[Numeracy 196] Re: manipulatives
Archived Content Disclaimer
This page contains archived content from a LINCS email discussion list that closed in 2012. This content is not updated as part of LINCS’ ongoing website maintenance, and hyperlinks may be broken.
Thu Feb 18 17:00:52 EST 2010
- Previous message: [Numeracy 195] manipulatives
- Next message: [Numeracy 198] Re: manipulatives
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Nobody uses manipulatives here, which I think is a shame.
Hard to make the bridge from concrete to abstract without the concrete, though we sometimes can anyway.
We do use some visuals -- but not much of that, either.
I wish I could say that the folks working with the more basic than pre-algebra did, but I'm 99 44/100% sure they don't either. We explain and wish and wonder why students don't connect math to the real world...
That said, there's not a lot of evidence (either formal research or anecdotal) to say manipulatives help... I've seen them be one more layer of confusion, if the connection between the concrete to the symbols isn't solidified. One reason I'm really looking forward to the Making Math Real overview is that I have a feeling this does that (or at least makes a good effort;)) and would give me the tools to try.
Academic Development Specialist
Center for Academic Success
Champaign, IL 61821
sujones at parkland.edu
>>> Jaye Luke <flipfloprun at gmail.com> 2/18/2010 11:52 AM >>>
I haven't taught a math class for adult learners...yet:) But I am curious
1- Are you using manipulatives?
2- If you are using manipulatives are they specifically for math (cuisenaire
rods) or more generalizable (tokens/tiles)?
3- Do you think the manipulatives are beneficial and why?