Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students' mathematics learning

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 58, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 399-419

  Roschelle, Jeremy ^a   Rafanan, Ken ^a   Bhanot, Ruchi ^a   Estrella, Gucci ^a   Penuel, Bill ^a   Nussbaum, Miguel ^b   Claro, Susana ^b  

^a SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^b PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

Cooperative learning; Feedback; Fractions; Group feedback; Handheld computers; Mathematics; Wireless networking

Indexed keywords

EID: 77953650061     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-009-9142-9     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.
2. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Morgan, M. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213-238.
3. Beason, L. (1993). Feedback and revision in writing across the curriculum classes. Research in the Teaching of English, 72(4), 395-422.
4. Black, P., & Harrison, C. (2001). Feecback in questioning and marking: The science teacher's role in formative assessment. School Science Review, 82(301), 55-61.
5. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61-100.
6. Bustos, H., & Nussbaum, M. (2009). An experimental study of the inclusion of technology in higher education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 17(1), 100-107.
7. Butler, R. (1987). Task-involving and ego-involving properties of evaluation: Effects of different feedback conditions on motivational perceptions, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 474-482.
8. Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and self-regulated learning: A theoretical synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65, 245-281.
9. Carpenter, T. C., Fenemma, E., & Romberg, T. (Eds.). (1993). Rational numbers: An integration of research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
11. Chi, M. T. H., De Leeuw, N., Chiu, M. H., & LaVancher, C. (1994). Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18(3), 439-477.
12. Clariana, R. B., & Koul, R. (2005). Multiple-try feedback and higher-order learning outcomes. International Journal of Instructional Media, 32(3), 239-245.
13. Clariana, R. B., & Lee, D. (2001). The effects of recognition and recall study tasks with feedback in a computer-based vocabulary lesson. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 23-36.
14. Confrey, J. (2008). A synthesis of the research on rational number reasoning. Paper presented at the International Congress of Mathematics Instruction XI.
15. Cortez, C., Nussbaum, M., Rodriguez, P., Lopez, X., & Rosas, R. (2005). Teacher training with face to face computer supported collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 171-180.
16. Cramer, K., & Henry, A. (2002). Using manipulative models to build number sense for addition and fractions. In B. Litwiller (Ed.), Making sense of fractions, ratios, and proportions (pp. 41-48). Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
17. Dihoff, R. E., Brosvic, G. M., Epstein, M. L., & Cook, M. J. (2004). Provision of feedback during preparation for academic testing: Learning is enhanced by immediate but not delayed feedback. Psychological Record, 54(2), 207-232.
18. Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., Heaviside, S., Novak, T., Carey, N., Campuzano, L., et al. (2007). Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from the first student cohort. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
19. Epstein, M. L., & Brosvic, G. M. (2002). Students prefer the immediate feedback assessment technique. Psychological Reports, 90(3), 1136-1138.
20. Fantuzzo, J. W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on mathematics and school adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 331-339.
21. Foot, H. C., Shute, R. H., Morgan, M. J., & Barron, A. M. (1990). Theoretical issues in peer tutoring. In M. J. Shute & R. H. Shute (Eds.), Children helping children (pp. 65-92). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
22. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N. B., Karns, K., & Dutka, S. (1997). Enhancing students' helping behavior during peer-mediated instruction with conceptual mathematical explanations. The Elementary School Journal, 97, 223-249.
23. Galloway, J. (2007, June 19). When three is not a crowd. The Guardian, from http://www. guardian. co. uk/education/2007/jun/19/elearning. technology9. Accessed 10 October 2009.
24. Gersten, R., Ferrini-Mundy, J., Benbow, C., Clements, D. H., Loveless, T., Williams, V., et al. (2008). Report of the task group on instructional practices. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
25. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 1-38.
26. Good, T. L., & Brophy, J. (2007). Looking in classrooms. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
27. Haertel, E. (1986). Choosing and using classroom tests: Teachers' perspectives on assessment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
28. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112.
29. Hiebert, J., & Behr, M. (1988). Number concepts and operations in the middle grades. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., Garnier, H., Givvin, K. B., Hollingsworth, H., Jacobs, J., et al. (2003). Teaching mathematics in seven countries: Results from the TIMSS 1999 video study. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.
31. Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students' learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371-404). Greenwich: Information Age.
32. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1987). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
33. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Holubec, E. (1998). Advanced cooperative learning (3rd ed.). Edina, Minnesota: Interaction book Company.
34. Kieren, T. E. (1976). On the mathematical, cognitive, and instructional foundations of rational numbers. In R. Lesh (Ed.), Number and measurement: Papers from a research workshop (pp. 101-144). Columbus, OH: ERIC/SMEAC.
35. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Findell, B. (Eds.). (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36. Kluger, A. N., & deNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
37. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. (2006). Collaboration scripts-A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159-185.
38. Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Ranney, M., & Trafton, J. G. (1992). Effective tutoring techniques: A comparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 277-305.
39. National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2000 (No. NCES 2001-571). Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
40. Nussbaum, M., Alvarez, C., McFarlane, A., Gomez, F., Claro, S., & Radovic, D. (2009). Technology as small group face-to-face Collaborative Scaffolding. Computers & Education, 52(1), 147-153.
41. Rafanan, K., Roschelle, J., Bhanot, R., Gorges, T., & Penuel, W. (2008). Measuring mathematics discourse in technology-supported collaborative activities. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Learning Sciences 2008.
42. Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Estrella, G., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2009). From handheld tool to effective classroom module: Embedding CSCL in a broader design framework. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, Rhodes, Greece.
43. Saxe, G. B., Gearhart, M., & Nasir, N. I. S. (2001). Enhancing students' understanding of mathematics: A study of three contrasting approaches to professional support. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 4, 55-79.
44. Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and inference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13, 141-156.
45. Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21, 43-69.
46. Smith, J. P., III. (2002). The development of students' knowledge of fractions and ratios. In Making sense of fractions, ratios, and proportions. 2002 yearbook (pp. 3-17). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
47. SRI International. (2004). Evaluation of the effectiveness of educational technology interventions (EETI) classroom observation protocol. SRI International.
48. Stein, M. K. (2008). Teaching and learning mathematics: How instruction can foster the knowing and understanding of number. In J. Brophy (Ed.), Subject-specific instructional methods and activities (pp. 111-144). Bingly, UK: JAI Press.
49. Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS videotape classroom study: Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States. Education Statistics Quarterly, 1(2), 109-112.
50. Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1997). Understanding and improving classroom mathematics instruction: An overview of the TIMSS video study. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(1), 14-21.
51. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008a). Fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www. ed. gov/about/bdscomm/list/mathpanel/report/final-factsheet. html. Accessed 10 October 2009.
52. The National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008b). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
53. Thorndike, E. L. (1913). Educational psychology. New York: Columbia University Press.
54. Wearne, D., & Kouba, V. L. (2000). Rational numbers. In E. A. Silver & P. A. Kenney (Eds.), Results from the seventh mathematics assessment of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (pp. 163-191). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
55. Webb, N. M. (1991). Task-related verbal interaction and mathematics learning in small groups. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(5), 366-389.
56. Wei, R. C., Darling-Hammond, L., Andree, A., Richardson, N., & Ophanos, S. (2009). Professional learning in the learning profession: A status report on teacher development in the United States and abroad. Dallas TX: National Staff Development Council.
57. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1-30.
58. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). MCSCL: Mobile computer supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 42(3), 289-314.
59. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2007). A conceptual framework based on Activity Theory for mobile CSCL. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 211-235.