was utilized. As seen in the video below, Lego MoretoMath is user-friendly and supports engagement with manipulatives.
2. Overview of the Case
This study took place in Turkey involving 25 classroom teachers. All of the teachers volunteered to be a part of the study and work with grades one or two. The study’s goal is centered around supporting students problem-solving abilities and contextualizing math concepts. Since the use of manipulatives in math education is grounded in theory, and Legos are a high-engagement item for many students this appears to be a great union. Lego MoretoMath also supports vocabulary, reading, thinking, listening, and speaking in a math classroom. Concrete manipulatives are used to aid student learning, and the software can be used interchangeably to provide a different way of engaging with problems. Prior to this implementation, many students had negative attitudes toward math and many lessons were not contextualized. Including real-world problems, engages students differently in math class and creates a more positive learning environment.
3. Solutions Implemented
In these Turkish classrooms, the Lego MoretoMath curriculum was implemented around 2019 with students in grades one and two. Teachers implemented Lego MoretoMath which is comprised of 48, 45-minute lessons (24 lessons per grade level). Each lesson utilizes the Lego MoretoMath software, Lego bricks, and a student-centered worksheet presenting one or more problems for students to solve. Data was collected through diary entries of activities, observation forms, story development forms, activity observation forms, and interview questions. Lessons were implemented throughout the school year with data collected each time a lesson was implemented. Teachers selected when to teach these lessons as they related to their standard curriculum. Data was then categorized into themes for analysis. This solution was designed to engage students in real-life problem-solving activities with the support of hands-on manipulatives and engaging software.
These lessons were primarily comprised of open-ended questions working to support students’ engagement with real-world problems. This contextualization of math was the primary goal of the study. Incorporating Lego bricks was another strategy of the researchers. Since Lego was something many students were already familiar with, it creates an interest for students even if they already have a negative attitude towards math. This age is often the time when students begin having a negative attitude towards math, so engaging students with fun lessons at their level early supports a love of math.
4. Outcomes
Following implementation, data was broken down into three themes: structure, implementation, and instruction. When it comes to structure, most teachers stated that the software was generally easy to use however, there were issues surrounding language. Many teachers also stated that they preferred to utilize the hands-on Lego bricks as opposed to the MoretoMath brick software. Though five teachers believed the open-ended questions were clear to students, the rest stated they were hard for students to understand.
With regards to implementation, this is where the primary failure of the study becomes apparent, as it relates to the lesson progression. Most teachers stated the rigor did not gradually increase or seem to make sense. Rearranging and altering the questions was the recommendation most teachers made. With this edit being made, teachers would support the utilization of this program again. Teachers also discussed how class sizes are not ideal for implementation. Lessons are best designed for small groups of ten or fewer children, but these lessons are able to be used with groups as large as twenty students.
When it comes to instruction with MoretoMath, teachers did state that they saw an increase in “the development of spatial intelligence” within their students (Kukley, 2010, p. 82). Additionally, many students altered the way they solved problems and gained different thinking skills as they develop their reasoning. There were concerns related to the concertizing of abstract concepts though, so teachers requested further lessons or questions to assist them as they teach these to students.
5. Implications
Within this study, it is clear lessons of this variety can be implemented successfully. Students can be engaged with hands-on manipulatives to support their math learning, and this style of learning has engaged different thinking skills among them. It does however emphasize the hands-on element of manipulatives. Students and teachers were presented with a digital option, and teachers and students alike preferred the physical Lego bricks to the MoretoMath software. This should be considered by educators as they utilize manipulative software rather than physical objects in their math classrooms. Lego MoretoMath should also consider adjusting the lesson ordering and pacing as they move forward with the Lego MoretoMath curriculum. Preparing open-ended questions of this nature also appear to support students’ mathematical thinking. These questions supported students as they vary their thinking skills and develop spatial intelligence.
When considering the next steps for research, I would be interested to see two groupings implementing Lego MoretoMath with only physical bricks and another with only the Lego MoretoMath software. Students and teachers would be expected to use the same problems and worksheets to support learning, but variance would be seen with the manipulatives. This would determine if both are necessary or if one is more effective than another.
References
Boggan, M., Harper, S., & Whitmire, A. (2010). Using Manipulatives to Teach Elementary Mathematics. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 3.
Kukey, E., Gunes, H. & Genc, Z. (2019). Experiences of classroom teachers on the use of hands-on material and educational software in math education. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues. 11(1), 074–086.
[Lego Education]. (2015, January 14). Introducing MoretoMath for Grades 1 and 2 [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/xBhpPkRtkEY
Research on the benefits of manipulatives (n.d.). Retrieved December 9, 2009, from: http://www.etacuisenaire.com/pdf/benefits_of_manipulatives.pdf