An official website of the United States government
Abstract Natural language helps express mathematical thinking and contexts. Conventional mathematical notation (CMN) best suits expressions and equations. Each is essential; each also has limitations, especially for learners. Our research studies how programming can be a advantageous third language that can also help restore mathematical connections that are hidden by topic‐centred curricula. Restoring opportunities for surprise and delight reclaims mathematics' creative nature. Studies of children's use of language in mathematics and their programming behaviours guide our iterative design/redesign of mathematical microworlds in which students, ages 7–11, use programming in their regular school lessonsas a language for learning mathematics. Though driven by mathematics, not coding, the microworlds develop the programming over time so that it continues to support children's developing mathematical ideas. This paper briefly describes microworlds EDC has tested with well over 400 7‐to‐8‐year‐olds in school, and others tested (or about to be tested) with over 200 8‐to‐11‐year‐olds. Our challenge was to satisfy schools' topical orientation and fit easily within regular classroom study but use and foreshadow other mathematical learning to remove the siloes. The design/redesign research and evaluation is exploratory, without formal methodology. We are also more formally studying effects on children's learning. That ongoing study is not reported here. Practitioner notesWhat is already knownActive learning—doing—supports learning.Collaborative learning—doingtogether—supports learning.Classroom discourse—focused, relevantdiscussion, not just listening—supports learning.Clear articulation of one's thinking, even just to oneself, helps develop that thinking.What this paper addsThe common languages we use for classroom mathematics—natural language for conveying the meaning and context of mathematical situations and for explaining our reasoning; and the formal (written) language of conventional mathematical notation, the symbols we use in mathematical expressions and equations—are both essential but each presents hurdles that necessitate the other. Yet, even together, they are insufficient especially for young learners.Programming, appropriately designed and used, can be the third language that both reduces barriers and provides the missing expressive and creative capabilities children need.Appropriate design for use in regular mathematics classrooms requires making key mathematical content obvious, strong and the ‘driver’ of the activities, and requires reducing tech ‘overhead’ to near zero.Continued usefulness across the grades requires developing children's sophistication and knowledge with the language; the powerful ways that children rapidly acquire facility with (natural) language provides guidance for ways they can learn a formal language as well.Implications for policy and/or practiceMathematics teaching can take advantage of the ways children learn through experimentation and attention to the results, and of the ways children use their language brain even for mathematics.In particular, programming—in microworlds driven by the mathematical content, designed to minimise distraction and overhead, open to exploration and discoveryen routeto focused aims, and in which childrenself‐evaluate—can allow clear articulation of thought, experimentation with immediate feedback.As it aids the mathematics, it also builds computational thinking and satisfies schools' increasing concerns to broaden access to ideas of computer science.
more »
« less
Teaching little kids big sentences: A randomized controlled trial showing that children with DLD respond to complex syntax intervention embedded within the context of preschool/kindergarten science instruction
Abstract BackgroundThe language of the science curriculum is complex, even in the early grades. To communicate their scientific observations, children must produce complex syntax, particularly complement clauses (e.g.,I think it will float;We noticed that it vibrates). Complex syntax is often challenging for children with developmental language disorder (DLD), and thus their learning and communication of science may be compromised. AimsWe asked whether recast therapy delivered in the context of a science curriculum led to gains in complement clause use and scientific content knowledge. To understand the efficacy of recast therapy, we compared changes in science and language knowledge in children who received treatment for complement clauses embedded in a first‐grade science curriculum to two active control conditions (vocabulary + science, phonological awareness + science). Methods & ProceduresThis 2‐year single‐site three‐arm parallel randomized controlled trial was conducted in Delaware, USA. Children with DLD, not yet in first grade and with low accuracy on complement clauses, were eligible. Thirty‐three 4–7‐year‐old children participated in the summers of 2018 and 2019 (2020 was cancelled due to COVID‐19). We assigned participants to arms using 1:1:1 pseudo‐random allocation (avoiding placing siblings together). The intervention consisted of 39 small‐group sessions of recast therapy, robust vocabulary instruction or phonological awareness intervention during eight science units over 4 weeks, followed by two science units (1 week) taught without language intervention. Pre‐/post‐measures were collected 3 weeks before and after camp by unmasked assessors. Outcomes & ResultsPrimary outcome measures were accuracy on a 20‐item probe of complement clause production and performance on ten 10‐item unit tests (eight science + language, two science only). Complete data were available for 31 children (10 grammar, 21 active control); two others were lost to follow‐up. Both groups made similar gains on science unit tests for science + language content (pre versus post,d= 2.9,p< 0.0001; group,p= 0.24). The grammar group performed significantly better at post‐test than the active control group (d= 2.5,p= 0.049) on complement clause probes and marginally better on science‐only unit tests (d= 2.5,p= 0.051). Conclusions & ImplicationsChildren with DLD can benefit from language intervention embedded in curricular content and learn both language and science targets taught simultaneously. Tentative findings suggest that treatment for grammar targets may improve academic outcomes. What this paper addsWhat is already known on the subjectWe know that recast therapy focused on morphology is effective but very time consuming. Treatment for complex syntax in young children has preliminary efficacy data available. Prior research provides mixed evidence as to children’s ability to learn language targets in conjunction with other information.What this study addsThis study provides additional data supporting the efficacy of intensive complex syntax recast therapy for children ages 4–7 with Developmental Language Disorder. It also provides data that children can learn language targets and science curricular content simultaneously.What are the clinical implications of this work?As SLPs, we have to talk about something to deliver language therapy; we should consider talking about curricular content. Recast therapy focused on syntactic frames is effective with young children.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1748298
- PAR ID:
- 10410762
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley-Blackwell
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders
- Volume:
- 58
- Issue:
- 5
- ISSN:
- 1368-2822
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 1551-1569
- Size(s):
- p. 1551-1569
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract What is vision's role in driving early word production? To answer this, we assessed parent‐report vocabulary questionnaires administered to congenitally blind children (N = 40, Mean age = 24 months [R: 7–57 months]) and compared the size and contents of their productive vocabulary to those of a large normative sample of sighted children (N = 6574). We found that on average, blind children showed a roughly half‐year vocabulary delay relative to sighted children, amid considerable variability. However, the content of blind and sighted children's vocabulary was statistically indistinguishable in word length, part of speech, semantic category, concreteness, interactiveness, and perceptual modality. At a finer‐grained level, we also found that words’ perceptual properties intersect with children's perceptual abilities. Our findings suggest that while an absence of visual input may initially make vocabulary development more difficult, the content of the early productive vocabulary is largely resilient to differences in perceptual access. Research HighlightsInfants and toddlers born blind (with no other diagnoses) show a 7.5 month productive vocabulary delay on average, with wide variability.Across the studied age range (7–57 months), vocabulary delays widened with age.Blind and sighted children's early vocabularies contain similar distributions of word lengths, parts of speech, semantic categories, and perceptual modalities.Blind children (but not sighted children) were more likely to say visual words which could also be experienced through other senses.more » « less
-
Abstract This paper reports on the first iteration of the Computational Thinking Summer Institute, a month‐long programme in which high school teachers co‐designed computationally enhanced mathematics and science curricula with researchers. The co‐design process itself was a constructionist learning experience for teachers resulting in constructionist curricula to be used in their own classrooms. We present three case studies to illustrate different ways teachers and researchers divided the labour of co‐design and the implications of these different co‐design styles for teacher learning and classroom enactment. Specifically, some teachers programmed their own computational tools, while others helped to conceptualise them but left the construction to their co‐design partners. Results indicate that constructionist co‐design is a promising dual approach to curriculum and professional development but that sometimes these two goals are in tension. Most teachers gained considerable confidence and skills in computational thinking, but sometimes the pressure to finish curriculum development during the institute led teachers to leave construction of computational tools to their co‐design partners, limiting their own opportunities for computational learning. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topic?Computational tools can support constructionist science and math learning by making powerful ideas tangible.Supporting teachers to learn computational thinking and to use constructionist pedagogies is challenging.What this paper adds?Constructionist co‐design is a promising approach to simultaneously support curriculum development and professional development, but there are tensions to navigate in trying to accomplish both goals simultaneously.Implications for practice and/or policyDesigners of professional development should consider constructionist co‐design as an approach but should be aware of potential tensions and prepare for them.more » « less
-
Abstract Capturing evidence for dynamic changes in self‐regulated learning (SRL) behaviours resulting from interventions is challenging for researchers. In the current study, we identified students who were likely to do poorly in a biology course and those who were likely to do well. Then, we randomly assigned a portion of the students predicted to perform poorly to a science of learning to learn intervention where they were taught SRL study strategies. Learning outcome and log data (257 K events) were collected fromn = 226 students. We used a complex systems framework to model the differences in SRL including the amount, interrelatedness, density and regularity of engagement captured in digital trace data (ie, logs). Differences were compared between students who were predicted to (1) perform poorly (control,n = 48), (2) perform poorly and received intervention (treatment,n = 95) and (3) perform well (not flagged,n = 83). Results indicated that the regularity of students' engagement was predictive of course grade, and that the intervention group exhibited increased regularity in engagement over the control group immediately after the intervention and maintained that increase over the course of the semester. We discuss the implications of these findings in relation to the future of artificial intelligence and potential uses for monitoring student learning in online environments. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topicSelf‐regulated learning (SRL) knowledge and skills are strong predictors of postsecondary STEM student success.SRL is a dynamic, temporal process that leads to purposeful student engagement.Methods and metrics for measuring dynamic SRL behaviours in learning contexts are needed.What this paper addsA Markov process for measuring dynamic SRL processes using log data.Evidence that dynamic, interaction‐dominant aspects of SRL predict student achievement.Evidence that SRL processes can be meaningfully impacted through educational intervention.Implications for theory and practiceComplexity approaches inform theory and measurement of dynamic SRL processes.Static representations of dynamic SRL processes are promising learning analytics metrics.Engineered features of LMS usage are valuable contributions to AI models.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)Purpose The aims of the study were to explore responses of children with developmental language disorder (DLD) to rich vocabulary instruction and to identify potential factors that contribute to outcomes. Method Children with DLD participated in a language intervention embedded within a science camp. Using parent and clinician reports, standardized tests, probes, notes, and video, we derived descriptions of seven of the campers who received a vocabulary intervention that incorporated principles of rich instruction. We present them here as a case series. Results Five cases responded to the intervention with modest gains in Tier 2 science vocabulary and science knowledge. One case demonstrated no response, and another was unable to complete the intervention. The latter two cases presented with triple risks: DLD, executive function deficits, and stressors associated with poverty. In comparison, the best responder also lived in poverty and had DLD, but he had intact executive function, strengths in extant vocabulary, stronger knowledge of science, better engagement in the science and language intervention activities, and was older. Other factors that seemed to contribute to outcomes included the complexity of the word forms and dosage. Conclusions Translating research on rich instruction to clinical practice is challenging. This case series motivated hypotheses about the nature of the challenge and what to do about it, the primary one being that the modest success of rich vocabulary instruction for children with DLD is not a limitation of the approach itself but rather a reflection of the difficulty of delivering the intervention while tailoring the targets, approach, and dosage to the needs of individual children with DLD. Supplemental Material https://doi.org/10.23641/asha.13667699more » « less
