Many students struggle to develop a solid foundation in understanding basic measurement concepts. This study addressed a gap in the research on technological instructional environments by comparing the effects of presenting students with computer and non-computer treatments (Battista, 2007) focused on developing a coordination between the markings on a ruler and the iteration of a unit of length.
This study set out to answer two questions. Is a treatment presented through GSP more effective than a paper and pencil environment in helping students develop a coordination between the markings on a ruler and the iteration of a unit of length? Which of the treatments presentation modes, if either, is effective at increasing students' ability level in measurement as described by a domain specific learning progression?
Students' ability levels were measured using a domain specific developmental progression (Clements & Sarama, 2007b) and change was tracked by following the microgenetic method (Siegler & Svetina, 2006). Thirty-six kindergarten and second grade students were administered a pre-, post-, and delayed post-test. The treatments were administered over six weekly sessions with three trials in each session. The correctness of responses as well as the strategy used for each of the 18 trials was recorded.
The pre-, post-, and delayed post-test scores were compared using paired samples tests to verify if any student growth took place during the study. The correctness and strategy data was compiled to display the changes over trial and session for each of the two treatment groups and the one comparison group. These graphical displays were used to compare the rate at which the different groups changed, the overall growth experienced.
There was no significant difference between the treatment modes of presentation for students' learning or growth. The two treatment groups outperformed the comparison in several ways and specific strategies were identified in the microgenetic analysis that has implications for instruction. Further study of student abstraction of intervals of length, as well as developing GSP displays for teaching measurement, should be explored.
|School:||Illinois State University|
|School Location:||United States -- Illinois|
|Source:||DAI-A 71/01, Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Mathematics education, Early childhood education, Educational psychology|
|Keywords:||Dynamic geometry environments, Geometer's Sketchpad, Learning trajectories, Length, Measurement, Unit iteration|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be