Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.7468/jksmed.2022.25.3.201

Enhancing Geometry and Measurement Learning Experiences through Rigorous Problem Solving and Equitable Instruction  

Seshaiyer, Padmanabhan (Department of Mathematical Sciences, George Mason University)
Suh, Jennifer (Mathematics Education, George Mason University)
Publication Information
Research in Mathematical Education / v.25, no.3, 2022 , pp. 201-225 More about this Journal
Abstract
This paper details case study vignettes that focus on enhancing the teaching and learning of geometry and measurement in the elementary grades with attention to pedagogical practices for teaching through problem solving with rigor and centering equitable teaching practices. Rigor is a matter of equity and opportunity (Dana Center, 2019). Rigor matters for each and every student and yet research indicates historically disadvantaged and underserved groups have more of an opportunity gap when it comes to rigorous mathematics instruction (NCTM, 2020). Along with providing a conceptual framework that focuses on the importance of equitable instruction, our study unpacks ways teachers can leverage their deep understanding of geometry and measurement learning trajectories to amplify the mathematics through rigorous problems using multiple approaches including learning by doing, challenged-based and mathematical modeling instruction. Through these vignettes, we provide examples of tasks taught through rigorous problem solving approaches that support conceptual teaching and learning of geometry and measurement. Specifically, each of the three vignettes presented includes a task that was implemented in an elementary classroom and a vertically articulated task that engaged teachers in a professional learning workshop. By beginning with elementary tasks to more sophisticated concepts in higher grades, we demonstrate how vertically articulating a deeper understanding of the learning trajectory in geometric thinking can add to the rigor of the mathematics.
Keywords
learning by doing; equitable instruction; geometric thinking;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Steffe, L. P. (2004). On the construction of learning trajectories of children: The case of commensurate fractions. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 129-162.   DOI
2 Suh, J., & Seshaiyer, P. (2015). Examining teachers' understanding of the mathematical learning progression through vertical articulation during lesson study. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 18(3), 207-229.   DOI
3 Suh, J. M., Matson, K., & Seshaiyer, P. (2017). Engaging elementary students in the creative process of mathematizing their world through mathematical modeling. Education Sciences, 7(2), 62.   DOI
4 Suh, J. M., & Seshaiyer, P. (2019). Promoting Ambitious Teaching and Learning through Implementing Mathematical Modeling in a PBL Environment: A Case Study. The Wiley Handbook of Problem- Based Learning, 529-550.
5 Turner, E., Dominguez, H., Maldonado, L., & Empson, S. (2013). English learners' participation in mathematical discourse: Shifting positioning and dynamic identities. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44(1), 199-234.   DOI
6 Van de Walle, J. A. (2004). Elementary and middle school mathematics-Teaching developmentally (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
7 Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465-491. doi:10.3102/00028312032003465   DOI
8 Lewis, C. (2002). Lesson study: A handbook of teacher-led instructional change. Research for Better Schools.
9 Mishra, A. (2003). Age and school related differences in recall of verbal items in a story context. Social Science International, 19(2), 12-18.
10 Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.   DOI
11 National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2020). Catalyzing change in early childhood and elementary mathematics initiating critical conversations. NCTM.
12 Peter-Koop, A. (2004). Fermi problems in primary mathematics classrooms: Pupils' interactive modeling processes. Mathematics education for the third millennium: Towards 2010. Proceedings of the 27th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Townsville. Putt I, Faragher R, McLean M, Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (Eds); Proceedings of the Annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (MERGA), 27. Sydney: MERGA: 454-461.
13 Bartell, T. G. (2011). Caring, race, culture, and power: A research synthesis toward supporting mathematics teachers in caring with awareness. Journal of Urban Mathematics Education, 4(1), 50-74.   DOI
14 Aguirre, J. M., Turner, E. E., Bartell, T. G., Kalinec-Craig, C., Foote, M. Q., Roth McDuffie, A., & Drake, C. (2013). Making connections in practice: How prospective elementary teachers connect to children's mathematical thinking and community funds of knowledge in mathematics instruction. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(2), 178-192. doi:10.1177/0022487112466900   DOI
15 Consortium for Mathematics and Its Applications [COMAP, Inc.]; Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics [SIAM]. (2019). GAIMME: Guidelines for assessment & instruction in mathematical modeling education. Garfunkel S. A.; Montgomery, M., Eds.
16 Arleback, J. B., & Bergsten, C. (2013). On the use of realistic Fermi problems in introducing mathematical modelling in upper secondary mathematics. In Lesh, R., Galbraith, P. L., Haines, C., and Hurford, A. (Eds.), Modeling students' mathematical modeling competencies (pp. 597-609). Dordrecht.
17 Barrett, J. E., Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Cullen, C. J., Van Dine, D. W. (2022, August 21). Children's measurement project. https://www.childrensmeasurement.org
18 Keeton, M. T., & Tate, P. J. (Eds.). (1978). Learning by experience--what, why, how (No. 1). Jossey-Bass.
19 Hedges, H., Cullen, J., & Jordan, B. (2011). Early years curriculum: Funds of knowledge as a conceptual framework for children's interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(2), 185-205. doi:10.1080/00220272.2010.511275   DOI
20 Hull, T. H., Miles, R. H., & Balka, D. S. (2014). Realizing rigor in the mathematics classroom. Corwin Press.
21 Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT press.
22 Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of educational psychology, 88(4), 715-730.   DOI
23 Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2004). Learning trajectories in mathematics education. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 6(2), 81-89.   DOI
24 Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2014). The importance of the early years. Science, Technology & Mathematics (STEM), 5-9, Corwin.
25 Cohen, E., Lotan, R., Scarloss, B. & Arellano, A. (1999). Complex instruction: Equity in cooperative learning classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 38, 80-86. doi:10.1080/00405849909543836   DOI
26 Driscoll, M. J., DiMatteo, R. W., Nikula, J., & Egan, M. (2007). Fostering geometric thinking: A guide for teachers, grades 5-10. Heinemann.
27 Foglia, L., & Wilson, R. A. (2013). Embodied cognition. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 4(3), 319-325.   DOI
28 National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). 2017. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2017 Mathematics Assessment. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nqt/
29 Piaget, J., Garcia, R., Davidson, P., Davidson, P. M., & Easley, J. (2013). Toward a logic of meanings. Psychology Press.
30 Schmitt, T., Demary, K., & Wilson-Rich, N. (2021). Urban beekeeping as a tool for STEAM education. In DeCoito, I., Patchen, A., Knobloch, N., and Esters, L. (Eds.), Teaching and learning in urban agricultural community contexts (pp. 179-208). Springer.
31 Van Hiele, P. M. (1999). Developing geometric thinking through activities that begin with play. Teaching Children Mathematics, 5(6), 310-316.   DOI
32 Simon, M. A. (1995). Reconstructing mathematics pedagogy from a constructivist perspective. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 26(2), 114-145.   DOI
33 Suh, J. M., & Seshaiyer, P. (2016). Modeling mathematical ideas: Developing strategic competence in elementary and middle school. Rowman & Littlefield.
34 Tan Sisman, G., & Aksu, M. (2016). A study on sixth grade students' misconceptions and errors in spatial measurement: Length, area, and volume. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(7), 1293-1319.   DOI
35 Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., & Empson, S. B. (1999). Children's mathematics. Cognitively Guided Instruction. Postmourth, NH: Heinemann. Trad. de C. De Castro y M. Linares: Las Matematicas que hacen los ninos.
36 Charles A. Dana Center (2019). "What is rigor in mathematics really". https://www.utdanacenter.org/sites/default/files/2019-02/what-is-rigor-inmathematics.pdf
37 Civil, M. & Khan, L. (2001). Mathematics instruction developed from a garden theme. Teaching Children Mathematics, 7, 400-405.   DOI
38 Elia, I., Heuvel-Panhuizen, M. V. D., & Gagatsis, A. (2018). Geometry learning in the early years: Developing understanding of shapes and space with a focus on visualization. In Kinnear, V., Lai, M. Y., & Muir, T. (Eds.), Forging connections in early mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 73-95). Springer.
39 Featherstone, H., Crespo, S., Jilk, L., Oslund, J, Parks, A., & Woods, M. (2011). Smarter Together! Collaboration and Equity in the Elementary Math Classroom. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
40 Battista, M. (2010). Representations of learning for teaching: Learning progressions, learning trajectories, and levels of sophistication. In P. Brosnan, D. B. Erchick, & L. Flevares (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Second Annual Meeting of the North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education, Vol. pp. 60-71. The Ohio State University.
41 Gay, G. (2002). Preparing for culturally responsive teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 106-116. doi:10.1177/0022487102053002003   DOI
42 Gutierrez, R., & Irving, S. (2012). Student centered learning: Latino/a, blacks, and mathematics. A white paper commissioned by the Nellie Mae Foundation Boston: Nellie Mae.
43 Haviger, J., & Vojkuvkova, I. (2014). The van Hiele geometry thinking levels: Gender and school type differences. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 112, 977-981.   DOI
44 Bartell, T., Wagner, A, Edwards, A., Battery, D., Foote, M., & Spencer, J. (2017). Toward a framework for research linking equitable teaching with the standards for mathematical practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 48(1), 7-21.   DOI
45 Battista, M. T. (2007). The development of geometric and spatial thinking. In Lester, F. (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 843-908). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
46 Sarama, J., & Clements, D. (2009). Early childhood mathematics education research: Learning trajectories for young children. Routledge.
47 Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In Gauvain, M., and Cole, M. (Eds.), Readings on the development of children (pp. 34-41). Scientific American Books.
48 Wager, A. A. (2014). Noticing children's participation: Insights into teacher positionality toward equitable mathematics pedagogy. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 45(3), 312-350. doi:10.5951/jresematheduc.45.3.0312.   DOI
49 Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it. Princeton University Press.
50 SellarEs, J. A., & Toussaint, G. (2003). On the role of kinesthetic thinking in computational geometry. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 34(2), 219-237.   DOI
51 Seshaiyer, P. & Suh, J. (2019). Mathematical modeling in problem solving: a big idea across the curriculum. In Big Ideas in Mathematics: Yearbook 2019, Association of Mathematics Educators (pp. 167-186).