>
> |
Posted on May 16, 2005 @ 23:34 by CarolynJohnston
Part 1 in a mini-series on a review of quality math ed research articles.
In 1998, the California State Board of Education contracted with a group of education researchers from the University of Oregon to conduct a review of high-quality mathematics education research papers. The resulting 100-page report is available here.
Their task was simply to search out all the mathematics education research that had been performed and published within a specified period, cull out the stuff that was of dubious quality (meaning it had unsound experimental underpinnings, or was performed in a setting that was not like a classroom, or had one of a number of other flaws), and see what the remaining studies had to say about mathematics achievement (that is, they avoided papers that did not measure study outcomes quantitatively, using tests of achievement; so studies measuring the impacts of changes in teaching methodology on students' confidence, for example, weren't included).
The results are surprising to me in places. There were studies on the use of manipulatives, studies on kids working with their peers, studies on the use of computers, calculators and technology, studies on motivational methods, and studies on the design of instruction. The researchers seem to have avoided bias, and to be genuinely searching out high quality research. I thought I would do a 'mini-series' describing and discussing their results, section by section. Stay tuned.
California study intro
California state study of group learning
California Board of Ed study part 2
education research - peer reviewed studies - chart
<!--
-->
Back to main page.
Comments
Users must register to comment.
|
