How First Graders with Low Language Skill Solve Math Word Problems Katie Humbert, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders Vicki Samelson, Ph.D.,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Inquiry-Based Instruction
Advertisements

SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS
Juli K. Dixon, Ph.D. University of Central Florida
Knowledge Construction
Dallas Independent School District Conrad High School August 2013.
Investigations in Number, Data, and Space: Teaching Philosophy.
The new maths curriculum in KS1 Sellincourt Primary School November 2014.
Robust Assessment Instrument for Student Problem Solving Jennifer L. Docktor Kenneth Heller, Patricia Heller, Tom Thaden-Koch, Jun Li, Jay Dornfeld, Michael.
Using Place Value to Add
Effective Questioning in the classroom
Big Ideas and Problem Solving in Junior Math Instruction
Results Table 1 Table 1 displays means and standard deviations of scores on the retention test. Higher scores indicate better recall of material from the.
This is a powerpoint presentation To activate this slide show On a PC: -Click on the tab entitled “Slide Show”. Then click the first icon called “From.
Counting by 1’s and 10’s Unit of Study: Counting and Modeling Numbers to 120 Global Concept Guide: 1 of 4.
Second Grade Common Core Standards and Shifts. Math Three major changes:  More time on fewer skills  Link major topics from grade to grade  Connect.
Operations: Meanings and Basic Facts CHAPTER 9 Tina Rye Sloan To accompany Helping Children Learn Math9e, Reys et al. ©2009 John Wiley & Sons.
Session 4 Pulling it All Together Building a Solid Number Foundation Strategies for Education Assistants 1.
Prekindergarten Math Sonia Dominguez Delia Molina August 17, 2010.
Compose Shapes Unit of Study: 3-Dimensional Shapes Global Concept Guide: 2 of 3.
Virginia Standard of Learning BIO.1a-m
General Considerations for Implementation
Numerosity in preschool – First steps towards mathematics Kevin F. Miller University of Michigan.
Background Purposes of the Study Methods Amanda Rumpca and Dr. Marie Stadler, Ph.D. CCC-SLP  Communication Sciences and Disorders  University of Wisconsin-Eau.
CONSTRUCTING OBJECTIVE TEST ITEMS: MULTIPLE-CHOICE FORMS CONSTRUCTING OBJECTIVE TEST ITEMS: MULTIPLE-CHOICE FORMS CHAPTER 8 AMY L. BLACKWELL JUNE 19, 2007.
Misunderstood Minds 1.
T 7.0 Chapter 7: Questioning for Inquiry Chapter 7: Questioning for Inquiry Central concepts:  Questioning stimulates and guides inquiry  Teachers use.
The Scientific Method Honors Biology Laboratory Skills.
Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) Don Martin EPSY 6304 Cognition and Development UT-Brownsville Professor Garcia By PresenterMedia.comPresenterMedia.com.
LEVEL 3 I can identify differences and similarities or changes in different scientific ideas. I can suggest solutions to problems and build models to.
Background and Objective Spencer Rohlinger, Kelly Murray, Dr. Ruth Cronje, Dr. Todd Wellnitz  Biology and English  University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire.
Illustration of a Validity Argument for Two Alternate Assessment Approaches Presentation at the OSEP Project Directors’ Conference Steve Ferrara American.
Does Phonological Awareness Intervention Impact Speech Production in a 3-year-old? Kayla Knueppel, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders Vicki.
Finnish-Russian Doctoral Seminar on Multicriteria Decision Aid and Optimization Iryna Yevseyeva Niilo Mäki Institute University of Jyväskylä, Finland
What is Science?. Competency Goal 1: The learner will design and conduct investigations to demonstrate an understanding of scientific inquiry.. –1.03.
MATH COMMUNICATIONS Created for the Georgia – Alabama District By: Diane M. Cease-Harper, Ed.D 2014.
Lecture by: Chris Ross Chapter 7: Teacher-Designed Strategies.
From Van de Walle Teaching Student Centered Mathematics K-3 and Carpenter, et. al. Children’s Mathematics: Cognitively Guided Instruction.
What the Research Says About Intentional Instruction wiki contribution by Kathryn L. Dusel EDU 740 Module 6.
Verification & Validation. Batch processing In a batch processing system, documents such as sales orders are collected into batches of typically 50 documents.
K-2 Math Countywide Data May 2015 Administration September 4, 2015 – RHS K-8 Subcommittee September 22, 2015 – Data Sharing with K-2 Math Task Force October.
Cognitively Guided Problem Informal Strategy Types.
Alternative Algorithms for Addition and Subtraction If we don’t teach them the standard way, how will they learn to compute?
Science Process Skills By: Stephanie Patterson and Martha Seixas.
The new maths curriculum
The Power of Comparison in Learning & Instruction Learning Outcomes Supported by Different Types of Comparisons Dr. Jon R. Star, Harvard University Dr.
ETP420 Grade 3CF Applying developmental principles to practice Sandra Murphy S ETP4201.
Effective mathematics instruction:  foster positive mathematical attitudes;  focus on conceptual understanding ;  includes students as active participants.
SCIENCE PROCESS SKILLS Eric Kravitz Diane Miller ELED 305/02 Spring Dr. Barrett.
Mathematics Disabilities Prepared by: Cicilia Evi GradDiplSc., M. Psi.
Understanding Numbers
#1 Make sense of problems and persevere in solving them How would you describe the problem in your own words? How would you describe what you are trying.
Measurement Chapter 6. Measuring Variables Measurement Classifying units of analysis by categories to represent variable concepts.
1 Common Core Standards. Shifts for Students Demanded by the Core Shifts in ELA/Literacy Building knowledge through content-rich nonfiction and informational.
Introduction to Supporting Science. What Does Science Involve? Identifying a question to investigate Forming hypotheses Collecting data Interpreting data.
Background Purposes of the Study Methods Elayne Hansen and Dr. Marie Stadler, Ph.D. CCC-SLP  Communication Sciences and Disorders  University of Wisconsin-Eau.
Mathematics in the Early Years and Infants – Addition.
Ronica Pardesi 30/09/08 DEVELOPING ESSENTIAL NUMERACY SKILLS IN THE FOUNDATION PHASE MISCONCEPTIONS AND THE METHODS OF REMEDIATION.
INVESTIGATION OF STUDENT ATTITUDES AND UNDERSTANDING IN GENERAL CHEMISTRY Hannah Zidon and Dr. Roslyn M. Theisen Department of Chemistry, University of.
Table 1. Τhe grid analysis with conceptual categories and subcategories by NRC (2012) Tsetsos Stavros et al. The Scientific Practices on the Science’s.
Inspiring today’s children for tomorrow’s world Early Years Foundation Stage Assessment Procedure 2016.
Maths No Problem; A Mastery Approach.
Additive Comparison Situations
Does training in number knowledge improve arithmetic scores?
Chapter 6: Checklists, Rating Scales & Rubrics
Kindergarten Curriculum Night
IB Assessments CRITERION!!!.
The Use of Adapted Dialogic Reading Strategies with
Margaret M. Flores, Ph.D., BCBA-D
Maths Parent Workshop Thursday January 25th 2018
Maths No Problem; A Mastery Approach.
Presentation transcript:

How First Graders with Low Language Skill Solve Math Word Problems Katie Humbert, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders Vicki Samelson, Ph.D., Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire Eau Claire, Wisconsin Background  Many preschool and kindergarten children enter school with a basic concept of numerical quantity and relationships between sets (Gelman & Gallistel, 1978; Griffin, 2003; Jordan, Levine & Huttenlocher, 1995).  Arithmetic word problems are difficult for all children; even more so for children with low oral language skill (Cowan, Donlan, Newton, & Lloyd, 2005; Samelson, 2009).  To solve an arithmetic word problem successfully, a child must: process and comprehend the linguistic message access background knowledge of the relationships between sets of numbers determine the underlying problem structure/schema select a solution strategy and calculate the solution  Prior research has demonstrated that children generate a wide variety of strategies to solve problems and depending on the nature of the task and the goals of the child certain strategies are “selected” and used (Siegler, 2005).  Children tend to resort to preferred default strategies when they are not sure how to interpret a word problem (Cummins, 1991).  Strategies and errors reported in the literature for typically developing children included: Wrong operation error, given number error, wrong assignment error (Cummins, 1991). Correct answer, calculation error, given number error, miscellaneous, no response (De Corte et. al., 1985).  This project is an extension of prior research (Samelson, 2009). Nine first graders with low-normal oral language skill (LN) and 11 with a diagnosis of language impairment (LI) listened to and then solved arithmetic word problems presented under four scaffolding conditions: Anecdotal evidence suggested that both rewording and gesture scaffolds influenced the solution strategies that first graders chose to use. Aims & Methods To date, no one has described the solution strategies employed by children with low oral language skill while they solve basic arithmetic word problems. Aims:  Identify, describe, and code the strategies that first graders in the lowest quartile of oral language skill used to solve basic arithmetic word problems  Establish the reliability of the coding system. Methods:  The primary investigator viewed 40 video files, described the children’s solution strategies and errors, and then expanded an existing coding system.  Three sources of evidence were used to describe and code the strategies and errors: 1)The child’s verbal ‘answer’ to each problem 2)The child’s explanation of how he/she solved the problem 3) Any strategies observed in the child’s use of the manipulatives that were provided for each problem.  The principle investigator and second author collaborated to reach agreement on a set of 9 codes.  A second undergraduate student, trained in coding arithmetic word problem tasks, independently recoded a randomly selected subset of the 40 video files (8 files, representing 20 percent of the data).  Point-to-point agreement between the principal investigator and the independent coder was calculated for each of the coding categories. Results & Discussion Selected References: Cowan, R., Donlan, C., Newton, E. J., & Lloyd, D. (2005). Number skills and knowledge in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), Cummins, D. D. (1991). Children’s interpretations of arithmetic word problems. Cognition and Instruction, 8(3), De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Dewin, L. (1985). Influence of rewording verbal problems on children's problem representations and solutions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), Gelman, R., & Gallistel, C. (1978). The Child's Understanding of Number. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Samelson, V. M. (2009). The influence of rewording and gesture scaffolds on the ability of first graders with low language skill to solve arithmetic word problems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa. Siegler, R. S. (2005). Children's learning. American Psychologist, 60, Acknowledgements: Dr. Vicki Samelson Alyssa Yanzick This study was supported by the UW-Eau Claire Differential Tuition Fund Results:  The following 9 strategies and errors were identified and coded: Accurate conceptualization of the problem – The child shows a conceptually accurate understanding of his/her solution/strategy. Calculation/count errors - The child makes an error in counting or calculating his/her response. Wrong operation errors - The child subtracts instead of adding. Wrong assignment errors - The child assigns an incorrect number to one of the characters. Given-number strategy - The child provides one of the numbers given in the problem as his/her response. Zero strategy - The child‘s response is “0” for problems containing the wording “fewer than”. Question-first strategy - Under the reworded + gesture condition, the child assigns a random quantity before hearing the rest of the problem. Remainder strategy - The remainder of the manipulatives are assigned to the second character. Unknown strategy - Specific strategy could not be identified. ** Bolded strategies were not previously identified in the literature.  Reliability: An inter-rater reliability analysis using the Cohen’s Kappa statistic was performed (Kappa = 0.825, (p < 0.001)). This result represents a very good level of reliability.  Anecdotal Observations: Under the reworded condition when “You need to figure out how many…” was read, some children quickly assigned a random quantity of manipulatives to the character named. This observation lead to the identification of the question-first strategy Under the traditional wording condition, some children, upon hearing “fewer than”, chose “0” as their answer. Some children even answered “0” without hearing the rest of the word problem. This observation lead to the identification of the zero strategy. Abstract  Using an existing videotaped data set, we identified, described, and coded strategies that 20 first graders with low oral language skill used to solve basic arithmetic word problems. To establish reliability, a second student coded 20 percent of the files. Children’s strategies and future directions will be discussed. Future Directions: We were able to construct a coding scheme that reliably identified the children’s solution strategies and errors, which will now allow us to test the following hypotheses:  Children with low oral language skill will choose different strategies to solve basic math word problems than typically developing children.  Children with low oral language skill will use a greater variety of strategies than children who are typically developing.  Under the traditional wording with no gesture condition, children with low oral language skill will interpret “fewer than” as meaning zero. Traditional Wording: Duck ate 7 ice cream cones. He ate 3 fewer ice cream cones than Bunny. How many ice cream cones did Bunny eat? Traditional Wording + Gesture: Present left hand cupped, palm up over Duck (scripted to ‘Duck ate 7 ice cream cones). Present right hand cupped, palm up and move to meet the left hand (scripted to ‘ate 3 fewer ice cream cones’ or ‘ate 3 more ice cream cones’). Move both hands, cupped together, over to Bunny (scripted to ‘How many ice cream cones did Bunny eat?’). Reworded: Duck and Bunny were eating ice cream cones. You need to figure out how many ice cream cones Bunny ate. Duck ate 7 ice cream cones. Bunny ate 3 more ice cream cones than Duck ate. How many ice cream cones did Bunny eat? Reworded + Gesture: Same gestures as Traditional Wording + Gesture. In addition, point to Bunny while saying ‘You need to figure out how many ice cream cones Bunny ate.’