Rowan University

Rowan Digital Works

Theses and Dissertations

4-14-2004

A study to develop and implement differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction strategies to improve student learning
Edmund F. Cetrullo Jr.
Rowan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd

Part of the Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration Commons

Recommended Citation
Cetrullo, Edmund F. Jr., "A study to develop and implement differentiated, hands on mathematics
instruction strategies to improve student learning" (2004). Theses and Dissertations. 1126.
https://rdw.rowan.edu/etd/1126

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by Rowan Digital Works. It has been accepted for inclusion
in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Rowan Digital Works. For more information, please
contact [email protected].
A STUDY TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT DIFFERENTIATED, HANDS

ON MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTION STRATEGIES

TO IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING

By
Edmund F. Cetrullo Jr.

A Thesis

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the

Master of Arts Degree
of
The Graduate School
At
Rowan University
April 2004

Approve
Professor

Date Approve;L L 2 °^
 ABSTRACT

Edmund F. Cetrullo Jr.

A STUDY TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT DIFFERENTIATED, HANDS
ON MATHEMATICS INSTRUCTION STRATEGIES
TO IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING
2004
Dr. Ted Johnson
Master of Arts in School Administration

The purposes of the study were to research, develop and implement differentiated,

hands on mathematics instruction strategies with mathematics teachers in grades six

through eight for improvement of student learning. Teachers, through collaborative

action research, created and implemented student centered, discovery based, hands on,

manipulative centered lessons over two marking periods which provided students with

experiential, problem solving, mathematical situations that met their individual and

group needs. Analysis of this case study yielded growth through a triangulation of data

measured from improved student scores, student observations, and teacher reflection

about their pedagogy. Effective classroom strategies for differentiated, hands on

instruction are discussed.

 Table of Contents

Page

Chapter 1 Introduction ........... ........... .................. ............................ 1

Chapter 2 Review of the Literature ............................................................ 7

C hapter 3 D esign of the Study ............................................................... 12

Chapter 4 Presentation of the Research Findings ........................................... 17

Chapter 5 Conclusions, Implications and Further Study ................................... 22

References ...................................................................................... 26

Ap p e nd ix A ....................................................................................... 2 7

Ap p en d ix B ........................................................................................ 2 9

Ap p e n d ix C ........................................................................................ 36

A ppen dix D ....................................................................................... 39

A ppendix E ............................ ........................................................ 41

Appendix F ................................................................................... 43

B iograp hical D ata ............................................................................... 4 5

ii
 Chapter 1

Introduction

Focus of the Study

The study focused on the enhancement of mathematics instructional strategies for

teachers in grades six through eight. During the previous school year, informal

observation of mathematics teachers and students at the G. S. School has allowed for the

recognition of antiquated, rote, mathematics instruction strategies. The instruction

focused on training students in computation, and not allowing students the opportunity to

apply mathematical concepts towards experiential, problem solving situations

individually and in cooperative groups. The lack of these opportunities had fostered an

inability for students to make a mathematical connection to problem solving situations of

the real world.

Although G.S. School students normally perform proficiently on standardized

assessments and yearly reports, in the classroom they struggled on how to use

mathematics when given an applicable problem solving situation.

Through action research, teachers researched, developed, and implemented

lessons to provide students with differentiated, hands on instruction which included

experiential, problem solving situations.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to develop and implement differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction strategies to improve the students' application of mathematics

towards problem solving in experiential, problem solving situations.

I
 Teachers of mathematics in grades six through eight, researched, developed, and

implemented experiential lessons to provide their students with differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction. The teachers provided for a variety of mathematical

opportunities that actively engaged and challenged the students in more than just

mathematics. The majority of the lessons mandated students to work in cooperative

groups, creating opportunities for students to interact, plan, and create roles for the

successful completion of the activity.

Definitions

Differentiated instruction is the use of non-traditional teaching strategies that

promotes the teacher meeting the individual student or group needs through a variety of

activities. Differentiated mathematics instruction would provide for students to learn

through various activities such as experiential, hands on, manipulative based, problem

solving situations implemented through individual and cooperative group activities.

Learning is knowledge acquired through study and that may be applied to a future

problem solving situation. Learning is discussed as the comprehension of a mathematical

concept and being able use the concept for application and synthesis.

Manipulatives are tools that may be used to problem solve. The use of

manipulatives for the implementation of differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction

strategies in this study referred to the use of tools of measurement, materials such as

plastic cubes, wooden dowels, paper cut-out shapes, rubber bands, boxes, toothpicks,

glue, three dimensional geometric shapes, and other common items found in a

mathematics classroom.

2
 The triangulation of data is the recognition, acceptance, and validation of a theory

based on the commonality of a theme that is present in three different data sources. The

triangulation of data in this study resulted in the overall achievement of students that was

evident through quantitative and qualitative data such as pre and post student scores, pre

and post teacher surveys, and observations from excerpts of teachers' reflective journals.

Quantitative data is data that is objective and measurable by number. The

quantitative data measured in this study was twofold. Pre and post mean scores of each

grade level which participated were analyzed. Also analyzed were the mean (see

Appendix C), range (see Appendix D), and percent of change scores (see Appendices E

and F) of pre and post Likert Scale surveys (see Appendix A) which identified

mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes of teachers.

Qualitative data is data that is subjective and measurable by condition. The

qualitative data analyzed in this study were ascertained through the teachers' reflective

journals (see Appendix B) and identified in the pre and post Likert Scale surveys (see

Appendix C).

Limitations of the Study

The study was a volunteer driven initiative, enlisting mathematics teachers from

grades six through eight. The original design of the study called for greater teacher

participation, however volunteers were difficult to find as teachers were working the

school year without a settled contract.

Data was collected and analyzed to identify the effective use of differentiated,

hands on instruction by teachers. The results of these actions, the improvement of

instruction and student progress, was measured through the triangulation of qualitative

3
and quantitative data measured from teacher reflection about their pedagogy, student

observation, and students' marking period scores. These results were classroom specific,

as they can only be compared to the teachers' previous behaviors and the students'

previous performances, thus limiting the research.

Resources available to teachers were also limiting. Textbooks used in each of the

grades did not provide for an abundance of problem solving situations. The majority of

the experiences were the result of researched activities or teacher creativity. Materials for

the activities were also limiting, as many lessons called for non-traditional supplies.

Setting of the Study

The site of the study was limited to grades six through eight at the G.S. School,

the only building in the pre-K through 8th grade district. The population observed was a

convenience sample which consisted of 23 sixth graders, 28 seventh graders, and 28

eighth graders from eight different classes. The entire school has a student population of

approximately 330 students with each grade having homogeneously mixed classes for

mathematics.

The participants of the study were volunteer mathematics teachers in grades six

through eight at the G.S. School. This convenience sample was limited to five

cooperating teachers. Each of these highly qualified teachers had ten to twenty-five years

of experience in the instruction of mathematics for middle school aged students in both

regular and special education.

The administration of the building is comprised of a superintendent/principal, a

special services director, and a part-time business administrator. The district is governed

by an elected school board.

4
 The school is set on the Eastern border of C. County, N.J. with a land area of 2.2

square miles. The town's population of 2,435 (year 2000), 49.7% males and 50.3%

females, has a racial balance of: White, Non-Hispanic (92.8%), with ancestries of Irish

(28.5%), German (22.1%), Italian (19.5%), English (15.9%), Polish (6.4%) and Welsh

(2.6); Black (2.8%); Hispanic (2.4%); American Indian (0.7%); and Other (1.7%).

The median resident age is 38.6 years. The median household income is $57,325.

The median house value is $117,500.

For the town's population 25 years of age or older, 84.7% graduated high school,

23.3% earned a Bachelor's degree, and 6.6% earned a Graduate degree or a professional

degree.

The G.S. School is a suburban, middle class school district that has been sheltered

between much larger and diversified communities. Its students are educated in the same

building from Pre-K to eighth grade, thus being identifiable by just about every staff

member in the building. Students usually find a comfortable niche within the school

where they can experience success, whether it is on a sports team or in the school play.

Educationally, G.S. School students generally perform well on standardized and

classroom assessments. Whenever a student experiences difficulty, it is quickly identified

and remedied by a caring and professional teaching staff.

The G.S. School is the focus of the community where many school and

community organizations meet to hold their events. The school and community are close

knit. Many community members are school employees and many of the students' parents

were once G.S. School students as well, thus creating a proud, caring, and effective

school and community.

5
Significance of the Study

The significance of the study was the assessment and enhancement of existing

antiquated mathematic instruction strategies for improved student learning. Students of

the G.S. School continually performed proficiently on their standardized and classroom

assessments, however when a lesson or assignment deviated from the norms created by

their teachers and textbooks, students had great difficulty assessing a situation,

strategizing a plan, applying mathematical concepts, using manipulatives, and working

cooperatively to solve problems. This action research study allowed for teachers to

enhance their mathematics instruction strategies, to develop meaningful experiential

situations in the classroom, and to implement them through individual or cooperative

group activities to improve student learning. These experiences have created memorable

discoveries that have not only influenced the past and present, but should influence the

future.

Organization of the Study

The study was organized to promote action research about differentiated, hand on

mathematical instruction among the mathematics teachers who have volunteered. The

volunteers met on a regular basis to research, develop, and implement into their

classrooms differentiated, hands on instruction through activities that promoted

experiential, problem solving situations that were completed individually and in

cooperative learning groups. The effectiveness of the instruction was measured through

various data collection procedures that included teacher reflection about their instruction

strategies, teacher observation of student progress during activities, and student scores.

6
 Chapter 2

Review of the Literature

Introduction

Student achievement in mathematics has been a part of the national focus for

decades and many attempts have been made to stimulate curriculum and instruction.

Hands on manipulative use to teach abstract and concrete mathematical concepts have

been attempted in many forms with mild successes. The use of these mathematical tools

has gained research support in the past decades (Raphael & Wahlstrom, 1989), however

the correct formula for its implementation is still being discovered.

In 1989 and 1991, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM)

released its Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics (Kennedy,

1998). These standards set higher expectations for mathematics instruction and have

offered new strategies to meet these higher expectations. The NCTM standards proposed

that all students be provided meaningful experiences to explore and reason through non-

routine problems (Ernest, 1994). These standards were,

based on the most current research on educational and work force

needs... realistic and applicable to students of all ages,

nationwide... endorsed by 15 math associations, societies, conference

boards, councils, institutions, etc. and supported by 25 professional

organizations... and have potential, if effectively employed, to level the

playing field for minorities and women, who perform poorly in traditional

mathematics coursework. (Carlson, 1992)

7
These standards offer guidelines for enhancing mathematical improvement through

manipulative programs; however the needed improvement lies within the instruction.

Implementing the ideas in the classroom remains the true obstacle because of antiquated

curriculum and instructional strategies. Districts must dedicate resources towards aligning

curriculum with these standards and provide meaningful professional development

opportunities so educators may best meet the needs of their students. If districts are

attempting these reforms, the change must occur with the teachers leading the way by

first initiating a change in classroom instruction. Unfortunately, this change only occurs

with motivated, dedicated teachers and requires patience on the part of administrators,

who are usually interested only in measurable outcomes. The effectiveness of the

differentiated, hands on instruction will only yield long term measurable outcomes if the

strategies are employed continuously, however the measurement process may be non-

traditional itself, relying heavily on individual student observation.

Most teaching in schools suffers from two conditions: (1) a lack of time spent on

the subject matter, and (2) passive teaching strategies which rely on textbook use

(Marlow & Inman, 1997). Designing effective experiences requires teachers with a

proficiency in using and helping students use technology and other tools to pursue

mathematical investigations along with the ability to guide students in individual, small

group, and whole class work (Ernest, 1994). Districts need to gear professional

development opportunities for teachers who shy away from exploring these instructional

strategies. Once teachers experience the empowerment of non-traditional lesson building

and observe the results of their lessons, meaningful change will occur. However, many

8
times teachers are proficient in one method and teach students as a whole class although

some students may not learn that well that way (Rust, 1999).

One main issue hindering the implementation of differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction is the lack of quality textbook publications. If the goals of

textbooks coincided with the NCTM's standards, teachers would have developed

strategies to meet such standards with lessons that,

are creative; emphasize comprehension and problem solving, not just

memorization; train students to use calculators or computers effectively to

enhance, not replace, knowledge of basic skill; and use manipulative

materials to promote maximum comprehension. (Carlson, 1992)

Even though some mathematical programs supply opportunity or knowledge to

help teachers overcome the challenge of adopting the new philosophy of their programs;

when it is time to teach, the teacher's main challenge is to create situations whereby the

manipulatives are used for uncovering, not just discovering (Waite-Stupiansky &

Stupiansky, 1998), thus changing their role from a purveyor of knowledge to one of

facilitating action.

The goals of the NCTM, to use hands on activities and manipulatives for

meaningful mathematics instruction, will not only teach students what concepts they

should learn, but also teach students how to learn. Unfortunately, standards alone will not

supply the necessary ingredients to change traditional teachers into math facilitators. One

deficit teachers must overcome is how to properly teach hands on activities. It must take

initiative, insight, effort and access to a successful program to use as a model. Teachers

9
who are using manipulative math with success are the most reliable resource to help

initiate this change.

Marilyn Burns boasts 30 years of manipulative instruction and offers Seven Musts

for Using Manipulatives:

1. Discuss the importance of how manipulatives help students learn

math.

2. With the help of students, create ground rules for manipulative usage.

3. Store manipulatives in a place that is familiar and accessible to

students.

4. Allow time for free exploration of the manipulatives.

5. Create classroom charts about manipulatives enhancing their value.

6. Use the manipulatives for cross-curricular instruction.

7. Invite parents to partake in manipulative activity. (Burs, 1996)

Sandra Waite-Stupiansky, Ph.D. and Nicholas G. Stupiansky, Ph.D., elementary

education professors at Edinboro University, feel that a good amount of time must be

spent between the facilitator and the students using manipulatives. They state that simple

guidelines for planning hands on activities should include: dialoguing, questioning,

integrating manipulatives and other tools, writing, and evaluating (Waite-Stupiansky &

Stupiansky, 1998).

Jim Koutsos successfully implements a hands on program in Maryland stating

that, "This puts traditional concepts in the context that kids can solve" (Koutsos, p. 26).

He also emphasizes the importance of longer periods to complete his activities.

10
 Literature and research offer the necessary components needed for meaningful

differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction with manipulative use. The NCTM has

provided curriculum and evaluation standards for mathematics instructors to attain.

Situations of successful differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction are becoming

more common. The methods to create these successful situations have come from zealous

mathematics teachers who have been properly trained and have a commitment to these

revolutionary teaching and classroom management strategies. These strategies of

instruction enable students the freedom to explore and discover mathematical concepts

while using a variety of processes and manipulatives. How to attain these successful

teaching situations will be an individual journey for each educator; however the most

recognized common threads include:

1. Create expectations with the students giving them a sense of empowerment

and commitment. Invite them to make norms of classroom management and

their learning.

2. Allow for flexibility within the lesson. Invite them to explore. Individual

students may learn different concepts other than the expected objectives, thus

creating a true discovery moment. Patience during a lesson is.paramount.

3. Relate classroom work to students' knowledge base. Make the lesson relevant

to them.

4. Incorporate various modes of instruction using practices not only common to

mathematics instruction. Create opportunities for students to write, speak, and

draw about their learning.

11
 Chapter 3

The Design of the Study

Introduction

Mathematics instruction has been primarily computation based, not active

problem solving, manipulative oriented, or differentiated to meet the needs of the

individual student or group. This case study research focused on the enhancement of

instruction through action research, which allowed for the development and

implementation of new lessons in the classroom. The results of these actions, the

improvement of instruction and student learning, was measured through the triangulation

of qualitative and quantitative data measured from teacher reflection about their

pedagogy, student observation, and students' marking period scores.

General Description of the Research Design

The analysis of the research was a summative case study format focused on the

improvement of mathematics instruction for students in grades six through eight using

pre and post study data. The improved instruction was measured by comparing

qualitative and quantitative data gathered prior to and following the action research

sessions in which teachers developed and implemented differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction. The results of this action produced evidence of growth yielded

through a triangulation of data.

Quantitative data was gathered through the comparison of students' mathematics

scores for two marking periods prior to and two marking periods during the

implementation of the new instructional strategies. The mean score of each student was

12
averaged to create a grade level mean score for both of the two marking period time

frames.

Qualitative data was gathered through surveys (see Appendix A) that were issued

to participating teachers to ascertain their most commonly used instructional strategies.

Teachers' characteristics were identified through a Likert Scale which identified their

preferred mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes. Surveys were also

administered following the implementation of the differentiated, hands on instruction that

measured the change in teachers' mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes.

Other qualitative data was collected through individual teachers' reflective

journals (see Appendix B for Reflective Journal Excerpts). These recorded personal and

student observations in relation to the differentiated, hands on instruction.

Development and Design of the Research Instrumentation

To bring about innovative instructional change is a long and personal

commitment that requires a teachers' awareness about their instruction and a desire to

improve. The research instrumentation was developed and designed to create a sense of

security and privacy for the participants. The survey (see Appendix A) and reflective

journal (see Appendix B) were created to allow for a self evaluation in relation to

teaching practice with a focus on differentiated, hands on instruction. The journal

provided for an intimate sounding board that posed no ill consequences. Participants were

not placed in uncompromising situations as they simply had the option not to offer

excerpts of their reflection.

13
 The reflective journal also provided for a forum to record anecdotal student

observations directly related to the differentiated, hands on instruction. This proved to be

an invaluable data source for student learning.

The mean scores of students were chosen for their quantitative value and provided

for a different technique of gathering data used for triangulation.

Description of the Sampling and Sampling Techniques

The participants of the convenience sample study were five volunteer

mathematics teachers in grades six through eight at the G.S. School. Each of these

teachers had ten to twenty-five years of experience in the instruction of mathematics for

middle school aged students in both regular and special education.

The population of the study was limited to grades six through eight at the G.S.

School. This convenience sample population consisted of 23 sixth graders, 28 seventh

graders, and 28 eighth graders from eight different classes. Each grade level was broken

into homogeneous groups related to mathematical ability. This was ascertained by

previous tracking in the elementary level. The eighth grade high group studied Algebra I,

with a curriculum comparable to a high school level Algebra I class. The lower eighth

grade groups studied Pre-Algebra, with a curriculum comparable to most junior high

schools or middle schools. The seventh grade high group also studied Pre-Algebra. The

lower seventh grade groups and the sixth grade groups followed traditional curricula

topics.

Description of the Data Collection Approach

Quantitative data was gathered through the comparison of students' mathematics

scores for two marking periods prior to and two marking periods during the

14
implementation of the new instructional strategies. The mean score of each student was

averaged to create a grade level mean score for both of the two marking period time

frames.

Quantitative and qualitative data was gathered through pre and post surveys (see

Appendix A) that were issued to participating teachers to ascertain their most common

mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes prior to and following their action

research. Teachers' strategies and attitudes were identified through a Likert Scale which

identified their preference of instruction. Number scores, 1 through 5, were affixed to

responses. A score of a 1 was representative of a strategy or attitude that the participant

strongly disagreed with, while a score of a 5 was one they strongly agreed with. A score

of a 3 yielded a neutral response. Calculations were made to find the mean (see Appendix

C), range (see Appendix D), and percent of change (see Appendices E and F) for each

statement the participants responded to in order to identify trends in their behaviors and

attitudes.

Other qualitative data was collected through individual teachers' reflective

journals (see Appendix B). These recorded personal and student observations in relation

to the differentiated, hands on instruction. Information from the journals was totally

voluntary and provided another forum to reflect changing attitudes about instruction and

observation about student learning.

Description of the Data Analysis Plan

The analysis of the research was a summative, case study format focused on

differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction for students in grades six through eight

using pre and post data. The differentiated, hands on instruction was measured by

15
comparing qualitative and quantitative data gathered prior to and following the action

research in which teachers developed and implemented differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction.

The objective of the study was to improve mathematics learning using three

different types of data which were gathered for triangulation. The improvement of

student scores in mathematics over two marking periods, positive changes in teachers'

mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes about teaching through differentiated,

hands on mathematics instruction strategies, and the observations of students during the

use of differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies were analyzed.

Commonalities in each of these three different data sources were identified for

triangulation. Each area of the study supported improved student learning which were

evident in the results of the pre and post surveys, calculations of student mean scores at

each grade level, and the recorded observations in teachers' reflective journals.

16
 Chapter 4

Presentation of the Research Findings

Introduction

The research study, to develop and implement differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction strategies to improve student learning, yielded modest growth

which was evident through the triangulation of data that was gathered through the

research instruments. The quantitative post study data boasted overall trends of enhanced

mathematics instruction and improved student learning; however it was the qualitative

anecdotal data that proved to identify specific learning outcomes and provided positive

assurance of student learning.

Grand Tour Question

What will be the effectiveness of the implementation of the differentiated, hands

on mathematics instruction strategies on student learning?

One aspect of the quantitative data gathered compared students' mathematics

scores for two marking periods prior to and two marking periods during the

implementation of the new instructional strategies. The mean score of each student was

averaged to create a grade level mean score for both of the two marking period time

frames. Overall all grade level mean scores increased during the implementation of the

differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies. The sixth grade mean score

increased 1.4%, from 89.1% to 90.5%. The seventh grade mean score increased 1.55%,

from 88.65% to 90.2%. The eighth grade mean score increased .8%, from 87.7% to

88.5%.

17
 The increased student scores were a result of the implementation of new

mathematics instruction strategies. Teachers provided improved, innovative instruction

which resulted in improved learning and scores.

The results of the survey measured quantitative and qualitative data. Specific

items were created to recognize the participating teachers' most commonly used

mathematics instruction strategies and mathematics attitudes prior to and following their

action research. Teachers' characteristics were identified through Likert Scale scores.

Number scores, 1 through 5, were affixed to responses. A score of a 1 was representative

of a strategy or attitude that the participant strongly disagreed with, while a score of a 5

was one they strongly agreed with. A score of a 3 yielded a neutral response. Calculations

were made to find the mean, range, and percent of change to analyze the teachers'

responses to identify changes in their mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes.

Teachers' perceptions about their practice were analyzed using a twenty item

survey (see Appendix A) which offered ten items related to their mathematics instruction

strategies and ten items related to their attitudes about mathematics. Nineteen of the

statements used a Likert Scale, and one was a free response item.

The quantitative data analyzed, the mean (see Appendix C), the range (see

Appendix D), and the percent of change (see Appendix E and F) of the Likert Scale

scores, provided evidence that supported improved student learning through the use of

the differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies.

The compared mean scores of the pre and post survey (see Appendix C) showed

positive increases in teachers' responses to selective statements related to pedagogy. This

18
evidence of enhanced differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies and

attitudes resulted in improved student learning.

Pre-survey responses to statements that related to teachers' mathematics

instruction strategies (see Appendix C) revealed telling evidence that they relied on

passive, antiquated, and rote mathematics instruction strategies prior to the action

research. This was identifiable by their responses which yielded high mean scores to

specific negative statements related to their pedagogy: (1) I teach lessons straight from

the textbook. (2) Students learn best when taking notes during a lesson. (3) I usually

teach by writing notes and examples on the board. Some responses yielded low mean

scores to specific positive statements about pedagogy revealing the same message: (1) I

use manipulatives to teach mathematical concepts. (2) I teach through differentiated

instruction.

The post-survey responses to these same statements that related to teachers'

mathematics instruction strategies (see Appendix C) identified positive changes. Mean

scores increased following the action research and the implementation of the enhanced

strategies. Positive increases in the percent of change (see Appendix E) for these items

ranged from 10% to 31%.

The compared mean scores of the pre and post survey (see Appendix C) showed

positive increases in teachers' responses to selective statements related to attitudes about

mathematics. Improved teachers' attitudes fostered environments conducive to improved

student learning.

The pre-survey responses to statements related to attitude about mathematics (see

Appendix C) revealed that some teachers had a poor predisposition about mathematics

19
and how it related to themselves and their students. Some negative pre-survey statements

which yielded some unanticipated high mean scores were: (1) All I learned about

teaching math I learned in college. (2) Math is a stagnant subject; it never changes. (3) I

enjoy math because it is logical. (4) Some students have an aptitude in math and are just

better at it. The survey had a free response item which asked teachers to supply three

adjectives that would describe their instruction. These responses echoed the same

sentiment: repetitive, practical, orderly, thorough, continuous.

The post-survey responses to these same statements that related to teachers'

attitude about mathematics were energizing. Mean scores (see Appendix C) increased

following the action research and the implementation of the enhanced mathematics

instruction strategies. The improved instruction was enlightening and empowering to

teachers and their students. Positive increases in the percent of change (see Appendix E)

for these items ranged from 11% to 56%.

The most enriched data that supported improved student learning was the

qualitative anecdotal data from excerpts of teachers' reflective journals (see Appendix B).

These reflections and observations provided examples of specific learning outcomes that

took place within the classroom. These learning outcomes could not have been measured

or even identified through traditional mathematics instruction strategies.

Through the implementation of differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction

strategies teachers were able to actively engage their students in mathematics yielding

improved instruction and student learning. They provided alternative experiences which

piqued their students' interest and allowed for mathematical application and synthesis in

practical problem solving situations. This innovative instruction allowed for improved

20
student learning by providing discovery within the classroom. Teachers facilitated this

learning by creating a sense of empowerment within their students. This empowerment,

intrinsically motivated students to look at mathematics globally and changed their

perception of what mathematics means to them.

Conclusion

The triangulation of the data the research instruments provided showed positive

growth through student scores, teachers' mathematics instruction strategies and attitudes,

and observation of learning which were identified within reflective journal excerpts. The

study concluded that students in grades six through eight at the G.S. School are better

prepared to apply mathematical concepts to problem solving situations.

21
 Chapter 5

Conclusions, Implications and Further Study

Introduction

It is no secret to educators that quality instruction yields a quality education.

However within this understanding educators must take into account the needs of

individuals within their classrooms and assure that all students are receiving the same

high level quality instruction. Individualized quality instruction will produce specific

outcomes for every student, but all students will not produce the same outcome. This

action research study looked at how teachers who wanted to provide high quality

individualized instruction improved student learning through the implementation of

differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies.

Grand Tour

The study focused on the improvement of instruction through the development

and implementation of differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies to

improve student learning. Dedicated teachers spent countless hours identifying standards

of mathematics instruction at their grade levels. Then they developed lessons, through

research and creativity, and implemented them to meet the needs of the standards. This

action created a sense of empowerment and excitement within the teachers that ultimately

trickled down into the classroom. Although the district did not provide time and resources

for these teachers, they still facilitated their own action for the improvement of

instruction.

Implications of Study on Leadership Skills

22
 The study relied on an educational leader who promoted the success of students

by facilitating the professional growth of teachers so they were able to develop and

implement differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies to improve the

students' application of mathematics towards experiential, problem solving situations.

The educational leader provided teachers the initiative, organization, and materials for

action research to occur among their colleagues in a safe and meaningful environment.

Implications of Study on Organizational Change

Literature and research offer the necessary components needed for meaningful

differentiated, hands on mathematics instruction strategies to improve student learning.

The NCTM has provided curriculum and evaluation standards for mathematics

instructors to attain. Situations of successful differentiated, hands on mathematics

instruction are becoming more common. The methods to create these successful

situations have come from zealous mathematics teachers who have been properly trained

and have a commitment to these revolutionary teaching and classroom management

strategies. These strategies of instruction enable students the freedom to explore and

discover mathematical concepts while using a variety of processes and manipulatives.

How to attain these successful teaching situations will be an individual journey for each

educator unless district administrators mandate change. If districts supply the resources

for teachers to engage in action research on a regular basis, instruction improvement in

all disciplines would benefit. In light of federal law mandating annual yearly progress,

professional development should be geared directly towards the improvement of

instruction.

Further Study

23
 Action research where teachers may research, develop, and implement

meaningful lessons in their classrooms to meet the individual needs of their students

should become a norm of our schools, and not the exception. This study provided the

initiative for a core group of mathematics teachers to complete professional development

in order to provide their students with much needed differentiated, hands on mathematics

instruction strategies for improved problem solving. The study, if adopted throughout the

entire pre-K through 8 th grade district, would be beneficial on many fronts. A school or

district wide initiative on developing and implementing differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction strategies for improved problem solving would:

1. Set meaningful teacher and student expectations.

2. Allow grade levels to meet national and state mathematics standards.

3. Allow teachers, through action research and collaboration, to develop

and create a wide variety of problem solving lessons and materials that

could be shared.

4. Provide opportunities for teachers to work together to create

comradeship and improve morale.

5. Allow teachers to gain regular feedback about their teaching practices

from their peers in a safe environment.

6. Allow for articulation throughout the school creating a continuum of

problem solving learning.

7. Provide action research opportunity, where teachers would gain

invaluable professional development that would meet state and federal

mandates for becoming a highly qualified teacher.

24
8. Provide cost effective professional development opportunities.

9. Provide excellent mathematics instruction that could provide cross

curricular opportunities.

10. Provide meaningful experiences that teach concepts students should

learn while teaching them how to learn.

25
 References

Burns, M. (1996). How to make the most of math manipulatives. Instructor, 105, 45-51.

Carlson, C. (1992). The metamorphosis of mathematics education. New Jersey. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED 364 403).

Ernest, P. (1994). Evaluation of the effectiveness and implementation of a math

manipulatives project. Alabama. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 391

675).

Flores, A. (2002). Learning and teaching mathematics with technology. Teaching

Children Mathematics, 8(6), 308.

Kennedy, M. (1998). Education reform and subject matter knowledge. Journalof

Research in Science Teaching, 35, 249-263.

Koutsos, J. (2000). Making the right mathematics connections. NEA Today, 18(4), 26.

Marlow, L., & Inman, D. (1997). Status report on teaching in the elementary school:

math, science, and social studies. Hilton Head. (ERIC Document Reproduction

Service No. ED 409 283).

Raphael, D. & Wahlstrom, M. (1989). The influence of instructional aids on mathematic

achievement. Journalfor Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 173-190.

Rust, A. (1999). A study of the benefits of math manipulatives versus standard

curriculum in the comprehension of mathematical concepts. Tennessee. (ERIC

Document Reproduction Service No. ED 436 395).

Tankersley, K. (1993). Teaching math their way. EducationalLeadership,50 (8), 12-13.

Waite-Stupiansky, S., & Stupiansky, N. (1998). Instructor-Intermediate,108(3), 85.

26
 Appendix A

Research Instrument: Survey

27
 Mathematics Instruction Survey
Please complete the following survey. This will allow me to gain some information about
your teaching strategies and attitudes in mathematics. Please circle the appropriate
response and return the survey to Mr. Cetrullo. Thank you for your cooperation.

1 Strongly Disagree 2 Somewhat Disagree 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat Agree 5 Strongly Agree

I enjoy working with my hands to solve problems. 1 2 3 4 5

All I learned about teaching math; I learned in college. 1 2 3 4 5

I teach lessons straight from the textbook. 1 2 3 4 5

Students learn best when taking notes during a lesson. 1 2 3 4 5

I enjoy a quiet, orderly classroom. 1 2 3 4 5

Mathematics is a sequential discipline. 1 2 3 4 5

I usually teach by writing notes and examples on the board. 1 2 3 4 5

I use manipulatives to teach mathematical concepts. 1 2 3 4 5.

I have studied math instruction within the last 10 years. I 2 3 4 5

I enjoy math because it is logical. 1 2 3 4 5

The best way to assess learning is through a written test. 1 2 3 4 5

I teach through differentiated instruction. 1 2 3 4 5

When teaching a new concept, it is important to give students as much 'information as possible.
1 2 3 4 5

Assigning many practice problems reinforces the day's lesson. 1 2 3 4 5

Some students have an aptitude in math and are just better at it. 1 2 3 4 5

I have studied math instruction within the past 5 years. 1 2 3 4 5

Math is a stagnant subject; it never changes. 1 2 3 4 5

Students discover math when I teach them. 1 2 3 4 5

Please supply three adjectives that would describe your mathematics instruction.
 Appendix B

Research Instrument: Reflective Journal Excerpts

29
Reflective Journal Excerpts

Excerpts from teachers' reflective journals provided data which gave insight on

teachers' mathematics instruction strategies following their action research. These

excerpts were voluntarily shared as evidence to measure student learning.

9/10/03

Today I implemented the first hands on lessons. Their objective was to be able to

work cooperatively to apply formulas of area (which they previously learned) to estimate

the population of blades of grass within specific shaped areas using a square inch cut out,

a yard stick, and a sheet with expectations and rules for students to follow. They were

given only a simple explanation of the activity and were told to begin working. Initially

the students were perplexed because I was not directing them and they had to

communicate to create their plan. One group was instantly labeled the smart group

because two very competent students were in that group, however they argued over

whose plan they were going to use. Another group experienced complete dissention,

relying on two individuals to create the plan and direct the others. It was a math activity,

but I believe everyone received a lesson in group dynamics as well. Some students

became enraged. It was great. Never did I see that kind of emotion about math in my

classroom. One group, which had some poor traditional learners, yet were hands on

learners, quickly identified a process to meet their needs. Students, who were normally

followers, were now in a position of status and leadership. Normal leaders identified with

being a follower, as the role reversals were evident. When groups realized their process,
they were running a laughing as they measured and calculated. The activity called for

specific results, written directions on how the estimate was accomplished. Some groups

considered this the real work; however what I experienced gave me true insight into how

specific students learn. This activity allowed some students, who normally don't get

recognized as being mathematically capable, the opportunity to shine. We discussed this

once we returned to class and most students recognized a little bit about what type of

learners they are.

If we had more time it would have been great to allow the groups to chart their

process and share how they came about it.

I was pleased at my ability to allow my students some freedom by stepping down

from my role of directing and passing out information to one of facilitating action. This

allowed for discovery on the parts of my students.

Students weren't behaving beyond my expectations. I knew they would run

around and swing yardsticks. This was new for them and they have to get acquainted with

the independence and freedom during math activities. Some even monitored themselves

as I heard them say, "Hey, he's looking at us, knock it off," and "He's coming."

Personally I felt I was cheating them in some way because I was not supplying a

traditional lesson and I was not the focus of their efforts, however I did supply an

environment for their learning.

10/6/03

Silent structure is the name of the activity in which groups of students are asked

to build a structure out of 36 inch wooden dowels which were to be connected with
rubber bands at the ends. Students worked cooperatively to create a structure at least four

feet tall that could house a student within standing totally erect. This had to be

constructed without talking.

This was awesome. It was the first time my class followed all of the rules and

directions perfectly. I think they are understanding the value of the activities and are now

excited to participate. After the initial directions, of which I only said once, students

began to work without me having to prompt them. Unlike other activities, where students

were led in a direction I wished them to follow, the students worked using many different

and unanticipated strategies. They were thinking, applying and synthesizing which

displayed the higher order thinking skills. This was excellent proof of student learning

through performance. The majority of the groups used geometric shapes which had been

discussed previously. Two groups recalled that triangles were the strongest shape and

incorporated that into their buildings. Some used primitive strategies of lean-to or post

structures. The evaluation, following the lesson, identified the many cross-curricular

aspects of the lesson as well as the mathematics concepts used.

This activity did not take as long. Shorter tasks seem to work better as this was

the best lesson yet. It provided for great student focus and motivation. Students actually

asked to do it again. When did students ever ask to complete a traditional lesson over?

11/24/03

Constructive chaos would best describe this tiling activity. Students were asked to

work cooperatively to tile an area of nine square feet (three feet by three feet). They

glued geometric shapes cut out of construction paper on to a larger sheet which simulated
open floor space. They were prompted the previous day and asked to look at tiling in

their environment, bathrooms, kitchens, school. They were told they could be moderately

creative and would have to cover the entire floor area. Three of the four groups

completed the task properly, however one group stood above the rest. Two groups

instantly recognized that the entire pieces of construction paper covered the area quite

nicely because the paper was 12" X 18" which are multiples of 36". The best group

created tiles 6" X 6" and used 36 of them to cover the area. They incorporated many

areas of math to complete this task and I was very excited about the results. During the

closing discussion, every student had a great understanding of how this activity was very

practical and could easily be used in their future.

Behaviorally this was the worst activity as I had to continually patrol for improper

behavior. Students were cutting and pasting in every corner of the room and even

overflowed into the hallway. Next time I should try to secure a larger space for the

lesson.

12/11/03

Today the classroom was very noisy and chaotic, students were working

independently with cubes to understand concepts of translations involving mirror images.

We were finding methods of creating mirror images from specific base plans.

They constantly needed reinforcement from me or their peers. Then an amazing thing

happened. A usually introverted and shy young man erupted when he successfully found

an alternative method for making the image that had not been identified thus far. This

reminded me of a video I had seen on Japanese students cooperatively working to solve

problems in science and math. They, like my student, went beyond the assignment

expectations. This was a true discovery, something that could never be relicated on a

written assessment. Students have so much interest, it becomes fun, and they gain a

greater understanding of a concept because they made a memory by relating it to an

emotional experience.

1/7/04

My planning has become a huge undertaking. The differentiated, hands on

mathematics instruction strategies are time consuming to create and plan. The work

seems to be having the lesson ready to facilitate not the completion or assessment of the

lesson.

1/23/04

Every experience seems to unfold a new twist. I have gotten to know my students

on such a deeper level. These instruction strategies allow me to be hands on with smaller

numbers of students. Since I spend less time with whole group instruction, I am able to be

among my students more. I now have more time to better meet the needs of my students.

I also engage in more casual conversation with my students, because during this group

time much more than math is discussed. Students are continually making analogies to

express their ideas. They are constantly relating math to topics they normally wouldn't

associate math with. One may think this is unproductive and off task, and sometimes it

may be, but the information I gain and the relationships I build ultimately help me to

improve my instruction and student learning. I see this as being student centered and
being a good thing. I gain greater understanding of who they are and apply that to my

lessons therefore meeting individual needs.

 Appendix C

Mathematics Instruction Survey:

Mean Scores of Survey Items:

Pre and Post Survey Results

36
 Mean Scores of Survey Items: Pre and Post Survey Results

1 Strongly Disagree 2 Somewhat Disagree 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat Agree 5 Strongly

Agree

Pre Post

I enjoy working with my hands to solve problems 3.2 3.6

All I learned about teaching math; I learned in college. 3.4 4.2

I teach lessons straight from the textbook. 4.2 3.6

Students learn best when taking notes during a lesson. 4.2 3.2

I enjoy a quiet, orderly classroom. 4.4 3.2

Mathematics is a sequential discipline. 4.2 3.8

I usually teach by writing notes and examples on the board. 4.2 3.4

I use manipulatives to teach mathematical concepts. 2.6 3.4

I have studied math instruction within the last 10 years. 3.2 5.0

I enjoy math because it is logical. 3.8 3.4

The best way to assess learning is through a written test. 3.6 2.8

I teach through differentiated instruction. 2.6 3.8

When teaching a new concept, it is important to give students as much information as

possible.
3.6 3.2

Assigning many practice problems reinforces the day's lesson. 3.4 3.2

Some students have an aptitude in math and are just better at it. 4.2 3.2

I have studied math instruction within the past 5 years. 3.2 5.0

Math is a stagnant subject; it never changes. 3.2 2.2

Students discover math when I teach them. 4.0 4.6

Please supply three adjectives that would describe your mathematics instruction.

Pre - Repetitive, practical, orderly, thorough, continuous

Post - Engaging, student centered, fun, discovery based.

 Appendix D

Range Scores of Survey Items: Pre and Post Survey Results

39
 Range Scores of Survey Items: Pre and Post Survey Results
(Lowest score to highest score identified)

1 Strongly Disagree 2 Somewhat Disagree 3 Neutral 4 Somewhat Agree 5 Strongly

Agree
Pre Post

I enjoy working with my hands to solve problems. 1- 5 2-5

All I learned about teaching math; I learned in college. 2-4 4-5

I teach lessons straight from the textbook. 3- 5 3-4

Students learn best when taking notes during a lesson. 4-5 1- 5

I enjoy a quiet, orderly classroom. 4- 5 1- 5

Mathematics is a sequential discipline. 4-5 3-4

I usually teach by writing notes and examples on the board. 4-5 2-5

I use manipulatives to teach mathematical concepts. 1- 4 2-5

I have studied math instruction within the last 10 years. 1- 5 5

I enjoy math because it is logical. 3-4 2-5

The best way to assess learning is through a written test. 3-5 2-4

I teach through differentiated instruction. 1- 4 3-4

When teaching a new concept, it is important to give students as much information as

possible.
2-4 1-5

Assigning many practice problems reinforces the day's lesson. 2 -5 1- 5

Some students have an aptitude in math and are just better at it. 2-4 2 -4

I have studied math instruction within the past 5 years. 1- 5 5

Math is a stagnant subject; it never changes. 1- 5 1- 3

Students discover math when I teach them. 3-5 3-5

 Appendix E

Survey Statements Grouped.

Statements of Mathematics Instruction Strategies:

Percentage of Change: Pre and Post Survey Results

41
 Statements of Mathematics Instruction Strategies

Percentage of Change:
Pre/Post Survey

1. I teach lessons straight from the textbook 14% Agree Less

2. Students learn best when taking notes during a lesson. 24% Agree Less

3. Mathematics is a sequential discipline. 10% Agree Less

4. I usually teach by writing notes and examples on the board. 19% Agree Less

5. I use manipulatives to teach mathematical concepts. 31% Agree More

6. The best way to assess learning is through a written test. 22% Agree Less

7. I teach through differentiated instruction. 46% Agree More

8. When teaching a new concept, it is important to give students as much information as

possible.
11% Agree Less

9. Assigning many practice problems reinforces the day's lesson.

Students discover math when I teach them.
6% Agree Less

10. Students discover math when I teach them. 15% Agree More
 Appendix F

Survey Statements Grouped:

Statements of Teacher Attitudes Related to Mathematics:

Percentage of Change: Pre and Post Survey Results

43
 Statements of Teacher Attitudes Related to Mathematics

Percentage of Change:
Pre/Post Survey

1. I enjoy working with my hands to solve problems. 13% Agree More

2. All I learned about teaching math; I learned in college. 24% Agree More

3. I enjoy a quiet, orderly classroom. 27% Agree Less

4. I have studied math instruction within the last 10 years. 56% Agree More

5. I enjoy math because it is logical. 11% agree Less

6. Some students have an aptitude in math and are just better at it. 24% Agree Less

7. I have studied math instruction within the past 5 years. 56% Agree More

8. Math is a stagnant subject; it never changes. 31% Agree Less

 Biographical Data

Name Edmund F. Cetrullo Jr.

High School Cherokee High School

Marlton, NJ

Undergraduate Bachelor of Arts

Communication: Liberal Arts
Rowan University
Glassboro, NJ

Post-Baccalaureate
Elementary Education
Rowan University
Glassboro, NJ

Graduate Master of Arts

School Administration
Rowan University
Glassboro, NJ

Present Occupation Mathematics Teacher

Gibbsboro School
Gibbsboro, NJ

45