Date post: | 06-Jan-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | daniella-owen |
View: | 217 times |
Download: | 0 times |
The Role of Comparison in the Development of Flexible Knowledge
of Computational Estimation
Jon R. Star (Harvard University)
Bethany Rittle-Johnson (Vanderbilt University)
AERA, New York City. Tuesday, March 25, 2008. Session 33.074 Developing Mathematical Understanding paper session, Crowne Plaza Times Square, Room 509/510, 4:05 – 5:35 pm
Thanks to...• Research supported by Institute of Education
Sciences (IES) Grant # R305H050179 • All participating teachers and schools in
Nashville, Tennessee and Hale, Michigan• Graduate and undergraduate research
assistants at Vanderbilt, Michigan State, and Harvard
March 25, 2008 2AERA CCS4
Comparison• Is a fundamental learning mechanism• Lots of evidence from cognitive science
– Identifying similarities and differences in multiple examples appears to be a critical pathway to flexible, transferable knowledge
• Mostly laboratory studies• Not done with school-age children or in
mathematics
March 25, 2008 3AERA CCS4
(Gentner, Loewenstein, & Thompson, 2003; Kurtz, Miao, & Gentner, 2001; Loewenstein & Gentner, 2001; Namy & Gentner, 2002; Oakes & Ribar, 2005; Schwartz & Bransford, 1998)
Central tenet of math reforms• Students benefit from sharing and comparing of
solution methods • “nearly axiomatic,” “with broad general
endorsement” (Silver et al., 2005)
• Noted feature of ‘expert’ math instruction• Present in high performing countries such as
Japan and Hong Kong
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 4
(Ball, 1993; Fraivillig, Murphy, & Fuson, 1999; Huffred-Ackles, Fuson, & Sherin Gamoran, 2004; Lampert, 1990; Silver et al., 2005; NCTM, 1989, 2000; Stigler & Hiebert, 1999)
“Contrasting Cases” Project• Experimental studies on comparison in
academic domains and settings largely absent• Goal of present work
– Investigate whether comparison can support learning and transfer, flexibility, and conceptual knowledge
– Experimental studies in real-life classrooms– Algebra equation solving– Computational estimation
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 5
Rittle-Johnson & Star, 2007• Experimental study in algebra classrooms with
70 7th grade students on equation solving• Intervention (Comparison condition)
– Comparing and contrasting alternative solution methods
• Control (Sequential condition)– Reflecting on same solution methods one at a time
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 6
Rittle-Johnson, B, & Star, J.R. (2007). Does comparing solution methods facilitate conceptual and procedural knowledge? An experimental study on learning to solve equations. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 561-574.
Results (from 2007 study)• At posttest, students in comparison condition
made significantly greater gains in procedural knowledge and flexibility and comparable gains in conceptual knowledge
• The intervention worked! But need to replicate and extend these findings...
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 7
Computational estimation• Widely studied in 80’s and early 90’s
– Less so in recent years• Process of mentally generating an approximate
answer for a given arithmetic problem (Rubenstein, 1985)
– (Distinct from “mental computation,” which means finding the exact answer)
• Estimates of 2-digit multiplication problems13 x 27
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 8
Strategies for estimating 13 x 27• Round both (to the nearest 10)
10 x 30 or 300• Round one (to the nearest 10)
10 x 27 or 270(Alternatively, 13 x 30, or 390)
• Trunc (truncate) (Sowder & Wheeler, 1989)
1 x 2, or 2 Then append 2 zeros, or 200
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 9
Why estimation for replication?• Estimation is different from algebra equation
solving in several ways that play a potentially important role whether comparison will help
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 10
Equation solving vs. estimation• Equation solving
– Problems have a single correct answer• Estimation
– Correctness or “goodness” of estimate depends on two sometimes competing goals
– Simplicity: how easy it is to compute– Proximity: how close the estimate is to the exact
answer
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 11
Complexity of “goodness”• Sometimes easy-to-compute estimate is not very
proximal to the exact value, and vice versa• Some strategies present false illusion of
consistent proximity• Is round one always more proximal than round
two?– Intuitively, yes? The less you round, the closer you get– Actually no! It depends on the problem– Try it for 39 x 41 versus 39 x 37
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 12
Solution efficiency• Algebra equation solving
– Easy and visually apparent to judge relative efficiency of two compared solutions
– For example, just count the number of steps!• Estimation
– Not at all clear how one would judge efficiency of two compared solutions
– Efficiency is more of an individual or subjective judgment
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 13
Summary of rationale• Evidence for effectiveness of comparison in
algebra, but replication needed• Estimation is a good domain in which to replicate
– Certain features of estimation raise legitimate questions about whether comparison of strategies can have the same positive impact
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 14
Method• Estimation: 158 5th-6th grade students• 69 5th graders in urban private school
– 4 classes, taught by the same teacher• 44 5th and 45 6th graders in rural public school
– Two 5th classes, taught by same teacher – Two 6th classes, taught by same teacher
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 15
Design• Pretest - Intervention – Posttest – Retention test
– 3-day intervention replaced lessons in textbook• Intervention occurred in partner work during
math classes– Random assignment of pairs to condition– Both conditions present in all classrooms
• Students studied worked examples with partner and also solved practice problems on own
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 16
Comparison materials
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 17
Sequential materials
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 18
pagenext
pagenext
next
Results• Procedural knowledge
– Ability to compute accurate estimates• Flexibility
– Knowledge of multiple strategies and ability to select most appropriate strategies for a given problem and problem-solving goal
– Direct measure (from procedural knowledge items)– Independent measure
• Conceptual knowledge
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 19
Procedural knowledge• Mental
– Estimate 32 x 17 mentally and quickly• Familiar
– Estimate 12 x 24 and 113 x 27• Transfer
– Estimate 1.19 x 2.39 and 102 ÷ 27
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 20
Procedural knowledge results• No difference between conditions on:• Accuracy of estimates
– Assessed accuracy a number of ways, none of which showed a difference for intervention students
• Both conditions improved the accuracy of students’ estimates
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 21
Accuracy of estimates
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 22
Conceptual knowledge sample• What does “estimate” mean?
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 23
Conceptual knowledge results• Comparison improved conceptual knowledge for
students who began with some initial procedural knowledge, but not for those who began with very little procedural knowledge
• In other words, comparison was particularly beneficial for students who began the study with some initial ability to compute estimates
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 24
Conceptual knowledge
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 25
Flexibility sample items• Independent measure• Estimate 12 x 36 in three different ways
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 26
Flexibility results• Comparison led to greater flexibility• Independent measure: Comparison students...
– Were more likely to be able to produce estimates for the same problem in multiple ways
– Were better at making judgments about which strategy would led to an easier or a closer estimate for a given problem
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 27
Flexibility independent measure
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 28
Flexible strategy use• Direct measure
– Strategies on procedural knowledge assessment• Comparison students were:
– More likely to use trunc, optimizing their strategy use for ease more than sequential student
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 29
Flexibility• Recall that students in both conditions saw the
same strategies demonstrated on the same problems
• Yet comparison students were– Better at generating multiple ways to find estimates– Were more likely to use the easiest strategy for a
given problem– Were better at predicting which strategy would led to
a close or easy estimate for a given problem
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 30
In sum...• It pays to compare!• Comparison led to:
– Greater flexibility (2007 and present study)– Improved procedural knowledge (2007 study)– Improved conceptual knowledge (for students with
modest procedural knowledge at pre-test; present study)
– In two very different mathematical domains, algebra and computational estimation
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 31
National Math Panel (p. 27)• “Teachers should broaden instruction in
computational estimation beyond rounding. They should insure that students understand that the purpose of estimation is to approximate the exact value and that rounding is only one estimation strategy.”
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 32
National Math Panel (p. 27)• “Textbooks need to explicitly explain that the
purpose of estimation is to produce an appropriate approximations. Illustrating multiple useful estimation procedures for a single problem, and explaining how each procedure achieves the goal of accurate estimation, is a useful means for achieving this goal. Contrasting these procedures with others that produce less appropriate estimates is also likely to be helpful.”
March 25, 2008 AERA CCS4 33
Thanks!This presentation and other related papers and
presentations can be found at:
http://gseacademic.harvard.edu/~starjo/or
by contacting Jon Star ([email protected])