Integrating Internet-based mathematical manipulatives within Essay Example for Free

Integrating Internet-based mathematical manipulatives within Essay Integrating Internet-based Mathematical Manipulatives Within a Learning Environment The article explores the development, use and importance of digital manipulatives in a mathematics classroom. These manipulatives are believed to be more versatile, economic and efficient than either the manufactured or teacher-created concrete objects traditionally used in the classroom. Manipulatives have been used from time immemorial and have provided tangible mental picture of abstract mathematical concepts. The digitalization of these manipulatives is an important progress in this process. However, the presumption that the article makes about the efficacy of manipulatives in teaching children along with the supposed teaching potential of the manipulatives is doubtful and smells of commercial publicity. There are several advantages that manipulatives are purported to provide. They concretize theoretical ideas, make the study concrete, build confidence in the learner, help solve problems and make the learning experience interesting. What the paper presupposes is that only the using of digital manipulatives is sufficient to bring each of these advantages. This is not supported by evidence. Let us consider the claim that manipulatives build confidence, if a section of the students is less familiar with web based technology than other students in the class, they are likely to lose confidence-using manipulatives. This may adversely affect their learning of math concepts and unnecessarily handicap them. The paper places some conditions that must be fulfilled to realize the full potential of manipulatives. For instance the parents must experience the system, manipulatives should be used for writing assignment, teacher pronounces the benefits to the students, ground rules are established and students are encouraged to explore more material on the web. If manipulatives are used as prescribed they can improve the understanding of more complex and more advanced math theories. These conditions are impractical. What happens if the parents are unfamiliar with the web? Does it put their children at a disadvantage? A teacher pronounces the benefits of manipulatives to children. This is a straw man. If a teacher uses manipulatives she automatically supports the method, there is no need to sermonize it. A child being encouraged to explore more material on the web is an issue that is not related directly to manipulatives. This opens up a host of debatable issues including the exposure of children to unsuitable material. Digital manipulatives can be downloaded and installed on school computers or distributed to children on CDs to be viewed in their homes. The issue of encouraging children to explore the web is not directly related to manipulatives. Further there is no teacher to guide the children in case of glitches. See what the instructions of a manipulative say. (Public Broadcasting Service, 2006). Familiarize yourself with the rules of this fraction game and have fun creating flag designs with the designated fractions. You can choose to paint by half, quarters, and combinations of quarters and halves and then the program will pick colors for you to paint your design by clicking in the flag. One drawback is that there is no help provided if the fraction portions are incorrect, you can only advance if you have painted to correct fractions. A research that comprised of a survey tested the proficiency development potential of manipulatives in math teaching. The basics tested in the survey were motivation, unique instructional capabilities, and support for new instructional approaches, increased teacher productivity and skills for an information age. Eleven teachers were surveyed using a five-point scale. The results were mixed. The results showed that the teachers felt that the use of digital manipulatives had a high positive impact on motivation, that the digital manipulatives had exceptional instructional capabilities, that the web based manipulatives supported new instructional approaches and that the web based manipulatives provided excellent training for an information age. What the teachers did not agree was that the web-based technology increased their productivity. In addition, the teacher showed apprehension about some issues like their inability to track the progress of the student, tricky web sites, ambiguous instructions and lack of direct feedback. This research is not valid. It does not clarify which constructs it attempts to measure. It does not give the process by which it selected the five variables. In addition, the sample size of eleven teachers is too small to reach any meaningful conclusion. Again, the study does not mention basis or the criteria for the selection of the eleven teachers. The study does not give us the details of how the survey scale was constructed. Was there a pilot test? It seems not. The direct conclusion of the research was that virtual manipulatives encouraged student-oriented erudition. The study assumed that the responses of the 11 teachers were indicative of the affect of the digital manipulatives on children. This is questionable. The background of the teachers is not given. Which type of schools they taught in? What physical manipulatives were the teachers using currently? The teachers were ambivalent as to whether digital manipulatives were better than concrete manipulatives and whether teachers were willing to replace concrete manipulatives entirely with digital manipulatives. The teachers have expressed reservations about their inability to track the progress of the student, ambiguous instructions and lack of feedback. If these concerns are addressed satisfactorily it is doubtful if digital manipulatives will remain student centric. In addition, the paper does not define what it means by ‘student centric’. Currently the digital manipulatives that are available on the net offer innovative, interesting and concrete learning opportunities of otherwise nonrepresentational math theories. The end result is that children manage to learn math concepts that were earlier believed to be too advanced for them. These are believed to increase theoretical learning, deeper understanding of dynamic systems, calculation, communication and innovation in thinking. The paper presupposes that the use of the new technology alone is sufficient for enhanced learning of complicated theories. This is not supported by evidence. The learning experience is a function of the power of understanding of the student, the effort he puts in to comprehend and his analytical skills. In addition, learning is facilitated by teacher inputs and guidance. Digital manipulatives cannot replace teacher inputs nor can they substitute student aptitude and effort. Attributing learning achievements to a learning tool is a lopsided opinion inspired by the sales propaganda of digital manipulatives software developers. In sum, the paper eulogizes the benefits of web-based manipulatives for math learning. These manipulatives are claimed to increase children’s understanding of advanced theories and increase the attractiveness of these theories. These web-based manipulatives are declared to focus on the learner and make an optimal use of web-based technology for visualizing intangible concepts. References: Public Broadcasting Service (2006). PBS Teacher Source: Fraction Flags. Retrieved from http://www. pbs. org/teachersource/recommended/math/lk_onlinegames. shtm on August 19, 2006.