Technology news and Jobs 
Science X, Y, and Z better than story problem when learning math
Science X, Y, and Z better than story problem when learning math | X, Y, and Z better than story problem when learning math |
|
| by William Atkins | |
| Saturday, 26 April 2008 | |
|
Page 2 of 3 In the first example of the game from a foreign country, eighty children were either given one concrete example, two or three concrete examples, or generic symbols. When taking the test, the generic symbol group got almost 80% of the answers correct. Featured Whitepaper
5 Best Practices for Smartphone Support
Science DiscussionsIn the second example, twenty students were given two concrete examples and told the examples were similar. However, the students still did poorly when tested. In the third example, twenty students were given two concrete examples and asked to compare them and indicate on paper their similarities. Forty-four percent of the students performed well on the test, however, 56% still did no better than guessing. In the fourth example, forty students either learned the math concept first with concrete examples and then were taught with generic symbols, or were taught with only generic symbols. Students who learned only with generic symbols performed better on the test than those who learned first with concrete examples and then with generic symbols. Consequently, the Ohio State researchers concluded that students learn better and are able to apply that knowledge to different situations when they learn with abstract (generic) symbols. They also concluded that students who learned with real-world (concrete) example could not easily transfer that knowledge to different real-life situations. The extra information provided with real-life example, such as in story problems, actually made it more difficult for students to understand the basic mathematical concept—and to apply it to new problems. Kaminski said, "The danger with teaching using this example is that many students only learn how to solve the problem with the trains.” She adds, "We're really making it difficult for students because we are distracting them from the underlying math.” [Portland Tribune: “Hold the marbles: Abstract approach best for math”] They stated that students learn better with abstract examples (such as “a” and “b”) than with concrete examples (such as “blue trains” and “green airplanes"). The conclusion of the research study definitely questions the long-standing ways in which teachers teach mathematics to students early in their schooling. It also questions the effectiveness of textbooks that use story problems to teach rather than with abstract symbolism. Vladimir Sloutsky, one of the authors of the study, states, “These findings cast doubt on a long-standing belief in education. The belief in using concrete examples is very deeply ingrained, and hasn't been questioned or tested." [Science Daily: “Concrete Examples Don't Help Students Learn Math, Study Finds”] The Kaminski, Sloutsky, Heckler team also performed a similar study with elementary students. Please read the third page for additional information. |
| < Next story in category | Previous story in the category > |
|---|
