Experiential Learning of Mathematics: Using Manipulatives

ERIC Educational Reports, Jun 01, 1990 by Robert Hartshorn, Sue Boren

Chapter 75 of current Texas law states that new concepts should be introduced with appropriate manipulatives at the elementary and secondary levels (Peavler, DeValcourt, Montalto, & Hopkins, 1987). Students are to be actively involved in structured activities that develop understanding and the ability to apply skills. Evaluation of mastery at the concrete level is supposed to include student demonstrations with manipulative materials. Minimum manipulative kits are described and are to be made available in each classroom, at each grade level K-8. Local districts, however, must provide funding.AREAS FOR INCREASED ATTENTIONAs the decade of the 1990s dawns, research on the effectiveness of manipulatives in grades K-8 will doubtless continue. Forthcoming research should also seek to study the use and effects of manipulatives at the secondary level. Increasing the use of this experiential strategy at both levels will require more states to make the type of financial commitment that those in the forefront have already made. In that vein, studies should be carefully designed to determine the impact of different funding formulas for effectively implementing this teaching strategy across the grades.REFERENCESCenter for Research in Mathematics and Science Education. (1988). Keys to the future. Raleigh, NC: Center for Research in Mathematics and Science Education.

Center of Excellence for the Enrichment of Science and Mathematics Education. (1989). Mathematics activity manuals (Draft Versions: K-8, Algebra I and II, Unified Geometry, Selected Topics from Advanced Mathematics Courses). Martin, TN: The University of Tennessee at Martin.

Gilbert, R., & Bush, W. (1988). Familiarity, availability, and use of manipulative devices in mathematics at the primary level. School Science and Mathematics, 88, 459-469.

Heddens, J. (1986). Bridging the gap between the concrete and the abstract. Arithmetic Teacher, 33(6), 14-17.

Howden, H. (1986). The role of manipulatives in learning mathematics. Insights into Open Education, 19(1), 1-11.

Lappan, G., Fitzgerald, W., Phillips, E., Shroyer, J., & Winter, M. (1986). Middle grades mathematics project. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Peavler, C., DeValcourt, R., Montalto, B., Hopkins, B. (1987). The mathematics program: An overview and explanation. Focus on Learning Problems in Mathematics, 9, 39-50.

Sowell, E. (1989). Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 498-505.

Suydam, M., & Higgins, J. (1977). Activity-based learning in elementary school mathematics: Recommendations from research. Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 144 840)

Prepared by Robert Hartshorn and Sue Boren, The University of Tennessee at Martin, Martin, TN.