This study asked the question: Does tuning students' attention to information in a mathematics problem impact their problem-solving performance? This was a traditional quasi-experimental research study, using some observation and interviewing techniques. The participants were sixth grade middle school students in Connecticut. The experimental group was provided a “tuning” activity prior to solving the Jasper problem, “Rescue at Boone's Meadow.” Statistical analyses were used to determine the difference on mathematical performance between the two groups and qualitative data were analyzed for emerging themes.
Tuning students' attention to information in a mathematics problem affected their performance on the modified Cloze Procedure Problems. No significant difference was found between the two groups on Transfer Problems. Some differences between the two groups emerged from the qualitative data analysis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FryeS. M., The NCTM Standards; Challenges for all Classrooms, Arithmetic Teacher, 36:9, pp. 4–7, 1989.
2.
National Commission on Excellence in Education, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 1983.
3.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, An Agenda for Action: Recommendations for School Mathematics of the 1980s, NCTM, Reston, Virginia, 1980.
4.
National Research Council, Everybody Counts: A Report to the Nation on the Future of Mathematics Education, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1989.
5.
Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (SCANS): U.S. Dept of Labor, Executive Summary, 1992.
6.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics, NCTM, Reston, Virginia1989.
7.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics, NCTM, Reston, Virginia, 1991.
8.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Assessment Standards for School Mathematics, NCTM, Reston, Virginia, 1995.
9.
Mathematics Sciences Education Board, Everybody Counts: A Report to the Nation on the Future of Mathematics Education, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1989.
10.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV), Anchored Instruction and Situated Cognition Revisited, Educational Technology, 33:3, pp. 52–70, 1993.
11.
DeFrancoT. C.CurcioF., A Division Problem with a Remainder Embedded Across Two Contexts: Children's Solutions in Restrictive vs. Real-World Settings, Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 19:2, pp. 58–72, 1997.
12.
SchoenfeldA. H., Mathematical Problem Solving, Academic Press, New York, 1985.
13.
SchoenfeldA. H., Problem Solving in Context(s), in The Teaching and Assessing of Mathematical Problem Solving, CharlesR. I.SilverE. A. (eds.), NCTM, Reston, Virginia, 1989.
14.
BlaisD. M., Constructivism—A Theoretical Revolution for Algebra, Mathematics Teacher, 81:8, pp. 624–631, 1988.
15.
von GlaserfieldE., Learning as a Constructive Activity, in Problem of Representation in the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics, JanvierC. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 3–17, 1987.
16.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV), Some Thoughts about Constructivism and Instructional Design, Educational Technology, 31:9, pp. 16–18, 1991.
17.
BrownJ. S.CollinsA.DuguidP., Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning, Educational Researcher, 1, pp. 32–42, 1989.
18.
GreenoJ. G., A Perspective on Thinking, American Psychologist, 44, pp. 134–141, 1989.
19.
WinnW., Instructional Design and Situated Learning: Paradox or Partnership?Educational Technology, 33:3, pp. 16–20, 1993.
20.
GibsonJ. J., The Theory of Affordances, in Perceiving Acting and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, ShawR. E.BransfordJ. (eds.), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1979.
21.
YoungM. F.BarabS. A., Perception of the Raison D'être in Anchored Instruction: An Ecological Psychology Perspective, Journal of Educational Computing Research, April 1998.
22.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV), Anchored Instruction and Its Relationship to Situated Cognition, Educational Researcher, 19:6, pp. 2–10, 1990.
23.
Van HaneghanJ.BaronL.YoungM.WilliamsS.VyeN.BransfordJ., The Jasper Series: An Experiment with New Ways to Enhance Mathematical Thinking, in Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, HalpernD. F. (ed.), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., Hillsdale, New Jersey, 1992.
24.
YoungM. F., Instructional Design for Situated Learning, Educational Technology Research and Development, 41:1, pp. 43–48, 1993.
25.
ElashoffJ. D., Analysis of Covariance: A Delicate Instrument, American Educational Research Journal, 6, pp. 383–399, 1969.
26.
PedhazurE. J., Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research (2nd Edition), CBS College Publishing, New York, 1982.
27.
StraussA.CorbinJ., Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory, Procedures and Techniques, Sage Publications, London, 1990.
28.
PolyaG., How To Solve It, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1973.
29.
HartL. E.WalkerJ., The Role of Affect in Teaching and Learning Mathematics, in Research Ideas for the Classroom: Middle Grades Mathematics, OwensD. T. (ed.), NCTM, Reston, Virginia, 1993.
30.
McLeodD. B., Research on Affect in Mathematics Education: A Reconceptualization, in Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning, GrouwsD. A. (ed.), Macmillan, New York, pp. 575–596, 1992.
31.
JakupcakJ.RushtonR., Corvallis School Inclusion Project: Corvallis Montana, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 357 566), 1992.
32.
RieckW.CormierB.ThibodeauxD., An Analysis of A-Priori Reading Intervention, presented at the annual conference of Mid South Educational Research Association, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 386 705), 1994.
33.
LoganS.MattsonJ.FuranJ., Preteaching versus Reteaching in Chapter 1 Reading, Wichita Public Schools, Kansas, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 336 731), 1991.
34.
CrandallJ. E., Theory and Measurement of Social Interest: Empirical Tests of Alfred Adler's Concept, Columbia University Press, New York, 1981.
35.
FesbachN. D.FesbachS., Affective Processes and Academic Achievement, Child Development, 58, pp. 1335–1347, 1987.
