Hickey, D. T., Moore, A. L., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2001). The motivational and academic consequences of elementary mathematics environments: Do constructivist innovations and reforms make a difference? American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 611-652. CARET summary.
Abstract: This study examined the effects of a videodisc-based mathematical problem- solving series known as The Adventures of Jasper Woodbury, as imple- mented by one school district within a constructivist-inspired reform of its math curricula. The motivational and academic consequences of both the specific innovation and the broader reforms were examined in 19 fifth- grade classrooms in two pairs of closely matched schools. Onepair of schools served higher-achieving high-socioeconomic status (SES) students while the other pair served relatively lower-achieving low-SES students. Significantly larger gains on the Mathematical Problem-solving subtest of the ITBS were documented in the 10 classrooms where the Jasper activities were implemented, and in the 10 classrooms that were ranked as relatively more con- sistent with the broader curricular reform goals. The largest relative gains were found in the five classrooms that both used the Jasper activities and were ranked more consistent with the broader reforms. The positive consequences of both the Jasper activities and the broader reforms were documented in both pairs of schools. The implications of these results are discussed relative to currentproposals for curricular reform and research on educational innovations.
o RQs
1. Do constructionist reforms and instructional programs in the domain of elementary mathematics make a difference in students’ academic achievement and motivational responses?
2. Examine the main effects and interactive effects of 3 independent variables (instructional group, SES, reform orientation) and dependent variables (subjective motivational experience, motivational beliefs, mathematical achievement).
o Units
§ School
§ School district in Southeast U.S.
§ School district as a whole was in process of implementing mathematics educational reform as recommended by the NCTM (constructivist, higher level thinking and problem solving, etc.). Started 6 years prior to study.
§ School district already in the process of incorporating Jasper materials in its elementary schools, thus allowing for this study.
§ 2 pairs of closely matched schools, one set to use the Jasper activities, one not (control group)
§ 19 total 5th grade classrooms
§ 10 Jasper classrooms – 5 classified as more consistent with reform education (constructivist, NCTM standards); 5 classified as less consistent (more teacher-oriented/directed)
§ 9 non-Jasper classrooms – 5 classified as more consistent with reform education; 4 classified as less consistent
§ Teachers
§ Two teachers who had participated in prior Jasper activities trained participating teachers in first 3 Jasper activities via daylong workshops
§ Demonstrations of technology
§ Discussion of how activities are best implemented
§ Theory behind activities
§ Teachers received no other formal training or manuals.
§ IRT available for help
§ No other info about teacher demographics
§ Per school definitions, some teachers were more consistent with reform education, some less
§ Students
§ One pair of schools served mostly higher SES, higher achieving students; while the other served mostly lower SES, lower achieving students.
§ In terms of standardized measures in math achievement, 40 percentile points separate the mean performance of the students in the school pairs
§ More than 1/3 of the student population in the low SES transferred in/out of the schools.
§ Admin
§ Instructional Resource Teacher (IRT) available in each school to help teachers incorporate the materials and methods associated with the curriculum reform
§ IRT does not have any teaching assignment and also helped the trainers along with the math dept. coordinator
§ Per school reform, school administration was on-board with study
§ Outside admin
§ Met with IRTs and administered the Motivational Beliefs surveys
§ Explained the administration process of the Motivational Experiences surveys to teachers.
§ Otherwise did NOT supervise treatment
o Treatment
§ Adventures of Jasper Woodbury, shown previously to have a positive effect on student attitudes and achievement in mathematics.
§ 1-year period
§ Jasper classrooms
§ Jasper activity intended to follow pattern of 3 – 4 class period over 3 – 4 days
§ Administer motivational beliefs survey mid-way through.
§ Between Jasper activities, a comparison math unit would occur.
§ Administer motivational experiences survey mid-way through.
§ Non-Jasper classrooms
§ Comparison math units
§ Administer motivational experiences survey mid-way through.
o Observations (methods)
· Standardized testing scores (ITBS test Form K – NCTM geared) pre (only received percentiles) / post
· Teacher questionnaires – issued at time of ME surveys to assess divergence from the plan, curricular objectives, nature of grades, rewards, etc.
· IRT interviews and surveys (about classrooms, etc. for initial ranking more/less reform standing)
· Student surveys
§ 50 question survey assessment on Motivational Beliefs (MB) pre / post
§ Motivational Experience survey (ME)
o Settings
§ Individual student outcomes
§ Students overall reported lower subjective competence on Jasper activities than non-Jasper activities, though it did increase through the 3 activities.
§ Students in the Jasper classrooms appraised the Jasper activities to be less relevant than the comparison activities.
§ Jasper environment diminished students’ focus on demonstrating one’s competence and “looking smart”.
§ Motivational beliefs appeared unchanged between Jasper and non-Jasper classrooms
§ Classroom outcomes
§ Students in each Jasper classroom improved in Problem Solving and Data Interpretation skills compared to non-Jasper classrooms, where each classroom decreased or remained the same.
§ A similar pattern occurred for Concepts and Estimation.
§ Mathematical Computation decreased in both sets of classrooms.
§ Students in the more-consistent classrooms showed higher gains than those in the less consistent classrooms.
§ Mathematic computation scores declined in the 5 more consistent Jasper classrooms but increased in the less-consistent Jasper classrooms.
§ Cohort outcomes?
§ Low SES schools’ students reported dramatically more positive task appraisals and motivation orientation than the high SES schools.
§ Low SES students appraised Jasper and comparison activities as equally relevant, while high SES students judged them as less relevant.
§ Positive consequences for conceptual knowledge and estimation skills were limited to the high SES classrooms.
o Findings
§ No negative consequences from applying the Jasper activities.
§ Jasper activities in the math curricula have a positive effect on 5th graders’ ability to solve moderately complex math problems.
§ Differences attributed to Jasper activities were themselves different in high and low SES students.
§ Mathematic computation scores increased in the less-consistent Jasper classrooms because or more “drill and kill” practice methods before assessment.
§ Appraisal of the Jasper activities by high SES as less relevant could have had a lot to do with parental concerns of advancing through as many levels math curricula as possible, which is a basis for placement in higher middle school math.
§ Positive consequences for conceptual knowledge and estimation skills were limited to the high SES classrooms potentially because teachers in the low SES Jasper classrooms used a compressed form of implementation of the Jasper activities across class periods in a single day.
§ Jasper activities by themselves did not increase motivation.
§ Positive effects of Jasper activities were largest in more consistent classrooms.
§ Coordinating both instructional innovation and curricular reforms around a common constructivist perspective is the most effective way of enhancing students’ conceptual understanding of math and their ability to solve complex math problems.
o Take-away
§ Admittedly, there was a lack of comparable information on instructional practices, which made it a bit more difficult to garner results.
§ Obvious need for ongoing training and feedback for teachers implementing student-centered teaching strategies and for the Jasper activities.
§ Overall, a good, in depth research study with nested, complex measures and variables. Make a good case for more student-centered instruction as well as the Jasper activities and possibly other similar programs. However, this study was focused more on the reform aspect than the technology aspect.
§ One glaring issue remains the drop in computational skills. Somehow, more practice needs to be incorporated into student-centered reform learning and the Jasper activities. Getting the higher level concepts and helping students think is great and extremely important, but being able to compute is also of high importance, especially as the student gets to higher math, especially collegiately where the teaching style is different and moves much faster. It is not acceptable that students may get the concept but can’t do the computations and thus can’t really apply the concept.
§ Parental diffusion of innovation occurred specifically in the high SES schools because parents were more concerned with quantity, not quality because of higher math placement at the next level.
0 responses so far ↓
There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.