1 / 27

Raising Achievement Through Reading and Writing Mathematics

Raising Achievement Through Reading and Writing Mathematics. Neil Hatfield Northwest Missouri State University. Background. Developing communication skills in addition to guiding students through the mathematical landscape can be challenging.

hova
Download Presentation

Raising Achievement Through Reading and Writing Mathematics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Raising Achievement Through Reading and Writing Mathematics Neil Hatfield Northwest Missouri State University

  2. Background • Developing communication skills in addition to guiding students through the mathematical landscape can be challenging. • I have observed various degrees of blending reading, writing and mathematics. • Results have been unclear.

  3. Why? • Push for tougher standards. • Call from state Boards of Education for Reading/Writing across the curriculum. • A closer investigation into pedagogies that blend reading, writing, and mathematics together over a whole course is warranted.

  4. Guiding Question • Can mathematical pedagogy blended with reading only emphasis, writing only emphasis, or emphasis in both reading and writing lead to improvement in student understanding of mathematical concepts?

  5. Research Questions • Is there significant evidence to suggest that there is a difference in student mathematical achievement between the various pedagogies? • Is there significant evidence suggesting that students exposed to reading pedagogy scored higher than the students in the control group? • Is there significant evidence suggesting that students exposed to writing pedagogy scored higher than the students in the control group? • Is there significant evidence suggesting that students involved in the reading only class scored higher than the students in the control group?

  6. Writing Research • Appears to be little research • Writing is an extremely organic process unique to each person • The writing process behaves in a similar fashion as the reading process…they are inextricably linked. • Rosenblatt, 1994

  7. Writing Research, cont. • Writing allows for students to develop both academically and personally. • Students need a wide range of writing activities in various academic contexts with both overtly self-reflective and overtly subject-focused tasks. • Curtis and Herrington (2003) • 73% of students reported that writing was important or very important in understanding/applying the ideas of the course. • Sommers and Saltz (2004)

  8. Writing Paradox • Sommers and Saltz found a paradox. • Novice writers viewed as experts • Students are required to write about material they are still coming to grips with, while at the same time, place that knowledge into a larger context. • Build authority not by writing from a position of expertise, but by writing into expertise. • Rosenblatt’s Transactional Theory

  9. Reading Research • Key Action to create successful readers: get the students to engage actively with the text. • Proposed strategies for reading: • Reciprocal Teaching (Palincsar and Brown, 1984) • Transactional Theory (Rosenblatt, 1994) • Constructively Responsive Reading (Pressley and Afflerbach, 1995) • Others (Exner, 1996; Barton and Heidema, 2002; Pape, 2004; Friedman, Myers, and Wright, n.d.; Flood and Lapp, 1990) • Small episodes with limited number of participants.

  10. Reading Research, cont. • Flood and Lapp (1990) provide a framework for working with “at-risk” students and reading comprehension. • Preparing for Reading Practices • Reciprocal Teaching Practices • Understanding/Using Text Structure • Questioning Practices • Information Processing Practices • Summarizing Practices • Voluntary/Recreational Reading

  11. The Research Project • Using Math Skills 2 (Intermediate Algebra) • Control Group • Reading Only • Writing Only • Reading and Writing • Each group sans Control receives additional mathematics instruction from the researcher. Control group has another leader. • The Reading and Writing group does the same activities as both of the single emphasis groups.

  12. Writing • Based on my own past experiences with writing. • Journal Prompts are Word 2007 forms • One-on-one approach • Provides differentiation • Preserves individual student voice • Example Journal Prompt • Example Journal Prompt

  13. Early Writing Results • Very difficult to get students to complete the prompts. (Not surprising.) • May have been worthwhile to spend time in class building what a “good” response is. • Benefit: Allows for the detection of misconceptions that may not surface. • “F.O.I.L” as the [only] way to factor any trinomial. • Difficulty understanding the Distributive Property • “Addressing” misconceptions • Curse: students must actually read the teacher responses. • Benefit: Private, non-threatening atmosphere

  14. Student Journal Responses • “F.O.I.L” Response • Distributive Property • “Good” Response

  15. Reading • Two Mini-Strategies • Unknown Words/Symbols • Matching Homework to Examples • Four Full Strategies • Summarizing Text • Summarizing Text and working Examples • Guided (Structured) Reading • Student Personal Synthesis

  16. Guided Reading • Blending of both Mini-strategies and the previous two Full strategies. • Instructor Prepared Reading Guides • Additionally • Activation of Prior Knowledge • Question-Generation • Reflective Thinking • Implements a gradual release of responsibility

  17. Example Reading Guide • Reading Guide Example 1 • Reading Guide Example 2 • Reading Guide Example 3

  18. Student Reading Work • Example 1 (Reading Strategy 1) • Example 2 (Reading Strategy 3) • Example 3 (Reading Strategy 3) • Example 4 (Reading Strategy 3)

  19. Student Personal Synthesis • Result of the gradual release of responsibility. • Students generated their own reading strategy based off what they have learned. • Idea: to see what students apply after instruction in the various strategies.

  20. Early Reading Results • In addition to “math” words/symbols identified as unknown, “non-math” words were also identified. • Students struggle with buying into the first two Full Strategies. • Repetition, monitoring and constructive support • Students seem to clasp onto the third strategy more readily. • Students also felt that it was helping them.

  21. Results • The following slides contain some “rough” results. • The power of the tests is really low. • Further analysis is underway.

  22. Implications • Continued research to refine methodology and remove confounding variables (primarily, researcher). • Provides insight into whole-classroom reading/writing instruction in a content area. • Provides a starting platform for the development of pedagogy. • Offers ideas for professional development.

  23. Future Research • This study did not provide a clearer picture on the impacts of blending reading and writing with mathematics. • It does help to move the research forward from one-on-one interactions to whole classroom instruction. • We need to refine the blended pedagogies and conduct additional research.

More Related