Beyond numeracy in preschool: Adding patterns to the equation

Rittle‐Johnson, Bethany; Fyfe, Emily R.; Loehr, Abbey M.; Miller, Michael R.

doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.01.005

Cited by 93 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings also suggest that the key ingredient in self-explaining may be processing and expressing high-quality explanations, not inventing explanations. This is in line with Crowley and Siegler (1999) and Rittle-Johnson et al (2015).This brings us to the third form of self-explaining: supported self-explaining, in which learners operate on high-quality explanations already created for them. Because our target population was students with a history of poor mathematics achievement, many of whom experience limitations in the cognitive processes associated with mathematics learning and may therefore be especially vulnerable to inventing subpar explanations, the focus of the present study's explaining condition was supported explaining rather than invented self-explaining.…”

mentioning

confidence: 79%

Supported self-explaining during fraction intervention.

Fuchs¹,

Malone²,

Schumacher³

et al. 2016

Journal of Educational Psychology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main purposes of this study were to test the effects of teaching at-risk 4 th graders to provide explanations for their mathematics work and examine whether those effects occur by compensating for limitations in cognitive processes. We randomly assigned 212 children to 3conditions: a control group and 2 variants of a multi-component fraction intervention. Both intervention conditions included 36 sessions, each lasting 35 min. All but 7 min of each session were identical. In the 7-min component, students were taught to provide high quality explanations when comparing fraction magnitudes or to solve fraction word problems. Children were pretested on cognitive variables and pre/posttested on fraction knowledge. On accuracy of magnitude comparisons and quality of explanations, children who received the explaining intervention outperformed those in the word-problem condition. On word problems, children who received the word-problem intervention outperformed those in the explaining condition.Moderator analyses indicated that the explaining intervention was more effective for students with weaker working memory, while the word-problem intervention was more effective for students with stronger reasoning ability.Key words: supported self-explaining, fractions, intervention, moderator, working memory, reasoning EXPLAINING WHY FRACTION MAGNITUDES DIFFER-4 Supported Self-Explaining during Fraction InterventionCompetence with fractions is important for advanced mathematics learning and success in the American workforce (National Mathematics Advisory Panel [NMAP], 2008;Geary Hoard, Nugent, & Bailey, 2012;Siegler et al., 2012). Yet understanding about fractions and skill in operating with fractions are difficult for many students (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2007; NMAP;Ni, 2001). The NMAP therefore assigned high priority to improving fraction instruction. The focus of the present study was on the effects of intervention to enhance at-risk learners' performance on fractions at fourth grade. Our main purposes were to isolate the effects of intervention focused on teaching children to explain why fractions differ in magnitude and to examine whether effects accrue by compensating for limitations in cognitive processes.In this introduction, we describe why teaching children to provide high quality explanations may enhance understanding of the explained content and provide a rationale for the supported self-explaining approach we took. We also discuss how self-explaining without such scaffolding can be cognitively demanding and why the approach we took may compensate for limitations in the cognitive resources many children with histories of poor mathematics learning experience. Finally, we describe the theoretical orientation of the multi-component intervention program in which our explaining intervention component was embedded. Explaining Why Fractions Differ in MagnitudeA major purpose of the present study was to isolate the effects of intervention teaching children to provide sound explanations regard...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 79%

Supported self-explaining during fraction intervention.

Fuchs¹,

Malone²,

Schumacher³

et al. 2016

Journal of Educational Psychology

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The authors argued that self-explanation was redundant with processing the instructional explanations. Comparable learning from self-explanation prompts and instructional explanations has been reported for a variety of other learning contexts, ranging from preschoolers learning about identifying rules in repeating patterns of objects, to adults learning from animations of the human circulatory system (Cho & Jonassen, 2012;Crowley & Siegler, 1999;De Koning, Tabbers, Rikers, & Paas, 2010;Rittle-Johnson, Fyfe, Loehr, & Miller, 2015;Tenenbaum et al, 2008).…”

Section: Constraint On Effectiveness Relative To Alternative Instructmentioning

confidence: 99%

Eliciting explanations: Constraints on when self-explanation aids learning

Rittle‐Johnson

Loehr

2016

Psychon Bull Rev

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generating explanations for oneself in an attempt to make sense of new information (i.e., self-explanation) is often a powerful learning technique. Despite its general effectiveness, in a growing number of studies, prompting for selfexplanation improved some aspects of learning, but reduced learning of other aspects. Drawing on this recent research, as well as on research comparing self-explanation under different conditions, we propose four constraints on the effectiveness of self-explanation. First, self-explanation promotes attention to particular types of information, so it is better suited to promote particular learning outcomes in particular types of domains, such as transfer in domains guided by general principles or heuristics. Second, self-explaining a variety of types of information can improve learning, but explaining one's own solution methods or choices may reduce learning under certain conditions. Third, explanation prompts focus effort on particular aspects of the to-be-learned material, potentially drawing effort away from other important information. Explanation prompts must be carefully designed to align with target learning outcomes. Fourth, prompted self-explanation often promotes learning better than unguided studying, but alternative instructional techniques may be more effective under some conditions. Attention to these constraints should optimize the effectiveness of self-explanation as an instructional technique in future research and practice.

show abstract

“…But, TECEC covers this topic and describes patterns in its indicators in detail. Although CCSSM do not include patterns, various studies (Mulligan and Mitchelmore 2009;Rittle-Johnson, Fyfe, Loehr, and Miller 2015) discuss how significant it is in early childhood education and how it affects algebraic thinking. As is known, skills like identifying, continuing patterns, finding out the rule for getting the next step, and stating a rule both verbally and symbolically direct children to algebraic thinking (Palabıyık and Akkuş İspir 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing Turkish Early Childhood Education Curriculum with Respect to Common Core State Standards for Mathematics

Öçal¹

2017

ENAD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Increasing recognition of mathematics in society and its effects in development of children takes attention to early childhood education and as a result early childhood curriculum. Although children have informal mathematical knowledge before they begin formal schooling, a qualified mathematics education during early childhood will enrich and prevent learning difficulties in further years. For this purpose, the aim of the study was to compare Turkish Early Childhood Education Curriculum (TECEC) objectives with respect to kindergarten level Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSSM). The study carried out as a document analysis method. Results are presented under five domains of CCSSM; counting and cardinality, operations and algebraic thinking, number and operations in base ten, measurement and data, and geometry. Results of the study indicate that TECEC and CCSSM for kindergarten level have both similarities and differences. While CCSSM dedicate more time numbers than other topics, TECEC gives significance to many mathematical skills not specifically the numbers like geometry, measurement, etc. About numbers topic in CCSSM have in depth expectations from children. Some other differences are also seen in patterning topic in TECEC and in place value topic in CCSSM. More similarities are found in geometry domain in both TECEC and CCSSM.

show abstract

Beyond numeracy in preschool: Adding patterns to the equation

Cited by 93 publications

References 41 publications

Supported self-explaining during fraction intervention.

Supported self-explaining during fraction intervention.

Eliciting explanations: Constraints on when self-explanation aids learning

Comparing Turkish Early Childhood Education Curriculum with Respect to Common Core State Standards for Mathematics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About