Manipulatives: Tensions & Issues

Jessa Salkeld Simon Fraser University

EDU 482 Ray Appel

When Marilyn Burns (1996) first introduced geoboard manipulatives to her students she admitted that the classroom quickly grew chaotic in the introductory exploration time. Since, she has improved the way that she introduces materials to her students by giving them plenty of structure, instructions, time and patience. She expresses that not only are manipulatives a way to extend learning (p. 51) but that they are also a way to give children a chance to make discoveries and explore new ideas. (p. 46) Constructive use of free exploration time is also a must, according to Marilyn Burns. She explained that by allowing children to satisfy their curiosity they dont become distracted from the assigned tasks. (p. 46) Moyer counters that although research generally supports the use of manipulatives, there is evidence that the mere presence of manipulatives does not guarantee the acquisition of conceptual understanding. (Moyer, p. 178) Though Burns (1996) has a particular structure to the way she uses manipulatives that makes them a positive impact in her classroom (including regular discussions of what students have discovered about them, posters and charts recording these findings and specific problems and activities to explore with the manipulatives) she also makes it known that they are useful across curriculum. Burns (1996) explains the inherent importance of journal writing in math and also comments that manipulatives provide concrete objects for children to describe in that writing process. (p. 46) In a Letter to the Parents, Marilyn Burns (1996) clarified that experiences with manipulatives help children see math as a subject to be understood, not memorized. (p. 47) She justified that the inherent importance of manipulatives for teaching math to students lay in their ability to help [students] find their way see how [each mathematical area] connects, and [help them understand] what to do should they forget a fact or procedure. (p. 47) Moyers (2001) article acknowledged that manipulatives serve as tools for teachers to translate abstractions into a form that enables learners to relate new knowledge (p.194) to prior knowledge but that the process entailed the need to interpret students own mathematical thinking in order to convey a relationship between mathematical objects,

actions and abstract concepts (p.194). However, the use of manipulatives in the curriculum seemingly has an embedded meaning of fun that goes hand-in-hand with it. She claims that in the study, participants behaviours and statements indicated that using manipulatives was little more than a diversion in classrooms where teachers were not able to represent mathematics concepts themselves.(p. 175) Manipulatives may function as part of teachers rewards system for classroom management. By aligning manipulatives with fun math teachers were, in essence, distinguishing manipulative use from their regular mathematics teaching. (p. 188) There is an alignment amongst these authors articles. Moyer (2001) points out that the development of the students internal representation of ideas, tested on the external representations or manipulatives, is at the heart of what it means to learn mathematics. Connecting the learners own mental actions with the shared tools used for representation is the challenge for mathematics teachers (p. 194). With this challenge in mind, it is here that we see the real importance of professional development days for teachers and consistent reflective practice throughout their careers. In a professional development session, Marilyn Burns (2004) aimed to provide a[n] experience that not only would help teachers learn more about the mathematics they have to teach, but also would help them learn whats needed to teach it. (p. 17) By exploring the relationship between various drink containers circumferences, diameters and height and engaging the attending teachers in discussions and predictions, Burns (2004) turned an exploration of objects and discussion into a logical conversation about pi. Her aim was not only to extend the knowledge of the attendees but to help them understand the importance of making sense of math and not simply re-teaching procedures that they may have been taught as students. The significance of professional development not only stems from improving teaching practice but re-grounding teachers understandings of their curriculum. Their lack of a firm base of mathematical knowledge compounds the problem teachers cannot teach what they dont understand. (Burns, 2004, p. 17)

This somewhat inquiry-based style of learning which uses manipulatives to explore ideas and build a foundation for understanding appeals to the aspect of learning [which] calls for making sense of mathematical ideas and skills that are rooted in logic, for which reasoning is both the avenue for building understanding and the source for doing so. (Burns, 2004, p. 19) Moyer (2001) agreed with this ideology in her writing which stated that the development of the students internal representation of ideas, tested on the external representations or manipulatives, is at the heart of what it means to learn mathematics. (p. 194) When teachers dont allow students to formulate their own understanding and teach by telling and asking children to remember, as is necessary for information that has no basis in logic [they] may give children the message that they arent supposed to make sense of mathematical ideas or look for the meaning in what theyre learning. (Burns, 2004, p. 20) This can initiate a reaction that math doesnt make sense for some people, and why should it? Without reasonable understanding in a foundation of mathematics students do not have a chance to devise a comprehension of how number relationships and concepts work. The underlying notion that really brings these authors principles to a parallel is that the key [to teaching mathematics] is providing children opportunities to build their own understanding. (Burns, 2004, p. 20) How it is accomplished is variable. Certainly mathematical manipulatives can be either a useful construct or a limiter depending on how the teacher makes use of it in the classroom. Like any tool, if used incorrectly it can certainly inhibit its intention. What professionals can consistently stand to gain from in their careers, to repeat Marilyn Burns (2004), is continuously provided opportunity to build their own understanding. (p. 20) If educators are frequently given opportunity to benefit from professional development they have a chance not only to increase their knowledge and frame of thinking but to receive a valuable boost of confidence in what they are teaching so that they may take risks, try new things and appeal to all learning styles by benefiting from new studies.

Bibliography

Burns, M. How to Make the Most of Math Manipulatives Instructor: 45-50, April 1996. Scholastic. http://www.mathsolutions.com/documents/1996_Hands_on_Help.pdf Burns, M. A Can of Coke leads to Pi Theme / Mathematics and Science: Vol. 25, No. 4, 16-21. 2004. National Staff Development Council http://www.mathsolutions.com/documents/2004_A_Can_of_Coke_NSDC.pdf Moyer, P. Are we having fun yet? How teachers use manipulatives to teach Mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics 47: 175197, 2001. 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers.