Using Handheld Computers in the Math Class

Introduction

The ability to master mathematical concepts is difficult for many students. Only 32% of grade 4 students and 29% of grade 8 students scored proficient or better on the 2003 National Assessment of Educational Progress Mathematics section [1]. This gap between the requirements students need to achieve and what they are accomplishing has been narrowing albeit slowly in the past years. A major contrast between schools and the workplace is the use of technology in the workplace that allows workers to work almost error free [2]. Technology comes natural to many students in today’s world and the use of handhelds can “make it possible for students in schools to use tools very much like those used by professionals in workplaces” [2].

The use of a handheld computer in the math classroom can be motivating factor to learning mathematical skills. The ability of systems that allow teachers to customize problem sets for their students can enhance the students’ math proficiency.

Handheld computers can aid children in understanding math concepts. It can be an ideal tool to the classroom. The benefits of programs like MathAmigo are discussed.

Portability

The portability of handheld computers allows students to take the programs and questions home with them. If a student has completed their work in one area, they can always retrieve a classroom handheld and work on their problems at their desk. Since the boot up time for a handheld is extremely short the use of the student’s time becomes efficient. Compared to a student who gets a laptop of the classroom cart and brings it back to their desk, time to start the computer and the programs could take most of a 10-minute space a student. The handheld computer allows efficient use of time in a class, maximizing time spent on task.

The portability of the handheld also allows parents to work with the child at home with their problems.

Differential Learning

Classrooms can contain students of many ability levels and teachers need to be able to adapt lesson plans for this wide range of abilities. MathAmigo allows grouping of students, allowing teachers to assign different levels of activities to the different groups, giving students activities suited for their level. This capacity to support differential learning gives great strength to the program. Students given the appropriate task level are more likely to make strong progress [3]. It has been found when student’s needs are met they are less frustrated, stayed on task and are more attentive [4].

Teachers can customize the difficulty for each student in MathAmigo, however since all the students are performing the same task the students stay on task more often [5]. It is the teacher who decides the levels of questions not the program in MathAmigo. This is an important consideration as Integrated Learning Systems (ILS) tried to replace the teacher by adjusting the student levels [6]. The teachers using MathAmigo retain control and can give the students non-electronic activities that could benefit a struggling student. Teachers discussing the problems with students can understand the issue better than a computer analyzing questions. The handheld is to assist the teacher not to replace the teacher.

Transfer of Knowledge

The use of different types of questions helps the transfer of knowledge. Programs that have lists of activities can help facilitate teachers’ utilization of questions on different levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. MathAmigo contains activities that integrate mathematical concepts and can be classified as higher order thinking skills according to Bloom’s Taxonomy. In the MathAmigo categories there is a broad range of activities to further aid the transfer of knowledge across disciplines. Fuchs et al [7] found that problem solving skills are enhanced through activities that increase metacognition (through novel problems) and promote a higher level of abstraction. Students using MathAmigo discuss how to tackle a problem as opposed to what the answer to the problem should be. Discussing strategy to solve a problem is important for the development of mathematical skills [2]. It has been shown that students taught math only through key algorithms are unable to transfer that knowledge to different problems. MathAmigo does not teach methodology, it is there is challenge the students with problems to extend and challenge their knowledge.

Feedback

The availability of feedback is very important from the teacher viewpoint and for the student. The feedback on student activities allows the teachers to easily see who needs more work, where they need to spend more or less of their energy [8]. Teachers can quickly see who in the entire class needs more instruction in an area or they can focus their attention on the few students who are struggling with the given subject area. This allows more efficient use of the teacher’s time and the class to benefits as a whole.

Students are able to make stronger progress if feedback is readily available [9]. MathAmigo tells the student immediately if they are right or wrong and will eventually give them the correct answer. The feedback allows students to progress since they know immediately if they have the wrong thought process to answer the questions. If the student is doing poorly the handheld can be set to tell the student to see the teacher or place an icon on the screen to alert the teacher. Teachers receive the results of each student through the desktop Manager.

Student Excitement

New technology always has the ability to excite students. This excitement about handhelds fosters a sense of community within the students [10]. They begin asking questions of each other furthering the transfer of information and understanding [11]. Since questions in MathAmigo are randomly generated, the students working on the same activity will have different questions. This ability for cooperative learning can increase student’s feeling of belonging increasing the attentiveness of the students [4]. Powell et al [12] found that the combination of teacher and computer activities improved both psychosocial and academic measures in classrooms with disruptive students. Although students are familiar with computer games in handheld devices it is important that valuable class time is not spent watching meaningless graphics on the screen. Many computer programs use different animated display for correct answers. This can use valuable class time as students see the opening credits for the program, and the animation between each question. Students also get quickly bored of seeing the graphics and quickly move off task. MathAmigo quickly enters the program and simply states whether the student got the answer right or wrong. This keeps the student on task, and allows more work to be completed.

Conclusion

Handheld programs like MathAmigo have many design features that can enhance the teacher instruction. Students can work at their own ability, with teacher feedback with an exciting tool. Time on task is maximized making the most efficient use of classroom resource. MathAmigo gives teachers a tool to enhance the transfer of mathematical knowledge that will allow students to become more proficient in mathematics.

Theresa Cornwall

Rutgers University

1. National Center for Education Statistics, Mathematics Highlights 2003, in The Nation's Report Card. 2003, U.S. Department of Education. p. 1-36.

2. National Research Council, How People Learn. 2000, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

3. Mills, C., K.E. Ablard, and W.C. Gustin, Academically Talented Students' Achievement in a Flexibly Paced Mathematics Program. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 1994. 25(5): p. 495-511.

4. Andrews, S., C. McFeggan, and C. Patterson, Problems Students Encounter during Math Instruction in Mixed-Ability Classrooms. 1998.

5. Good, T.L., et al., An Observational Study of Small Group Mathematics Insturction in Elementary Schools. American Educational Research, 1990. 27(4): p. 755-782.

6. NCET, Integrated Learning Systems: A report of Phase II of the pilot evaluation of ILS in England and Wales. 1996.

7. Fuchs, L.S., et al., Enhancing Third-Grade Students’ Mathematical Problem Solving With Self-Regulated Learning Strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2003. 95(2): p. 306-315.

8. Cain, M., PDA: Paradigm-Disrupting Appliance? Journal of Academic Librarianship, 2003. 29(1): p. 44-48.

9. Good, T.L., D.A. Grouws, and H. Ebmeier, Active mathematics teaching. 1983, New York: Longman.

10. Joyner, A., A Foothold for Handhelds. American School Board Journal, 2003. 190(9): p. 42-44.

11. Townsend, M.A.R. and L. Hicks, Classroom Goal Structures, Social Satisfaction and the Perceived Value of Academic Tasks. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1997. 67: p. 1-122.

12. Powell, J.V., J. Aeby, Victor G., and T. Carpenter-Aeby, A comparison of student outcomes with and without teacher facilitated computer-based instruction. Computers & Education, 2003. 40(2): p. 183-191.