Follett, James Edward (1983) A comparative study of an enactive and an iconic approach to the teaching of perimeter and area to seventh grade students. Masters thesis, Memorial University of Newfoundland.
PDF (Migrated (PDF/A Conversion) from original format: (application/pdf))
- Accepted Version
Available under License - The author retains copyright ownership and moral rights in this thesis. Neither the thesis nor substantial extracts from it may be printed or otherwise reproduced without the author's permission.
The purpose of the study was to compare the effects on achievement and retention of an enactive and an iconic approach to the teaching of perimeter and area concepts to seventh grade students. Four intact classes of hetero-geneously grouped students were selected for the study. Treatments were randomly assigned to the classes. The students were stratified into low, middle, and high ability groups by means of the Canadian Tests of Basic Skills. In the enactive treatment two classes used concrete materials in the form of 5 x 5 geoboards while the two classes in the iconic treatment used a semi-concrete material in the form of 5 x 5 dot paper on which they drew the same figures that the enactive group made on the geoboards. -- Two parallel sets of lesson plans, a posttest, and a retention test were constructed by the researcher. A pilot study was conducted prior to implementation of the main study. The posttest was administered immediately after the instructional period which lasted about 20 teaching days, and the retention test was administered five weeks later. Data were collected from 103 students and a two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the scores on each test. Scheiffé tests were used to investigate differences among the three ability levels. -- Six null hypotheses were tested at the 0.05 level of significance, and all were rejected. The results were as follows: There was a significant difference in mean scores on both the posttest and retention test in favour of the iconic treatment. There was a significant difference in mean scores among the three ability levels on both the posttest and retention test. There was a significant interaction between treatment and ability with respect to scores on both the posttest and retention test. -- Based on the results of the study, it was recommended that further research be conducted using a larger sample and dealing with a different topic; at a lower grade level; or with students who have had previous experience with manipulative materials.
|Item Type:||Thesis (Masters)|
|Additional Information:||Bibliography: leaves 77-82.|
|Department(s):||Education, Faculty of|
|Library of Congress Subject Heading:||Geometry--Study and teaching (Secondary); Mathematics--Study and teaching (Secondary)|
Actions (login required)