Final presentation


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Define Manipulative: Hynes’ (1986) defines manipulatives as “concrete models that incorporate mathematical concepts, appeal to several senses and can be touched and moved around by students” (Hynes, 1986, p. 11). White, Swan and Marshall (2009) echo these ideas in their definition, “a manipulative material is an object(s) that can be handled by an individual in a sensory manner during which process, and conscious and unconscious thinking will be fostered” (p. 2).provide scaffold instruction of the curriculum through a progression from physical objects to representational forms and abstract thought”
  • The participants for the study were identified by analyzing the students with the most need to mathematics intervention. It was decided that the participants would be chosen within the 11% of the population who received special education services.Questionnaire subsections A) feelings associated with math B) usefulness of methods/tools in learning mathC) application/ comparison to other subjects D) self-assessment of abilitiesAssessment topics Pre and Post assessment covering “Rational Reasoning” curriculum Pre and Post assessment covering “Equations & Expressions” curriculum
  • Based on these results the students did not show any significant influence of the use of manipulatives during instruction as measured by Unit 1 and Unit 2 pre and post assessments.
  • Final presentation

    1. 1. Kathleen Burns
    2. 2. Use of Manipulatives and Performance Task in Mathematics Why this topic was chosen… MCMS’ consistent students with disabilities poor scores on standardized testing in mathematics subsections. Increasing focuses placed STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) instruction Preparing students for a 21st century world
    3. 3. What impact does the inclusion of the use of manipulatives have on math achievement for students with disabilities? Benefits of Manipulatives (According to the Literature) • Provides scaffolding between concrete and abstract • Applies to multiple learning styles • Visual represent/model problem solving • Encourages students to make mathematical relationships
    4. 4. Within the MCMS student population 20% received gifted services, 11 % receive special education services, an d 0.1% received English Language Learners (ELL) services. Participants of study were identified as 7th grade special education students receiving math services 1st instrument : Teacher made surveycompiled of 15 scaled response questions to measure students 2nd instrument : Teacher made diagnostic and summative assessme nts Limitations of study
    5. 5. • Questionnaire Results • How were data values formulated? Subsection A = feelings associated with math results? What were the Subsection B= usefulness of tools/methods in math Subsection C= comparison to other subjects Subsection D= Self-assessment of abilities Questionnaire Subsection values 1. I like learning new math concepts 2. I see a purpose in studying math 4. Using different tools (manipulatives) help me learn math 5. Using paper and pencil methods (handouts) help me learn math 6. Learning a math concept in more than one way helps me understand it better 7. It is hard to remember how to solve a math problem outside of class 8. I worry more about math than other subjects 9. I have confidence when it comes to mathematics 10. The methods my teacher uses effects my learning in math 11. I have a good attitude about math 12. I try my best in math 13. I can work out math problems quickly 14. Applying what we learned to real life helps me understand the concept 15. Using different activities in class helps me learn math Questionnaire Results 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.1 3 Subection A Subsection B Subsection C Subsection D Unit 1 Reults- Instruction without Manipulatives Unit 2 Results- Instruction with Manipulatives
    6. 6. • Assessment results Participant Assesment Gains of Each Unit Unit 1 gains Unit 2 gains Points gained between Diagnostic to Summative Assessment 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Participant Number 9 10 11 12 13 14 • A Student’s t-test was conduct using the student’s gains between Unit 1 and Unit 2. • Results of this analysis indicate that the difference between Unit 1 results and Unit 2 results is not statistically significant (p=0.45).