Comparing ICT With Physical Manipulative Supported Learning of 3D Geometry in Elementary School

Abstract

Since one of the main goals of teaching geometry is to provide students with the opportunity to develop spatial reasoning, it is important to find the most suitable support for learning 3D geometry in elementary school. This paper compares Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and physical manipulatives support, with the aim to answer if their use produces different effects on students’ spatial reasoning. The participants in the study were 74 4th graders (10–11 years old) who were assigned to two equal groups that attended a month of the experimental program. Group E_ICT learned with the ICT support and group E_MAN learned with physical manipulatives support. The results showed that there was no difference in students’ 3D geometry achievement regardless of the support that was used, and that both supports provided learning access for all students. According to our results, teaching geometry should be directed to the complementary use of physical manipulatives and ICT support, depending on the technological and software resources available to schools and teachers’ preference of the support. ICT can assist in achieving learning equity, but there is a need for a systematic development of the ICT sources that could be used as instructional manipulatives, their promotion, and the support for the teachers.

Keywords

manipulative geometry equity spatial reasoning elementary mathematics instruction

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bartolini

Martigone

(2014). Manipulatives in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematic education (pp. 365−372). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4978-8_93

Battista

M. T.

Wheatley

G. H.

Talsma

(1982). The importance of spatial visualization and cognitive development for geometry learning in preservice elementary teachers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 13(5), 332−340. https://doi.org/10.2307/749007

Bishop

A. J.

Forgasz

(2007). Issues in access and equity in mathematics education. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (Vol. 2, pp. 1145−1167). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Bray

Tangney

(2017). Technology usage in mathematics education research—A systematic review of recent trends. Computers & Education, 114, 255−273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.07.004

Bruce

C. D.

Davis

Sinclair

McGarvey

Hallowell

Drefs

Francis

Hawes

Moss

Mulligan

Okamoto

Whiteley

Okamoto

(2017). Understanding gaps in research networks: using “spatial reasoning” as a window into the importance of networked educational research. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 95(2), 143−161. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-016-9743-2

Bruce

C. D.

Sinclair

Moss

Hawes

Caswell

(2015). Spatializing the curriculum. In B. Davis & Spatial Reasoning Study Group (Eds.), Spatial reasoning in the early years. Principles, assertions, and speculations (pp. 85−106). Routledge.

Carbonneau

K. J.

Marley

S. C.

Selig

J. P.

(2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380−400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084

Chan

K. K.

Leung

S. W.

(2014). Dynamic geometry software improves mathematical achievement: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(3), 311−325. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.51.3.c

Clements

D. H.

Battista

M. T.

(1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 420–464). Macmillan.

10.

Đokić

(2013). Realno okruženje u početnoj nastavi geometrije [Realistic mathematics in teaching and learning elementary geometry, Doctoral dissertation, University of Belgrade]. PHAIDRA, E-THESES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF BELGRADE. http://eteze.bg.ac.rs/application/showtheses?thesesId=1376

11.

Đokić

(2014). Realno okruženje u početnoj nastavi geometrije [Realistic mathematics education in initial geometry teaching]. Teaching Innovations, 27(2), 7−21. https://doi.org/10.5937/inovacije1402007D

12.

Drickey

N. A.

(2000). A comparison of virtual and physical manipulatives in teaching visualization and spatial reasoning to middle school mathematics students [Doctoral dissertation, Utah State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/125430/

13.

Drijvers

Ball

Barzel

Kathleen Heid

Cao

Maschietto

(2016). Uses of technology in lower secondary mathematics education: A concise topical survey. Springer.

14.

English

L. D.

Jones

G. A.

Tirosh

Lesh

Bartolini Bussi

M. G.

(2002). Future issues and directions in international mathematics education research. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education: Directions for the 21st century (pp. 787−812). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

15.

Gecu-Parmaksiz

Delialioğlu

Ö.

(2018). The effect of augmented reality activities on improving preschool children’s spatial skills. Interactive Learning Environments, 28(7), 1−4. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1546747

16.

Gunderson

E. A.

Ramirez

Beilock

S. L.

Levine

S. C.

(2012). The relation between spatial skill and early number knowledge: The role of the linear number line. Developmental Psychology, 48(5), 1229−1241. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027433

17.

Gutiérrez

(1996). Visualization in 3-dimensional geometry: In search of a framework. In L. Puig, & A. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 20th International Conference of the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 3−19). University of Valencia.

18.

Hawes

Moss

Caswell

Seo

Ansari

(2019). Relations between numerical, spatial, and executive function skills and mathematics achievement: A latent-variable approach. Cognitive Psychology, 109, 68−90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2018.12.002

19.

Hegarty

Kozhevnikov

(1999). Types of visual–spatial representations and mathematical problem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 684−689. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.91.4.684

20.

Hershkowitz

(1990). Psychological aspects of learning geometry. In P. Nesher, & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Mathematics and cognition: A research synthesis by the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 70−95). Cambridge University Press.

21.

Hoyles, C. & Lagrange, J. -B. (Eds.) (2010). Mathematics education and technology—Rethinking the terrain. The 17th ICMI Study. Springer.

22.

İbili

Çat

Resnyansky

Şahin

Billinghurst

(2019). An assessment of geometry teaching supported with augmented reality teaching materials to enhance students’ 3D geometry thinking skills. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 51(2), 224−246. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2019.1583382

23.

Jones

G. A.

Langrall

C. W.

Thornton

C. A.

Nisbet

(2002). Elementary students’ access to powerful mathematical ideas. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education: Directions for the 21st century (pp. 113−141). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

24.

Kvaščev

Đurić

Đ.

Krkljuš

(1989). Sposobnosti, osobine ličnosti i uspeh učenika [Student abilities, personality traits and achievement]. Zavod za izdavanje udžbenika; Institut za pedagogiju Filozofskog fakulteta.

25.

Lowrie

Logan

Harris

Hegarty

(2018). The impact of an intervention program on students’ spatial reasoning: Student engagement through mathematics-enhanced learning activities. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 3(1), 1−10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-018-0147-y

26.

Marley

S. C.

Carbonneau

K. J.

(2014a). Future directions for theory and research with instructional manipulatives: Commentary on the special issue papers. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 91−100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9259-1

27.

Marley

S. C.

Carbonneau

K. J.

(2014b). Theoretical perspectives and empirical evidence relevant to classroom instruction with manipulatives. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 1−7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-014-9257-3

28.

Moyer-Packenham

P. S.

Baker

Westenskow

Anderson

Shumway

Rodzon

Jordan

(2013). A study comparing virtual manipulatives with other instructional treatments in third-and fourth-grade classrooms. Journal of Education, 193(2), 25−39. https://doi.org/10.1177/002205741319300204

29.

Moyer-Packenham

P. S.

Westenskow

(2013). Effects of virtual manipulatives on student achievement and mathematics learning. International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments, 4(3), 35−50. http://doi.org/10.4018/jvple.2013070103

30.

Mulligan

(2015). Looking within and beyond the geometry curriculum: Connecting spatial reasoning to mathematics learning. ZDM Mathematics Education, 47(3), 511−517. http://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0696-1

31.

Mulligan

Woolcott

Mitchelmore

Davis

(2017). Connecting mathematics learning through spatial reasoning. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 77−87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0210-x

32.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2007). Mathematics Teaching Today: Improving Practice, Improving Student Learning.

33.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to actions: Ensuring Mathematical Success for All.

34.

National Research Council. (2006). Learning to think spatially: GIS as a support system in the K–12 curriculum. National Academy Press.

35.

National Research Council. (2009). Mathematics learning in early childhood: Paths toward excellence and equity. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12519

36.

Newcombe

N. S.

(2010). Picture this: Increasing math and science learning by improving spatial thinking. American Educator, 34(2), 29–35.

37.

Owens

(2015). Visuospatial reasoning: An ecocultural perspective for space, geometry and measurement education. Springer.

38.

Panaoura

Gagatsis

Lemonides

(2007). Spatial abilities in relation to performance in geometry tasks. In D. Pitta-Pantazi & G. Philippou (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 5 (pp. 1062−1071). UC.

39.

Pepin

Gueudet

(2014). Curriculum resources and textbooks in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematic education (pp. 132−135). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_40

40.

Petit

(2013). Comparing concrete to virtual manipulatives in mathematics education. Science Lib, 5, Article 130911.

41.

Pittalis

Mousoulides

Christou

(2010). Students’ 3D geometry thinking profiles. In V. Durand-Guerrier, S. Soury-Lavergne, & F. Arzarello (Eds.), Proceedings of CERME 6 (pp. 816−825). INRP.

42.

Presmeg

(2006). Research on visualization in learning and teaching mathematics: Emergence from psychology. In A. Gutiérrez & P. Boero (Eds.), Handbook of research on the psychology of mathematics education (pp. 205−235). Brill Sense.

43.

Presmeg

(2014a). Visualization and learning in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 636–641). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_161

44.

Presmeg

(2014b). Visualisation in the learning and teaching mathematics [Special section]. In M. N. Fried & T. Dreyfus (Eds.), Mathematics & mathematics education: Aearching for common ground, advances in mathematics education (pp. 210−220). Springer. https://10.1007/978-94-007-7473-5_11

45.

Resnick

Harris

Logan

Lowrie

(2020). The relation between mathematics achievement and spatial reasoning. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 32(1), 171−174. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00338-7

46.

Sarama

Clements

(2016). Physical and virtual manipulatives: What is “concrete”? In P. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on technology and learning mathematics with virtual manipulatives. Mathematics education in the digital era (Vol. 7, pp. 71–94). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32718-1_4

47.

Seah

R. T. K.

Horne

(2020). The influence of spatial reasoning on analysing about measurement situations. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 32(1), 365−386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00327-w

48.

Shepard

Metzler

(1971). Mental rotation of three dimensional objects, Science, 171(972), 701−703.

49.

Uribe-Flórez

L. J.

Wilkins

J. L.

(2017). Manipulative use and elementary school students’ mathematics learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15(8), 1541−1557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9757-3

50.

Uttal

D. H.

Meadow

N. G.

Tipton

Hand

L. L.

Alden

A. R.

Warren

Newcombe

N. S.

(2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352−402. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028446

51.

Villani

(1998). The way ahead. In C. Mammana & V. Villani (Eds.), Perspectives on the teaching of geometry for the 21st century (pp. 319−327). Kluwer Academic Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5226-6

52.

Wolf

Momirović

Džamonja

(1992). KOG 3: baterija testova inteligencije [COG 3: Intelligence Test Battery]. Savez društva psihologa Srbije; Centar za primenjenu psihologiju.

53.

Woolcott

Le Tran

Mulligan

Davis

Mitchelmore

(2020). Towards a framework for spatial reasoning and primary mathematics learning: An analytical synthesis of intervention studies. Mathematics Education Research Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-020-00318-x

54.

Woolcott

Logan

Marshman

Ramful

Whannell

Lowrie

(2020). The re-emergence of spatial reasoning within primary years mathematics education. In J. Way, C. Attard, J. Anderson, et al. (Eds.), Research in mathematics education in Australasia 2016–2019 (pp. 245–268). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4269-5_10

55.

Yildiz

Tüzün

(2011). Effects of using three-dimensional virtual environments and concrete manipulatives on spatial ability. Hacettepe University Journal of Education, 41, 498–508.

56.

Young

C. J.

Levine

S. C.

Mix

K. S.

(2018). The connection between spatial and mathematical ability across development. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 755. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00755