This article describes the design principles behind a set of research-based software microworlds included in the Building Blocks program, a PreK to grade 2 software-based mathematics curriculum. Building Blocks approach is finding the mathematics in, and developing mathematics from, children's activity. The materials are designed to help children extend and mathematize their everyday activities, from building blocks to art to songs and stories to puzzles. The 9-step design process model that defines what we mean by “research-based” is described and illustrated.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AubreyC. (1997). Children's early learning of number in school and out. In ThompsonI. (Ed.), Teaching and learning early number (pp. 20–29). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
2.
BallD. L., & CohenD. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is—or might be—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform?Educational Researcher, 16(2), 6–8; 14.
3.
BeckerH. J. (1992). Computer-based integrated learning systems in the elementary and middle grades: A critical review and synthesis of evaluation reports. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8, 1–41.
4.
BransfordJ. D.BrownA. L., & CockingR. R., (Eds.) (1999). How people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
5.
CharC. A. (1989, March). Formative research in the development of mathematics software for young children. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
6.
ClementsD. H. (1984). Training effects on the development and generalization of Piagetian logical operations and knowledge of number. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 766–776.
7.
ClementsD. H. (1999a). Geometric and spatial thinking in young children. In CopleyJ. V. (Ed.), Mathematics in the early years (pp. 66–79). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
8.
ClementsD. H. (1999b). Subitizing: What is it? Why teach it?Teaching Children Mathematics, 5, 400–405.
9.
ClementsD. H. (2000). From exercises and tasks to problems and projects: Unique contributions of computers to innovative mathematics education. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 9–47.
10.
ClementsD. H. (2002). Linking research and curriculum development. In EnglishL. D. (Ed.), Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education (pp. 599–630). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11.
ClementsD. H., & BattistaM. T. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In GrouwsD. A. (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 420–464). New York: Macmillan.
12.
ClementsD. H., & BattistaM. T. (2000). Designing effective software. In KellyA. E. & LeshR. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 761–776). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13.
ClementsD. H.BattistaM. T.SaramaJ., & SwaminathanS. (1997). Development of students' spatial thinking in a unit on geometric motions and area. The Elementary School Journal, 98(2), 171–186.
ClementsD. H., & NastasiB. K. (1992). Computers and early childhood education. In GettingerM.ElliottS. N., & KratochwillT. R. (Eds.), Advances in school psychology: Preschool and early childhood treatment directions (pp. 187–246). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
16.
ClementsD. H.NastasiB. K., & SwaminathanS. (1993). Young children and computers: Crossroads and directions from research. Young Children, 48(2), 56–64.
17.
ClementsD. H., & SaramaJ. (2002). Learning and teaching with computers in early childhood education. In SarachoO. N. & SpodekB. (Eds.), Contemporary Perspectives in Early Childhood Education (pp. 171–219). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
18.
ClementsD. H.SaramaJ., & WilsonD. C. (2001). Composition of geometric figures, Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education. The Netherlands.
19.
ClementsD. H., & SwaminathanS. (1995). Technology and school change: New lamps for old?Childhood Education, 71, 275–281.
20.
ClementsD. H.SwaminathanS.HannibalM. A. Z., & SaramaJ. (1999). Young children's concepts of shape. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 192–212.
21.
CobbP., & McClainK. (in press). Supporting students' learning of significant mathematical ideas. In WellsG. & ClaxtonG. (Eds.), Learning for life in the 21st century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
FusonK. C. (1988). Children's counting and concepts of number. New York: Springer-Verlag.
23.
FusonK. C. (1997). Research-based mathematics curricula: New educational goals require programs of four interacting levels of research. Issues in Education, 3(1), 67–79.
24.
GelmanR. (1994). Constructivism and supporting environments. In TiroshD. (Ed.), Implicit and explicit knowledge: An educational approach (Vol. 6, pp. 55–82). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
25.
GinsburgH. P.InoueN., & SeoK.-H. (1999). Young children doing mathematics: Observations of everyday activities. In CopleyJ. V. (Ed.), Mathematics in the early years. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
26.
GravemeijerK. P. E. (1991). An instruction-theoretical reflection on the use of manipulatives. In StreeflandL. (Ed.), Realistic mathematics education in primary school (pp. 57–76). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute, Utrecht University.
27.
GravemeijerK. P. E. (1994). Developing realistic mathematics instruction. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Freudenthal Institute.
28.
GravemeijerK. P. E. (1999). How emergent models may foster the constitution of formal mathematics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1, 155–177.
29.
GriffinS.CaseR., & CapodilupoA. (1995). Teaching for understanding: The importance of the Central Conceptual Structures in the elementary mathematics curriculum. In McKeoughA.LupartJ., & MariniA. (Eds.), Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30.
HiebertJ., & WearneD. (1992). Links between teaching and learning place value with understanding in first grade. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 98–122.
31.
KelmanP. (1990, June). Alternatives to integrated instructional systems. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Educational Computing Conference, Nashville, TN.
32.
LehrerR.JenkinsM., & OsanaH. (1998). Longitudinal study of children's reasoning about space and geometry. In LehrerR. & ChazanD. (Eds.), Designing learning environments for developing understanding of geometry and space (pp. 137–167). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33.
MansfieldH. M., & ScottJ. (1990). Young children solving spatial problems. In BookerG.CobbP., & deMendicutiT. N. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th annual conference of the Internation Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 275–282). Oaxlepec, Mexico: PME.
34.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
35.
ReichS.SubrahmanyamK., & GelmanR. (1999, April). Children's use of number and amount information when making judgments about quantity. Paper presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Albuquerque, NM.
36.
ReynoldsA., & WheatleyG. (1996). Elementary students' construction and coordination of units in an area setting. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(5), 564–581.
37.
RoblyerM. D.CastineW. H., & KingF. J. (1988). Assessing the impact of computer-based instruction: A review of recent research. New York: Haworth Press.
38.
SalesC. (1994). A constructivist instructional project on developing geometric problem solving abilities using pattern blocks and tangrams with young children. Unpublished Masters, University of Northern Iowa.
39.
SaramaJ. (2000). Toward more powerful computer environments: Developing mathematics software on research-based principles. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 22(3&4), 125–147.
40.
SaramaJ., & ClementsD. H. (2001). Linking research and software development. In HeidK. & BlumeG. (Eds.), Technology in the learning and teaching of mathematics: Syntheses and perspectives. New York: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
41.
SaramaJ.ClementsD. H., & VukelicE. B. (1996). The role of a computer manipulative in fostering specific psychological/mathematical processes. In JakubowskiE.WatkinsD., & BiskeH. (Eds.), Proceedings of the eighteenth annual meeting of the North America Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 2, pp. 567–572). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
42.
SchaubleL. (1990). Formative evaluation in the design of educational software at the Children's Television Workshop. In FlaggB. N. (Ed.), Formative evaluation for educational technologies (pp. 51–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
43.
SchoenfeldA. H. (1999). Looking toward the 21st century: Challenge of educational theory and practice. Educational Researcher, 28, 4–14.
44.
SieglerR. S. (1996). Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
45.
SimonM. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114–145.
46.
SpradleyJ. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.
47.
SpradleyJ. P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.
48.
SteffeL. P., & CobbP. (1988). Construction of arithmetical meanings and strategies. New York: Springer-Verlag.
49.
SteffeL. P., & TzurR. (1994). Interaction and children's mathematics. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 8(2), 99–116.
50.
SteffeL. P., & WiegelH. G. (1994). Cognitive play and mathematical learning in computer microworlds. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 8(2), 117–131.
51.
WilenskyU. (1991). Abstract mediations on the concrete and concrete implications for mathematics education. In HarelI. & PapertS. (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 193–199). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
