https://scholarworks.moreheadstate.edu/student_scholarship_posters/1098/thumbnail.jp

Boram, Robert

Brown, Chelsea

English

Morehead State University

A study of student learning comparing hands-on with traditional mathematics instruction with lOth grade high school students By: Chelsea Brown* Advised by: Dr. Robert Boram MOREHEAD STATE UNIVERSITY "' Introduction: Department of Mathematics and Physics Methods: • Teaching strategies defined as, 11A generalized plan for lesson(s) which • Four classes were chosen as participants in this study; two classes includes structure, desired behavior, in terms of the goal of were taught using traditional instruction and two were taught using instruction, and an outline of tactics necessary to implement the hands-on approach strategy." (School of Ed, 2011} • Days of instructions extended over 7 days • Traditional approach to teaching is defined as, 11The teacher being the • All subjects of the study, in both groups, were given the same pretest controller of the learning environment. Power and responsibility are and the same posttest (pictures below) held by the teacher and they play the role of instructor (in the form of • Traditional instruction included lectures, notes, and problems assigned lectures) and decision maker (in regards to curriculum content and specific outcomes). The lesson's content and delivery are considered to be most important and students master knowledge through drill and practice." {Griffiths et. al., 2002} • Hands-on approach is defined as, 11Students cooperate to construct a consensus to an open-ended activity. Students are in control of their own learning and ultimately, the outcome of their learning." (Griffiths et. al., 2002) Demographics: • The research took place at a county school in central Kentucky that serves a largely rural population • Total of 105 students, 49 in the traditional instruction group and 56 in the hands-on instruction group • lOth grade high students in Algebra 2 • Students were Caucasian, African American, Hispanic and Asian • Groups were predetermined by students class schedule; early morning, 2nd, 3rd and 4th period. • No exceptionalities (disabilities, ELL, IEP, etc.) • Lesson over trigonometry (sine, cosine, tangent) • Teacher of lesson was a college students studying to become a secondary math educator Literature Review: • J. Mcliesh Conducted a research that shows student's concentration/ attention spans are limited to 15-20 minutes, therefore lectures should be broken up with active participations • Yorke made the conclusion from his research that traditional teaching, if done well, can be proficient in that students can be taught concurrently, but it's assuming that all students are starting from similar mathematical 'platforms of knowledge'. • Bealer stated that there has been a lack of careful research on the impact of different approaches to mathematics teaching and learning. • from the book Hands-on instruction included making a foldable, playing trashketball, and completing problems posted around the room Instrument: Objective 1: Students will be able to define trigonometric functions; sine, cosine, tangent Pretest: U"s l F. .• . ob,:ectw. 1 . : mu sme, co:nne, lfihl tangent or 3D acute tdangle and us~ the tdg rat ios to find missin g Sides. 1) sin X .r 35 I .'... I :>a"'~)/21 ' 5 J A)- *B)-4 5 4 3 C)- D)-5 4 2) cos X '17' :>4v40 ' 4 5 A)- 8)-3 4 4 3 *C)- D)-5 5 Posttest: Ob,lech•& I -hml the mlue o r each trigonometric n1tio. I) tunC ::!) cosX c /~} ,./ 36 8 A) g Bl 1]_ 5 5 C) ~ D) .'_2_ 13 13 3) sin Z '17' "V" \ )5 8 A)- BJ -17 17 C)~ D)~ 8 ) 5 X 3 5 A) - B)-4 4 4 C)-' 3 DJ-5 4) tan .r z 50 r \ /. 3C"v 40 -4 A) -5 C) I 4 ' 3 B) -5 5 DJ-J Objective 2: Students will be able to find the missing side using trigonometric ratios. Pretest: Posttest: Obwhv• 2 ~ Find the missing sid e. Round to the nearest tenth. Ob JeCt\IC 2 rind th l" m issing sui E. Round t v the ne:1rest lent h. " !:'=h A) 22.S H) 2<;1.4 *C) 7.6 Dl 10.9 ' A) 13.9 *B) 15.1 C) 13.0 D) 14.fl A) 6.6 8) 14.3 C) 7.6 D) 15.2 A) 4.1 H) PJ.:! C) 7.5 D) 10.3 7) ==----------:?" \ar ~,,~~ 8] A) 14.5 B) 25.9 C) 4.7 D) 5.0 A) \0_9 BJ 15.8 C) 14.3 D) 19.5 Objective 3: Students will be able to find the measure of the missing angle using trigonometric ratios. Pretest: Ob.ieLh" 3: Find the musul"e uT the indica ted angle to the nearest degree. 8)~ A) 59° BJ Jr C) 53" *DJ 31" 10) ~2 ' A) 16" BJ 17" CJ 55" •oJ 7r 9) /lf--===;j> 5 • A) 22° B) fl6" C) 2.j." D) 68° Posttest: ObJ£cllvd Find tbe mcaSUI"C of the indicated angle to t he nearest degree. 9) 32 ) 0) .. [7 '~J A) 65" B ) 42" C) 48" D ) 25" A) 32" B ) 58" C) 40" D) soc JJ) "~" h)c-, A) 55" BJ 60" Al 60" B) 27" C) 37" 0) 35" C) 5" D) 30" Results: Traditional Instruction Pretest versus Hands-on Instruction Pretest versus Posttest Results Posttest Results Two-tailed P-value <0.0001 Two-tailed P-value <0.0001 95% Confidence -6.99 to -5.34 95% Confidence -7.09 to -5.62 Interval Interval t-value 14.8462 t-value 17.1309 Degrees of 96 Freedom Degrees of 110 Freedom Standard Error of -0.415 Standard Error of 0.371 Difference Difference # of students 49 # of students 56 *Statistically significant *Statistically significant 11 .,-'-'·"ditio.na Unsttu.c.ti.on_l'r-etest-v.ersus 10.os Posttest Resul ts 12 _ HaJ1ds-on Inst ruction Pretest v.e rsus 10.04 Posttest Results 10 t--. 10 -~-~~-----8 t----l 6 t--1 ... Pretest At Pretest ------... Posttest • Posttest 2.3:1 1 2 0.25 0.33 0.2 0.31 0 0 Mean SD SEM M ean 50 SEM Traditional versus Hands-on Pretest Traditional versus Hands-on Posttest Two-tailed P-value 0.4472 Two-tailed P- 0.9203 95% Confidence -0.38 to 0.86 value Interval 95% Confidence -0.86 to 0.95 t-value 0.7630 Interval t-value 0.1003 Degrees of 103 Freedom Degrees of 103 Freedom Standard Error of 0.314 Standard Error of 0.458 Difference Difference # of students 105 # of students 105 *Not statistically significant *Not statistically significant 12 I Pretest versu s Posttest Results for Both Groups 10.08 10.04 1D ~-~ 8 ;------1 s l---~ 1-----------~ Traditional Instruction • Hands-on Instruction 3.92 2.33 2.34 0.25 0.2 0.33 0.31 Pret est Mean Pas test Me an Prete.st SD Post est SD Pretest SEM Posttest SEM Conclusion: • Based on pretest data, the hands-on and traditional group were comparable • Both groups demonstrated significant learning (P<O.OOOl} based on content objectives • Since both groups demonstrated significant learning (P<O.OOOl}, both teaching strategies were effective with these students • When comparing the hands-on and traditional strategies, there was no statistically significant difference in their effectiveness based on student posttest results. 

A study of student learning comparing hands-on with traditional mathematics instruction with 10th grade high school students

https://scholarworks.moreheadstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1098&context=student_scholarship_posters

A study of student learning comparing hands-on with traditional mathematics instruction with 10th grade high school students

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Morehead State University