An official website of the United States government
Background: While there exists a large body ofresearch on the benefits of play in supporting chil-dren’s mathematical learning, the vast majority ofsuch research has been conducted in early childhoodor informal contexts, rather than formal K-12 schools.Moreover, this research has predominantly focusedon adults’ perspectives of children’s play. Seeking to bring young children’s voices into methodological and design considerations, this study investigates children’s video interpretations of their mathematical play. Methods: Leveraging data from a larger project that explores the integration of play in elementary mathematics classrooms, I draw upon socio-cultural theory and critical childhood studies, as well as video-elicited interviews with four children, in order to examine play as both a context for mathematics learning, as well as a text for reading the mathematical worlds of young children. Findings: Findings suggest that the four children drew upon sophisticated frames when making sense of video data, including situated conditions, networks of care, affective experiences, tangible fulfillment, and mathematical curiosities.Contribution: Insights from this study challenge traditionally narrow perspectives of young children as merely consumers of knowledge, who learn in order to “become adults,” and instead situates them as active sense-makers, whose noticings may better position us to design mathematics learning environ-ments according to their insights and vantage points.
more »
« less
What Do You See in Mathematical Play?
As part of a longitudinal study focused on mathematical play, we (Melissa, Amy, and Anita) are often faced with questions about what counts as play and what mathematics (and other learning) we see in play, and whose play is most likely to be seen or dismissed. Rather than discuss our findings from classroom videos of kindergarten children engaged in mathematical play, we asked scholars who bring different lenses to research on play, young children, and teaching and learning mathematics to look at some of our data and provide their perspectives. In this session, we will share video and discuss with our panel (Nathaniel, Naomi, and Tran) various ways to interpret that video. This paper provides background on the potential of mathematical play and the details of the study that generated data for analysis. We conclude with a copy of a transcript that is associated with a video we will watch during the plenary with hopes that participants will watch prior to the session and come with their own questions/perspectives.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2101356
- PAR ID:
- 10624952
- Editor(s):
- Lamberg, T; Moss, D
- Publisher / Repository:
- North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Brown, Ryan; Antink-Meyer, Allison (Ed.)Current education reforms call for engaging students in learning science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) in an integrative way. This critical case study of one fourth grade teacher investigated the use of educational robots (ER) not only for teaching coding, but as an instructional support in teaching mathematical concepts. To support teachers in teaching coding in an integrative and logical manner, our team developed the Collective Argumentation Learning and Coding (CALC) approach. The CALC approach consists of three elements: choice of task, coding content, and teacher support for argumentation. After a cohort of elementary teachers completed a professional development course, we followed them into their classrooms to support and document implementation of the CALC approach. Data for this case consisted of video recordings of two lessons, a Pre-interview, and Post-interview after each lesson. Research questions included: How does an elementary teacher use the CALC approach (integrative STEM approach) to teach mathematics concepts with ER? What are the teacher’s perspectives towards teaching mathematics with ER using an integrative STEM approach? Results from this critical case provide evidence that teachers can successfully integrate ER into the mathematics curriculum without losing coherence of mathematics topics and while remaining sensitive to students’ needs.more » « less
-
How people see the world, even how they research it, is influenced by beliefs. Some beliefs are conscious and the result of research, or at least amenable to research. Others are largely invisible. They may feel like “common knowledge” (though myth, not knowledge), unrecognized premises that are part of the surrounding culture. As we will explain, people also hold ideas in both a detailed form and in a thumbnail image and may not notice when they are using the low-resolution image in place of the full picture. In either case, unrecognized myths about how young learners develop mathematical ideas naturally or with instruction are insidious in that they persist unconsciously and so sway research and practice without being examined rigorously. People are naturally oblivious to the ramifications of unrecognized premises (myths) until they encounter an anomaly that cannot be explained without reexamining those premises. Like all disciplines, mathematics education is shaped and constrained by its myths. This article is a conceptual piece. It uses informally gathered (but reproducible) classroom examples to elaborate on two myths about mathematics learning that can interfere with teaching and can escape the scrutiny of empirical research. Our goal is to give evidence to expand the questions researchers think to pose and to encourage thoughtful reappraisal of the implications of the myths. The myths we will discuss involve the order in which mathematical ideas are learnable and the “unity” of mathematical topics, with special attention to algebra. With examples, we will show that some ideas develop at a strikingly counterintuitive and early time. Taking advantage of such unexpectedly early developments can let educators devise pedagogies that build on the logic young children already have rather than predicating learning on statistically observed learning patterns or even the apparent structure of mathematics. Acknowledging such early developments might change the questions researchers ask and change how they study children’s mathematical learning, with the possible result of changing how children are taught.more » « less
-
> Context • In 1972, Papert emphasized that “[t]he important difference between the work of a child in an elementary mathematics class and […]a mathematician” is “not in the subject matter […]but in the fact that the mathematician is creatively engaged […]” Along with creative, Papert kept saying children should be engaged in projects rather than problems. A project is not just a large problem, but involves sustained, active engagement, like children’s play. For Papert, in 1972, computer programming suggested a flexible construction medium, ideal for a research-lab/playground tuned to mathematics for children. In 1964, without computers, Sawyer also articulated research-playgrounds for children, rooted in conventional content, in which children would learn to act and think like mathematicians. > Problem • This target article addresses the issue of designing a formal curriculum that helps children develop the mathematical habits of mind of creative tinkering, puzzling through, and perseverance. I connect the two mathematicians/educators – Papert and Sawyer – tackling three questions: How do genuine puzzles differ from school problems? What is useful about children creating puzzles? How might puzzles, problem-posing and programming-centric playgrounds enhance mathematical learning? > Method • This analysis is based on forty years of curriculum analysis, comparison and construction, and on research with children. > Results • In physical playgrounds most children choose challenge. Papert’s ideas tapped that try-something-new and puzzle-it-out-for-yourself spirit, the drive for challenge. Children can learn a lot in such an environment, but what (and how much) they learn is left to chance. Formal educational systems set standards and structures to ensure some common learning and some equity across students. For a curriculum to tap curiosity and the drive for challenge, it needs both the playful looseness that invites exploration and the structure that organizes content. > Implications • My aim is to provide support for mathematics teachers and curriculum designers to design or teach in accord with their constructivist thinking. > Constructivist content • This article enriches Papert’s constructionism with curricular ideas from Sawyer and from the work that I and my colleagues have donemore » « less
-
null (Ed.)This workshop will focus on how to teach data collection and analysis to preschoolers. Our project aims to promote preschoolers’ engagement with, and learning of, mathematics and computational thinking (CT) with a set of classroom activities that engage preschoolers in a data collection and analysis (DCA) process. To do this, the project team is engaging in an iterative cycle of development and testing of hands-on, play-based, curricular investigations with feedback from teachers. A key component of the intervention is a teacher-facing digital app (for teachers to use with students on touch-screen tablets) to support the collaboration of preschool teachers and children in collecting data, creating simple graphs, and using the graphs to answer real-world questions. The curricular investigations offer an applied context for using mathematical knowledge (i.e., counting, sorting, classifying, comparing, contrasting) to engage with real-world investigations and lay the foundation for developing flexible problem-solving skills. Each investigation follows a series of instructional tasks that scaffold the problem-solving process and includes (a) nine hands-on and play-based problem-solving investigations where children answer real-world questions by collecting data, creating simple graphs, and interpreting the graphs and. (b) a teacher- facing digital app to support specific data collection and organization steps (i.e., collecting, recording, visualizing). This workshop will describe: (1) the rationale and prior research conducted in this domain, (2) describe an intervention in development focused on data collection and analysis content for preschoolers that develop mathematical (common core standards) and computational thinking skills (K-12 Computational Thinking Framework Standards), (3) demonstrates an app in development that guides teacher and preschoolers through the investigation process and generates graphs to answer questions (NGSS practice standards), (4) report on feedback from a pilot study conducted virtually in preschool classrooms; and (5) describe developmentally appropriate practices for engaging young children in investigations, data collection, and data analysis.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Proceeding:
- The DOI is not currently available.
