Mathematics: Difference between revisions

The educational technology and digital learning wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(9 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{under construction}}
==Promoting learning in mathematics using ICTs==
==Promoting students' skills in mathematics using ICTs==
[[User: Ellen_Hicks | Ellen Hicks]], Memorial University of Newfoundland
[[User: Catherine_Peddle | Catherine Peddle]], Memorial University of Newfoundland


==Problem==
==Problem==
Teaching mathematics in face to face learning in a traditional classroom poses challenges for the teacher to develop students’ mathematical skills. The following studies address specific problems with teaching mathematics face to face. According to Ross, MaDougal, and Hogoboam-Gray (2002) there is evidence that traditional mathematic programs taught using face to face instruction leads to mastery of basic algorithms without conceptual understanding.


Traditional approaches to teaching mathematics are not facilitating productive classroom discourse that allows students to develop habits of mind to engage with mathematics (Walshaw, 2008).
Student engagement is an issue in mathematics classrooms because many students do not like the subject and they find it difficult to learn (Sedig, 2008).  In a study of third grade students, Kiger, Herro, and Prunty (2012) observed that math lessons were often structured in a teacher-led lecture-style method, followed by small group and then individual remediation. Sedig (2008) found that students’ negative attitudes towards mathematics were a result of their experiences in the classroom and how the lessons were conducted.  A study of students who were considered at-risk in mathematics, argued that classes "offered few opportunities for active, engaging learning or activities that students experienced as being relevant" (Kajander, Zuke, & Walton, 2008, p. 1069).  These researchers also reported that disengagement (observed through poor attention spans, completion of assignments, and attendance) was a result of teachers' lack of ability to respond to students' misconceptions and varying ability levels with mathematics. Students in this study reported that they were frustrated with mathematics and could not "see the point of the topics being studied” (p.1059).


According to McLoghhlin (2013) to increase learner engagement with mathematical problem solving the development of instructional model with flexible and learner centered experiences is needed. Traditional teaching is not enhancing active engagement of students’ mathematical concepts because students need to learn complex concepts in a flexible, self paced manner ( McLoghlin, 2013).
Liu (2013) determined that elementary schools are dependent on textbooks for mathematics instruction. Liu identified several problems with existing mathematics textbooks: (a) general presentation of concepts with little consideration for students’ experiences and background (b) written above average reading levels, (c) information and the relationships between concepts are poorly structured.  Pareto, Haake, Lindström, Sjödén, and Gulz (2012) concluded that elementary students' understanding of base-ten concepts was also a barrier to achievement and that traditional instruction alone was not sufficient to develop these concepts. Early negative experiences with mathematics instruction will often shape students’ beliefs and feelings about the subject (Sedig, 2008). Furthermore, these beliefs and feelings that students develop about mathematics are correlated to their achievement levels (Anderson, Rogers, Klinger, Ungerleider, Glickman, & Anderson, 2006).  
 
Pianfetti’s (2000) findings were similar to McLoghlin’s  (2013).  According to Pianfetti’s (2000) study students in the traditional face to face teaching classroom tend to perceive mathematics from a textbook perspective , which means students have difficulty transferring what they learn in class to events they may encounter in their daily lives ( Pianfetti, 2000 ). Students have difficulties understanding  concepts such as distance over and then applying them to concrete events(Pianfetti, 2000 ).Thus, instruction needs to involve new ways to help students better understand abstract concepts (Pianfetti,2000 ).
 
Pianfetti’s(2000) study can be linked to Main and O’Rourke’s ( 2011) study in Australia. According to Main and O’Rourke (2011) The Review Panel of National Numeracy in Australia in 2008 showed concerns over poor numeracy skills in students. Students were not being engaged in the traditional face to face math instruction resulting in lack of fluency in basic math facts and a limited development of higher order mathematical skills( Main and O’Rourke, 2011).There was a need for a more engaging delivery of the curriculum and a collaboration to enhance mathematical understanding ( Main and O’Rourke, 2011).


==Role of ICTs==
==Role of ICTs==
The problem can be addressed through Information Communication Technology (ICT). ICT can promote students learning of mathematical concepts. The following studies address solutions.


Edwards, Rule, and Bloody (2013) studied two mixed ability classes, one class using online laptop learning and the second class receiving traditional face to face learning for ten different math topics. Achievement results were similar for both classes (Edwards, Rule, & Bloody, 2013). Edwards, Rule, and Bloody (2013) recommend blending both modes of learning, online learning and face to face instruction together for best student achievement. A specific finding for the benefit of using online learning with face to face instruction was that students who have difficulty attending to or comprehending the language of a typical lecture, benefit from web based tools (Edwards, Rule, & Bloody, 2013).
The current generation of students has grown up surrounded by technology and preferring video learning and games in comparison to traditional classroom instruction (Edwards, Rule & Boody, 2013). Digital math games can provide an alternative to traditional instructional methods (Liu, 2013). Kim and Chang (2010) reported that computer games are “a potential way to improve students’ performance” (p. 226).  Katmada, Mavridis, and Tsiatsos (2014) designed and researched a mathematics game that could act as a “complementary learning tool” (p. 231). They determined that digital game-based learning was appealing to students and that the students felt computer games improved both their achievement and motivation in mathematics.


In a study of first graders, differences were examined that exist among academic achievement of those students who were learning using virtual manipulatives and those who were taught  with the traditional text and practice activities (Brooks,2006).  According to Brooks (2006), the use of virtual manipulatives as an instructional tool was more effective than traditional text activities. Students received immediate feedback (Brooks, 2006).  
High school students reported that math games “were effective because they (a) combined learning and fun, (b) offered mathematics in adventurous and exploratory context, and (c) challenged students to learn Mathematics” (Kebritchi, Hirumi, & Bai, 2010, p. 436).  Sixth grade students described an adaptable mathematics game as easy, entertaining and that it provided an “innovative approach to the learning process” (Katmanda et al., 2014, p. 238).  


According to Wright (2010) it is clear that information technology tools support learning mathematics from feedback from ICT learners. One of the key findings on computer instruction was that when the student is in control over his or her learning than the effects were greater than when the teacher was in the control (Wright, 2010).
High school teachers recounted that mathematics computer games decreased math phobia and improved on-task behavior (Kebritchi et al., 2010).  These same teachers expressed that digital games offered simulated real life experiences and provided motivation for students to solve problems in order to make progress within the game.  Researchers observed grade four and five students using drill and practice computer games in a summer camp program to be more on task and committed to learning (Ke, 2008).  This study also posited that computer math games positively enhanced student’s attitudes towards mathematics. As well, video evidence of grade three students in a multimedia mathematics intervention supported the high engagement level and attentive behavior of students (Liu, 2013).


According to Luterbach (2013) elegant instruction goes past traditional instruction because it is effective, efficient and inspiring. Examples in Luterbachs’ study focus on the benefits of applications of information communication technologies and mathematics which give learner a knowledge and a sense for the real world applicability of a concept (Luterbach, 2013).
Kebritchi et al. (2010) concluded that collaborative math games were even more attractive than competitive games. Participants in their study preferred multiplayer options over single player environments. In one comparative study of fifth graders, researchers determined that cooperative digital games enhanced positive attitudes towards math more than competitive games (Ke & Grabowski, 207). This study also reported that socio-economically disadvantaged students’ attitudes towards mathematics were significantly improved through cooperative math computer games.
The next study addresses the teacher’s point of view of using ICT. Glazer (2004) followed a teacher who previously taught with limited technology in mathematics, completed a course with Intermath materials and later integrated technology enhanced mathematical investigations in her classroom. According to Glazer (2004) the teacher commented, “I have become very proud. Its not what I’m doing, but what they’re (the students) doing there. I have been much more observant of different types of peer interactions and learning. That’s been much more rewarding for me than seeing tests to grade (p.5).”
An innovative learning  solution is mobile learning, which involves handheld technologies to improve teaching and learning (Kalloo and Mohan, 2012) .A mobile learning application offered the learner multiple strategies for learning mathematics such as game based learning( Kalloo and Mohan,2012).


The final four studies reflect results specific to teaching and learning geometry.
Following a five week study of an instructional computer game, Kebritchi et al. (2010) revealed significant achievement by Pre-Algebra and Algebra students on the district math exam. Another study of a game designed to teach transformational geometry to sixth graders specified that digital games improved achievement (Sedig, 2008). In addition, two grade four classrooms increased achievement after utilizing interactive tabletops (a Computer Supported Collaborative Learning device) with digital math games (Jackson, Brummel, Pollet, & Greer, 2013). Ke and Grabowski (2007) suggested in their study comparing cooperative and competitive digital math games that cooperative digital games promoted mathematical learning both “cognitively and affectively” (p. 257).
According to Santos (2008) students developed problem solving skills,as a result of, using Cabri Geometry software. A result of this study was that students using software were engaged in a line of reflection in which their teachers allowed them opportunity to visualize, explore and connect diverse mathematical contents and problem solving (Santos, 2008).
Starcic (2013) found that, “Computer didactic programs, allow students, a more natural passage through the first three levels of geometric reasoning( problem visualization, problem analysis, and forecasting solutions) than the paper-pen tasks usually required of students (p. 5).”
 
According to Kang (2011) traditional education in mathematics has focused on facts rather than applications while increased intensity of graphic information in computer-generated instruction can hold students’ attention and information in mind. Virtual intense images were helpful with advanced geometry problems (Kang 2011).
Garcia (2007) studied a debate on the use of computers versus pencils for the study of descriptive geometry. The results showed the combination of laptop computer and projector was the preferred method of instruction because computers have been able to improve the technical branches of drawing (Garcia, 2007).


==Obstacles==
==Obstacles==
There are obstacles to promoting mathematical skills with information communication technology.


According to Glazer (2004) technology training for teachers can fall short when needed to enhance student’s learning. In Glazer’s (2004) study a teacher successfully learned to use technology tools in a workshop and received support to use this technology to enhance her students’ learning. With a cognitive apprenticeship model she received support until she could independently implement technology enhanced mathematical investigations (Glazer, 2004).
Hrastinski, Edman, Andersson, Kawnine and Soames (2014) found that mathematics in the world of digital technologies presented unique challenges such as recording expressions and illustrating explanations and symbols particularly with a keyboard and mouse. However, students could utilize tablets, digital pens and/or video technology to illustrate and explain their mathematical ideas.


According to Bos (2009) virtual manipulatives can be difficult to maneuver and cause a student frustration. However, when students are given detailed instructions, examples and guidance to use these virtual manipulatives abstract concepts will become more concrete and the students will gain a higher conceptual understanding (Bos, 2009).
In one case, the design of the math digital game became an obstacle in that the game did not adapt to student ability level (Ke, 2008). As a result, Ke (2008) concluded that students made random guesses at answers and displayed a lack of thoughtful reflection.  Ke recommended that teachers match challenges in digital games to a student’s ability level. In addition, he recommended that games be designed using situated learning activities with characters in stories, that the difficulty level be “pleasantly challenging” (p. 1619) for students, and that reflections be scaffolded.


According to Wright (2010) networked handheld technologies are used to run small software owned by someone who is not part of the classroom, the software programmer. The teacher may find it difficult to help in learning unless requested by the student (Wright, 2010). As well, the software may be too challenging or easy (Wright, 2010).To prevent this obstacle from happening the teacher and learner need to use the handheld technologies as problem solving tools and with joint understanding, thus the teacher has to become familiar with the technology before using it in his or her classroom (Wright, 2010). Wright (2010) identified another obstacle which would be learners in an individual experience. However, teachers can promote social interaction using technology such as providing mathematical activities where students submit their solutions to a public display, iniating justifications of solutions (Wright, 2010).
Eid (2005) reported that the availability of computers was a limitation in his study of online problem solving. That limitation coupled with the novelty of technology can become a distraction in the classroom when offered in limited amounts and to only small groups of students at a time (Jackson et al., 2013). Jackson et al. (2013) recommended that technology such as the interactive table top remain in classrooms so that students have frequent access and will become “acclimatized to it” (p. 327). Sharing of technology and the Bring Your Own Device model may decrease costs and increase student accessibility to technology (Kiger et al., 2012).  
 
According to Garcia (2007) some people believe that computers cannot substitute a pencil in a student’s hand since they do not have the versatility or availability in technical drawing. However, programs such as Macromedia Flash facilitate geometry and visualization systems (Garcia, 2007). Computers have brought an evolution to the technical branches of drawing Garcia, 2007).


==Works cited==
==Works cited==
Anderson, J.O., Rogers, W., Klinger, D.A., Ungerleider, C., Glickman, V., & Anderson, B. (2006). Student and school correlates of mathematics achievement: Models of school performance based on Pan-Canadian Student Assessment. ''Canadian Journal of Education'', 29(3), 706-730. doi:10.2307/20054192


[[Category:Special contents]][[Category:Position paper]]
Edwards, C., Rule, A., & Boody, R. (2013). Comparison of face-to-face and online mathematics learning of sixth graders. ''Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching'', 32(1), 25-47.
Bos, B.(2009). Technology with cognitive and mathematical Fidelity: what it means for the math classroom. Computers in the Schools, 26(2), 107-114.
Url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07380560902906088
 
Bouck, E., & Gauri, J. (2012). Assistive technology and mathematics education: reports from the field.  Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 31(2), 115-138
 
Edwards, C., Rule., & Bloody, R. (2013). Comparison of face to face and online mathematics learning of sixth graders. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 32(1), 25-47


Garcia, R., Quiros, J., Santos, R., Gonzalez, S., & Fernanz, S.(2007). Interactive multimedia animation with Macromedia flashes in descriptive geometry teaching. Computers & Education, 49(3), 615-639.
Eid, G. K. (2005). An investigation into the effects and factors influencing computer-based online math problem-solving in primary schools. ''Journal of Educational Technology Systems'', 33(3), 223-240. doi:10.2190/J3Q5-BAA5-2L62-AEY3


Glazer, E. (2004). From a caterpillar to a butterfly: the growth of a teacher in developing technology – enhanced mathematical investigations. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 114-138.
Hrastinski, S., Edman, A., Andersson, F., Kawnine, T., & Soames, C. (2014). Informal math coaching by instant messaging: Two case studies of how university students coach K-12 students. ''Interactive Learning Environments'', 22(1), 84-96. doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.641682


Hu, X., & Craig, S. (2012). The effects of a traditional and technology- based after school program on 6th grade students  mathematics skills. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 31(1), 17-38.  
Jackson, A., Brummel, B., Pollet, C., & Greer, D. (2013). An evaluation of interactive tabletops in elementary mathematics education. ''Educational Technology Research & Development'', 61(2), 311-332. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9287-4


Hwang, W., & Hu, S. (2013). Analysis of peer learning behaviors using multiple representations in virtual reality and their impacts on geometry problem solving. Computers & Education, 62, 308 -319.  
Kajander, A., Zuke, C., & Walton, G. (2008). Teaching unheard voices: Students at-risk in mathematics. ''Canadian Journal of Education'', 31(4), 1039-1063.  


Hollebrands, K. (2007). The role of a dynamic software program for geometry in the strategies high school mathematics students employ. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 164-192.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/30034955
Katmada, A., Mavridis, A., & Tsiatsos, T. (2014). Implementing a game for supporting learning in mathematics. ''Electronic Journal of E-Learning'', 12(3), 230-242.  


Kang, H. & Zentall, S. (2011). Computer-generated geometry instruction: a preliminary study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 59(6), 783-797.  
Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay? ''Computers & Education'', 51(4), 1609-1620. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.03.003


Luterbach, K. (2012-2013). Elegant instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, Vol. 41(2), 183-204. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.2190/ET.41.2.f 
Ke, F., & Grabowski, B. (2007). Gameplaying for maths learning: Cooperative or not? ''British Journal of Educational Technology'', 38(2), 249-259. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00593.x


Main, S. & O’Rourke, J. (2011) New directions for traditional lesson: can handheld game consoles enhance mental mathematical skills. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 26(2), 43-55.  
Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. ''Computers & Education'', 55(2), 427-443. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.007


McLoughlin,C. (2013). Scaffolding conceptual learning in mathematics technology enhanced pedagology, a preliminary evaluation of student engagement with screencasts. AACE Journal, 20(1), 259-265.
Kiger, D., Herro, D., & Prunty, D. (2012). Examining the influence of a mobile learning intervention on third grade math achievement. ''Journal of Research on Technology in Education'', 45(1), 61-82.  


Pianfetti, E. (2000). From the abstract to the practical: how motion media grapher helps students understand and interpret mathematical concepts. AACE Journal, 20(1), 328-333.  
Kim, S., & Chang, M. (2010). Computer games for the math achievement of diverse students. ''Journal of Educational Technology & Society'', 13(3), 224-232.  


Ross, J., & McDougal, D., & Hogoboam-Gray, A. (2002). Research on reform in mathematics education. Alberta Journal of Educational research, 48(2), 122-138.
Liu, Yuliang (2013). A comparative study of integrating multimedia into the third grade math curriculum to improve math learning. ''Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching'', 32(3), 321-336.  


Santos, T., & Cristobal, E. (2008). Emerging high school students’ problem solving trajectories on the use of dynamic software. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 27(3), 325-340. http://search.proquest.com/docview/220641623?accountid=12378 
Pareto, L., Haake, M., Lindström, P., Sjödén, B., & Gulz, A. (2012). A teachable-agent-based game affording collaboration and competition: Evaluating math comprehension and motivation. ''Educational Technology Research & Development'', 60(5), 723-751. doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9246-5


Starcic, A. I., Cotic, M. and Zajc, M. (2013), Design-based research on the use of a tangible user interface for geometry teaching in an inclusive classroom. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44: 729–744.  doi:  10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01341.x 
Sedig, K. (2008). From play to thoughtful learning: A design strategy to engage children with mathematical representations. ''Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching'', 27(1), 65-101.  


Steen,K., Brooks, D., & Lyon, T. (2006). The impact of virtual manipulatives on first grade geometry instruction and learning. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching ,25(4), 373-391.
http://search.proquest.com/docview/220637236?accountid=12378


Vani, K., & Permanend, M. (2012) Correlating questionaire data with actual usage in a mobile learning study for high school mathematics. Electronic Journal of E Learning, 10(1),  76-89. http://search.proquest.com.qe2a-proxy.mun.ca/docview/1010336132?accountid=12378


Walshaw, M., & Anthony, G.(2008). The Teacher’s role in classroom discourse: a review of recent research into mathematics classrooms. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 516-551.  http://www.jstor.org/stable/40071136


Wright,D.,(2010). Orchestrating the instruments: integrating the ICT in the secondary mathematics classroom through handheld
[[Category:Special contents]][[Category:Position paper]] [[Category:Mathematics]]
technology networks. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(2),277-284. http//dx.doi.org/10.1080/1475939x.2010.491239.

Latest revision as of 12:09, 10 July 2018

Promoting learning in mathematics using ICTs

Ellen Hicks, Memorial University of Newfoundland

Problem

Student engagement is an issue in mathematics classrooms because many students do not like the subject and they find it difficult to learn (Sedig, 2008). In a study of third grade students, Kiger, Herro, and Prunty (2012) observed that math lessons were often structured in a teacher-led lecture-style method, followed by small group and then individual remediation. Sedig (2008) found that students’ negative attitudes towards mathematics were a result of their experiences in the classroom and how the lessons were conducted. A study of students who were considered at-risk in mathematics, argued that classes "offered few opportunities for active, engaging learning or activities that students experienced as being relevant" (Kajander, Zuke, & Walton, 2008, p. 1069). These researchers also reported that disengagement (observed through poor attention spans, completion of assignments, and attendance) was a result of teachers' lack of ability to respond to students' misconceptions and varying ability levels with mathematics. Students in this study reported that they were frustrated with mathematics and could not "see the point of the topics being studied” (p.1059).

Liu (2013) determined that elementary schools are dependent on textbooks for mathematics instruction. Liu identified several problems with existing mathematics textbooks: (a) general presentation of concepts with little consideration for students’ experiences and background (b) written above average reading levels, (c) information and the relationships between concepts are poorly structured. Pareto, Haake, Lindström, Sjödén, and Gulz (2012) concluded that elementary students' understanding of base-ten concepts was also a barrier to achievement and that traditional instruction alone was not sufficient to develop these concepts. Early negative experiences with mathematics instruction will often shape students’ beliefs and feelings about the subject (Sedig, 2008). Furthermore, these beliefs and feelings that students develop about mathematics are correlated to their achievement levels (Anderson, Rogers, Klinger, Ungerleider, Glickman, & Anderson, 2006).

Role of ICTs

The current generation of students has grown up surrounded by technology and preferring video learning and games in comparison to traditional classroom instruction (Edwards, Rule & Boody, 2013). Digital math games can provide an alternative to traditional instructional methods (Liu, 2013). Kim and Chang (2010) reported that computer games are “a potential way to improve students’ performance” (p. 226). Katmada, Mavridis, and Tsiatsos (2014) designed and researched a mathematics game that could act as a “complementary learning tool” (p. 231). They determined that digital game-based learning was appealing to students and that the students felt computer games improved both their achievement and motivation in mathematics.

High school students reported that math games “were effective because they (a) combined learning and fun, (b) offered mathematics in adventurous and exploratory context, and (c) challenged students to learn Mathematics” (Kebritchi, Hirumi, & Bai, 2010, p. 436). Sixth grade students described an adaptable mathematics game as easy, entertaining and that it provided an “innovative approach to the learning process” (Katmanda et al., 2014, p. 238).

High school teachers recounted that mathematics computer games decreased math phobia and improved on-task behavior (Kebritchi et al., 2010). These same teachers expressed that digital games offered simulated real life experiences and provided motivation for students to solve problems in order to make progress within the game. Researchers observed grade four and five students using drill and practice computer games in a summer camp program to be more on task and committed to learning (Ke, 2008). This study also posited that computer math games positively enhanced student’s attitudes towards mathematics. As well, video evidence of grade three students in a multimedia mathematics intervention supported the high engagement level and attentive behavior of students (Liu, 2013).

Kebritchi et al. (2010) concluded that collaborative math games were even more attractive than competitive games. Participants in their study preferred multiplayer options over single player environments. In one comparative study of fifth graders, researchers determined that cooperative digital games enhanced positive attitudes towards math more than competitive games (Ke & Grabowski, 207). This study also reported that socio-economically disadvantaged students’ attitudes towards mathematics were significantly improved through cooperative math computer games.

Following a five week study of an instructional computer game, Kebritchi et al. (2010) revealed significant achievement by Pre-Algebra and Algebra students on the district math exam. Another study of a game designed to teach transformational geometry to sixth graders specified that digital games improved achievement (Sedig, 2008). In addition, two grade four classrooms increased achievement after utilizing interactive tabletops (a Computer Supported Collaborative Learning device) with digital math games (Jackson, Brummel, Pollet, & Greer, 2013). Ke and Grabowski (2007) suggested in their study comparing cooperative and competitive digital math games that cooperative digital games promoted mathematical learning both “cognitively and affectively” (p. 257).

Obstacles

Hrastinski, Edman, Andersson, Kawnine and Soames (2014) found that mathematics in the world of digital technologies presented unique challenges such as recording expressions and illustrating explanations and symbols particularly with a keyboard and mouse. However, students could utilize tablets, digital pens and/or video technology to illustrate and explain their mathematical ideas.

In one case, the design of the math digital game became an obstacle in that the game did not adapt to student ability level (Ke, 2008). As a result, Ke (2008) concluded that students made random guesses at answers and displayed a lack of thoughtful reflection. Ke recommended that teachers match challenges in digital games to a student’s ability level. In addition, he recommended that games be designed using situated learning activities with characters in stories, that the difficulty level be “pleasantly challenging” (p. 1619) for students, and that reflections be scaffolded.

Eid (2005) reported that the availability of computers was a limitation in his study of online problem solving. That limitation coupled with the novelty of technology can become a distraction in the classroom when offered in limited amounts and to only small groups of students at a time (Jackson et al., 2013). Jackson et al. (2013) recommended that technology such as the interactive table top remain in classrooms so that students have frequent access and will become “acclimatized to it” (p. 327). Sharing of technology and the Bring Your Own Device model may decrease costs and increase student accessibility to technology (Kiger et al., 2012).

Works cited

Anderson, J.O., Rogers, W., Klinger, D.A., Ungerleider, C., Glickman, V., & Anderson, B. (2006). Student and school correlates of mathematics achievement: Models of school performance based on Pan-Canadian Student Assessment. Canadian Journal of Education, 29(3), 706-730. doi:10.2307/20054192

Edwards, C., Rule, A., & Boody, R. (2013). Comparison of face-to-face and online mathematics learning of sixth graders. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 32(1), 25-47.

Eid, G. K. (2005). An investigation into the effects and factors influencing computer-based online math problem-solving in primary schools. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(3), 223-240. doi:10.2190/J3Q5-BAA5-2L62-AEY3

Hrastinski, S., Edman, A., Andersson, F., Kawnine, T., & Soames, C. (2014). Informal math coaching by instant messaging: Two case studies of how university students coach K-12 students. Interactive Learning Environments, 22(1), 84-96. doi:10.1080/10494820.2011.641682

Jackson, A., Brummel, B., Pollet, C., & Greer, D. (2013). An evaluation of interactive tabletops in elementary mathematics education. Educational Technology Research & Development, 61(2), 311-332. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9287-4

Kajander, A., Zuke, C., & Walton, G. (2008). Teaching unheard voices: Students at-risk in mathematics. Canadian Journal of Education, 31(4), 1039-1063.

Katmada, A., Mavridis, A., & Tsiatsos, T. (2014). Implementing a game for supporting learning in mathematics. Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 12(3), 230-242.

Ke, F. (2008). A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay? Computers & Education, 51(4), 1609-1620. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2008.03.003

Ke, F., & Grabowski, B. (2007). Gameplaying for maths learning: Cooperative or not? British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 249-259. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00593.x

Kebritchi, M., Hirumi, A., & Bai, H. (2010). The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers & Education, 55(2), 427-443. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.007

Kiger, D., Herro, D., & Prunty, D. (2012). Examining the influence of a mobile learning intervention on third grade math achievement. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 45(1), 61-82.

Kim, S., & Chang, M. (2010). Computer games for the math achievement of diverse students. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 224-232.

Liu, Yuliang (2013). A comparative study of integrating multimedia into the third grade math curriculum to improve math learning. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 32(3), 321-336.

Pareto, L., Haake, M., Lindström, P., Sjödén, B., & Gulz, A. (2012). A teachable-agent-based game affording collaboration and competition: Evaluating math comprehension and motivation. Educational Technology Research & Development, 60(5), 723-751. doi:10.1007/s11423-012-9246-5

Sedig, K. (2008). From play to thoughtful learning: A design strategy to engage children with mathematical representations. Journal of Computers in Mathematics & Science Teaching, 27(1), 65-101.

Retrieved from "https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/mediawiki/index.php?title=Mathematics&oldid=69000"