Top

TechTrends

Published in:

08-10-2022 | Original Paper

Teachers’ Experiences with and Perceptions of Virtual Manipulatives Following the COVID-19 Pandemic

Authors: Fayth Keldgord, Yu-Hui Ching

Published in: TechTrends | Issue 6/2022

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

While the use of virtual manipulatives (VM) is rising in classrooms, there is still limited research. regarding teacher experiences with and perceptions of virtual manipulatives. Most of the research regarding teacher perceptions of VM has focused only on short-term uses following professional development sessions and none has highlighted the experiences of teachers using them during emergency remote teaching during COVID-19. The purpose of this study was to explore teacher perceptions and. experiences with virtual manipulatives following emergency remote teaching during COVID-19. To achieve this, the researchers conducted an online survey to gather data on educator’s (n = 103) experiences, perceptions, and usage of virtual manipulatives. The qualitative and quantitative data show that educators feel that VM are a valid and feasible support of mathematics instruction when physical manipulatives are not available. Results regarding usage of virtual manipulatives including frequency of use, standards taught, and types used are presented and discussed.

previous article Stats Kwon Do: a Case Study in Instructional Design, Multimedia and Gamification of Instruction

next article A Design-Based Research Study Exploring Pre-service Teachers’ Instructional Design Decision-Making for Technology Integration

Available only for authorised users

Akkan, Y., & Cakir, Z. (2012). Pre-service classroom teachers’ opinions on using different manipulatives in mathematics teaching. Journal of Instructional Technologies and Teacher Education, 1(1), 68–83.

Ardiç, M. A. (2021). Instruction of mathematics in higher education in the COVID-19 pandemic: The case of Turkey. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 9, 24–44.CrossRef

Borba, M. C. (2021). The future of mathematics education since COVID-19: Humans-with-media or humans-with-non-living-things. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 108(1/2), 385–400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-021-10043-2CrossRef

Bouck, E. C., Bassette, L., Shurr, J., Park, J., Kerr, J., & Whorley, A. (2017). Teaching equivalent fractions to secondary students with disabilities via the virtual-representational-abstract instructional sequence. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32(4), 220–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417727291CrossRef

Carbonneau, K. J., & Marley, S. C. (2012). Activity-based learning strategies. In J. Hattie, & E. M. Anderman (Eds.), The international guide to student achievement (pp. 282–284). Routledge.

Carbonneau, K. J., Marley, S. C., & Selig, J. P. (2013). A meta-analysis of the efficacy of teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 380–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031084CrossRef

Carbonneau, K. J., Zhang, X., & Ardasheva, Y. (2018). Preservice educators’ perceptions of manipulatives: The moderating role of mathematics teaching self-efficacy. School Science & Mathematics, 118(7), 300–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12298CrossRef

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. SAGE Publications.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008CrossRef

Downe-Wamboldt, B. (1992). Content analysis: method, applications, and issues. Health care for women international, 13(3), 313–321.CrossRef

Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first-and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational technology research and development, 47(4), 47–61.CrossRef

Ferri, F., Grifoni, P., & Guzzo, T. (2020). Online learning and emergency remote teaching: Opportunities and challenges in emergency situations. Societies, 10(4), 86.CrossRef

Flevares, L. M., Perry, M., Beilstein, S. O., & Bajwa, N. P. (2022). Examining first-graders’ developing understanding of place value via base-ten virtual manipulatives. Early Childhood Education Journal, 50(3), 359–370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-01162-9CrossRef

Hansen, A., Mavrikis, M., & Geraniou, E. (2016). Supporting teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge of fractions through co-designing a virtual manipulative. Journal Of Mathematics Teacher Education, 19, 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-016-9344-0CrossRef

Hensberry, K., Moore, E., & Perkins, K. (2015). Effective student learning of fractions with an interactive simulation. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 34(3), 273–298.

Hodges, C., Moore, S., Lockee, B., Trust, T., & Bond, A. (2020). The difference between emergency remote teaching and online learning. Educause Review, 27 March. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/3/the-difference-between-emergency-remote-teaching-and-online-learning. Accessed 9/2/2022.

Jimenez, B. A., & Besaw, J. (2020). Building early numeracy through virtual manipulatives for students with intellectual disability and autism. Education & Training in Autism & Developmental Disabilities, 55(1), 28–44.

Kablan, Z. (2016). The effect of manipulatives on mathematics achievement across different learning styles. Educational Psychology, 36(2), 277–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2014.946889CrossRef

Larbi, E., & Mavis, O. (2016). The use of manipulatives in mathematics education. Journal of Education and practice, 7(36), 53–61.

Liggett, R. S. (2017). The impact of use of manipulatives on the math scores of grade 2 students. Brock Education: A Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 26(2), 87–101.

Lin, C. (2010). Web-based instruction on preservice teachers’ knowledge of fraction operations. School Science and Mathematics, 110(2), 59–71.

Livy, S., Muir, T., Murphy, C., & Trimble, A. (2022). Creative approaches to teaching mathematics education with online tools during COVID-19. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science & Technology, 53(3), 573–581. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2021.1988742CrossRef

Lee, C., & Chen, M. (2010). Taiwanese junior high school students’ mathematics attitudes and perceptions towards virtual manipulatives. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), E17–E21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00877.xCrossRef

Lishchynska, M., & Palmer, C. (2021). Teaching maths in the time of COVID: The good, the bad and missing factors. All Ireland Journal of Higher Education, 13(1), 1–14.

McHugh, M. L. (2012). Interrater reliability: the kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 22(3), 276–282.CrossRef

Moyer-Packenham, P., & Bolyard, J. (2016). Revisiting the definition of a virtual manipulative. In P. Moyer-Packenham (Ed.), International perspectives on teaching and learning with virtual manipulatives (pp. 3–25). Springer International Publishing.

Moyer, P. S., Bolyard, J. J., & Spikell, M. A. (2002). What are virtual manipulatives? Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 372–377.

Moyer-Packenham, P. S., Ulmer, L. A., & Anderson, K. L. (2012). Examining pictorial models and virtual manipulatives for third-grade fraction instruction. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 11(3), 103–120.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. NCTM.

Park, J. (2019). Supporting maintenance in mathematics using the virtual-representational-abstract instructional sequence intervention package. Proquest Dissertations Publishing. Michigan State University.

Pressley, T. (2021). Factors contributing to teacher burnout during COVID-19. Educational Researcher, 50(5), 325–327.CrossRef

Reiten, L. (2020). Why and how secondary mathematics teachers implement virtual manipulatives. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 20(1), 55–84.

Satsangi, R., Hammer, R., & Hogan, C. (2018). Studying virtual manipulatives paired with explicit instruction to teach algebraic equations to students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 41(4), 227–242.CrossRef

Scherer, R., Siddiq, F., & Tondeur, J. (2019). The technology acceptance model (TAM): A meta-analytic structural equation modeling approach to explaining teachers’ adoption of digital technology in education. Computers & Education, 128, 13–35.CrossRef

Schuck, R. K., & Lambert, R. (2020). “Am I doing enough?” Special educators’ experiences with emergency remote teaching in Spring 2020. Education Sciences, 10(11), 320.CrossRef

Shin, M., Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., McKenna, J. W., Hou, F., & Ok, M. W. (2017). Virtual manipulatives: Tools for teaching mathematics to students with learning disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 52(3), 148–153.CrossRef

Shin, M., Park, J., Grimes, R., & Bryant, D. P. (2021). Effects of using virtual manipulatives for students with disabilities: Three-level multilevel modeling for single-case data. Exceptional Children, 87(4), 418–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029211007150CrossRef

Suh, J. (2005). Third graders’ mathematics achievement and representation preference using virtual and physical manipulatives for adding fractions and balancing equations. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. George Mason University.

Taber, K. S. (2018). The use of Cronbach’s Alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2CrossRef

Teo, T., Luan, S., & Sing, C. C. (2008). A cross-cultural examination of the intention to use technology between Singaporean and Malaysian pre-service teachers: An application of the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). Educational Technology & Society, 11(4), 265–280.

Uribe-Flórez, L., & Wilkins, J. (2017). Manipulative use and elementary school students’ mathematics learning. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 15(8), 1541–1557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9757-3CrossRef

Waarvik, J. (2019). Predicting Teacher Usage of Learning Games. [Doctoral dissertation, Boise State University]. Scholar Works. https://scholarworks.boisestate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2642&context=td. Accessed 11/1/2021.

Wang, T., & Tseng, Y. (2018). The comparative effectiveness of physical, virtual, and virtual-physical manipulatives on third-grade students’ science achievement and conceptual understanding of evaporation and condensation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 203–219.CrossRef

Title: Teachers’ Experiences with and Perceptions of Virtual Manipulatives Following the COVID-19 Pandemic
Authors: Fayth Keldgord
Yu-Hui Ching
Publication date: 08-10-2022
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: TechTrends / Issue 6/2022
Print ISSN: 8756-3894
Electronic ISSN: 1559-7075
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-022-00796-9

Springer Professional

Teachers’ Experiences with and Perceptions of Virtual Manipulatives Following the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

Premium Partner

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Other articles of this Issue 6/2022

The Rise and Fall of the HyFlex Approach in Mexico

Transition Complete: On the Work We do and the Value of Good Mentors

Centering Teaching and Learning Centers in Instructional Systems Design Conversations

Open Educational Resources for K-12 Teachers: A Sustainable Plan

Stats Kwon Do: a Case Study in Instructional Design, Multimedia and Gamification of Instruction

Exploring Organizational Creativity and Mindfulness with Ravi S. Kudesia