Multiple Means of Engagement Strategies for Maximising the Learning of Mathematics in Pandemic-regulated Classrooms
Abstract
Many learners find mathematics learning challenging. In response to that actuality, this paper highlights mathematics teachers’ experiences of, and insights into how they adopted and implemented the principle of “Multiple Means of Engagement” (MME) to maximise learning in pandemic-regulated classrooms (in the context of the study, characterised by alternative weeks of attendance, social distancing and wearing of masks). The MME principle is one of the three universal design for learning (UDL) key principles, which guides on how diverse groups of learners can be effectively catered for. The empirical processes, premised on a phenomenological case study, commenced with focus group discussions with 8 high school mathematics teachers from a previously disadvantaged area, who have prior-training in MME. A free attitude interview (FAI) technique was used, to afford the teachers the opportunity to share their insights into the application of MME in their pandemic-regulated classrooms. The content analysis of the teachers’ reflections revealed the following aspects: clear instructions, step-by-step guides, checklists to enhance self-regulation, varying demand and resources to meet challenges, fostering collaboration, providing corrective feedback to sustain effort and persistence, addressing mathematical vocabulary and using real-life situations to recruit interest. These strategies were found not only essential in maximising learning in mathematics under normal circumstances, but also indispensable during the prevailing conditions of the pandemic. The findings therefore suggest MME as a suitable mathematical approach during this Covid19 period.
https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.8.5
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Al-Hattami, A. A. (2019). The perception of students and faculty staff on the role of constructive feedback. International Journal of Instruction, 12(1), 885-894.
Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.261
Anderson, D. M., & Stritch, J. M. (2016). Goal clarity, task significance, and performance: Evidence from a laboratory experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(2), 211-225. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/muv019
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., & Furlong, M. J. (2008). Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools, 45(5), 369-386. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20303
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement: Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44(5), 427-445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.04.002
Balwant, P. T. (2018). The meaning of student engagement and disengagement in the classroom context: Lessons from organisational behaviour. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 42(3), 389-401. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2017.1281887
Bansilal, S., & Ubah, I. (2019). The use of semiotic representations in reasoning about similar triangles in Euclidean geometry. Pythagoras, 40(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.4102/pythagoras.v40i1.480
Bellini, S., & Peters, J. K. (2008). Social skills training for youth with autism spectrum disorders. Child and adolescent psychiatric clinics of North America, 17(4), 857-873. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2008.06.008
Bercher, D. A. (2012). Self-monitoring tools and student academic success: When perception matches reality. Journal of College Science Teaching, 41(5), 26-32.
Boothe, K. A., Lohmann, M. J., Donnell, K. A., & Hall, D. D. (2018). Applying the principles of universal design for learning (UDL) in the college classroom. The Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 7(3), 1–13.
Burgstahler, S. (2008). Equal access: Universal design of instruction. DO-IT, University of Washington. edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/equal_access_udi.htm
Capp, M. J. (2020). Teacher confidence to implement the principles, guidelines, and checkpoints of universal design for learning. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 24(7), 706-720. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1482014
Center for Applied Special Technology. (2014). UDL guidelines – Version 2.0: Principle III provide multiple means of engagement. http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines/principle3
Center for Applied Specialised Technology [CAST]. (2011).Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author.
Courey, S. J., Tappe, P., Siker, J., & LePage, P. (2013). Improved lesson planning with universal design for learning (UDL). Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(1), 7-27. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0888406412446178
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Flow and education. NAMTA Journal, 22(2), 2-35.
Dalton, E. M. (2017). Beyond universal design for learning: Guiding principles to reduce barriers to digital & media literacy competence. Journal of Media Literacy Education, 9(2), 17-29. http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/jmle/
Dalton, E. M., Mckenzie, J. A., & Kahonde, C. (2012). The implementation of inclusive education in South Africa: Reflections arising from a workshop for teachers and therapists to introduce universal design for learning. African Journal of Disability, 1(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.4102/ajod.v1i1.13.
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97-140. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791
De Manzano, Ö., Theorell, T., Harmat, L., & Ullén, F. (2010). The psychophysiology of flow during piano playing. Emotion, 10(3), 301. DOI: 10.1037/a0018432
Duchesne, S., & Ratelle, C. (2010). Parental behaviors and adolescents’ achievement goals at the beginning of middle school: Emotional problems as potential mediators. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(2), 497. DOI: 10.1037/a0019320
Engeser, S. E. (2012). Advances in flow research. Springer Science+ Business Media. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/978-1-4614-2359-1
Engeser, S., & Rheinberg, F. (2008). Flow, performance and moderators of challenge-skill balance. Motivation and Emotion, 32(3), 158-172. DOI 10.1007/s11031-008-9102-4
Evmenova, A. (2018). Preparing teachers to use universal design for learning to support diverse learners. Journal of Online Learning Research, 4(2), 147-171. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/181969/
Febrianto, P. T., Mas' udah, S., & Megasari, L. A. (2020). lmplementation of Online Learning during The Covid-19 Pandemic on Madura lsland, lndonesia. lnternational Joumal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 19(8), 233-254. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.19.8.13
Filgona, J., Sakiyo, J., Gwany, D. M., & Okoronka, A. U. (2020). Motivation in learning. Asian Journal of Education and Social Studies, 16-37. https://doi.org/10.9734/ajess/2020/v10i430273
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109. https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543074001059
Gray, T., & Madson, L. (2007). Ten easy ways to engage your students. College Teaching, 55(2), 83-87. https://doi.org/10.3200/CTCH.55.2.83-87
Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809
Halverson, L. R., & Graham, C. R. (2019). Learner engagement in blended learning environments: A conceptual framework. Online Learning, 23(2), 145-178. https://doi.org/10.24059 /olj.v23i2 .1481
Hartnett, M. (2020). Relationships between online motivation, participation, and achievement: More complex than you might think. Journal of Open, Flexible and Distance Learning, 24(1), 75-88. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.195515786038745
Hatip, A. (2020). The Transformation Of Learning During Covid-19 Pandemic Towards The New Normal Era. PROCEEDING UMSURABAYA.
Hattie, J., Gan, M., & Brooks, C. (2011). Instruction based on feedback. Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction, 249-271.
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Qualitative health research. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Hughes, K. (2012). A behavioural understanding of privacy and its implications for privacy law. The Modern Law Review, 75(5), 806-836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2012.00925.x
Hyppönen, L., Hirsto, L., & Sointu, E. (2019). Perspectives on University Students’ self-regulated learning, task-avoidance, time management and achievement in a flipped classroom context. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.18.13.5
Klein, M. (2000). How active involvement in learning mathematics can preclude meaningful engagement: Contributions from Foucault. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 8(1), 69-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360000200079
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2011). Student success in college: Creating conditions that matter. John Wiley & Sons.
Leonard, S. H. (2008). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement in middle school students [Doctoral dissertation. University of South Dakota].
Lipscomb, L., Swanson, J., & West, A. (2004). Scaffolding. Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching and technology. http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Scaffolding.
Mapuya, M. (2021). First-Year Accounting Student Teachers’ Constructivist Learning Experiences, The Lecturer’s Role and Implications for Curriculum Implementation. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 20(1), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.20.1.6
McKeen, H. (2019). The impact of grade level flexible grouping on math achievement scores. Georgia Educational Researcher, 16(1), 48-62. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1206047.pdf
Mishra, D. L., Gupta, D. T., & Shree, D. A. (2020). Online Teaching-Learning in Higher Education during Lockdown Period of COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Educational Research Open, August, 100012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100012
Moleko, M. M., & Mosimege, M. D. (2020). Teachers’ and learners’ experiences for guiding effective teaching and learning of mathematics word problems. Issues in Educational Research, 30(4), 1375-1394. ttps://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.606279637425764
Padgett, J., Cristancho, S., Lingard, L., Cherry, R., & Haji, F. (2019). Engagement: what is it good for? The role of learner engagement in healthcare simulation contexts. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 24(4), 811-825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-018-9865-7
Park, C. (2003). Engaging students in the learning process: The learning journal. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 27(2), 183-199. https://doi.org/10.1080/03098260305675
Parsons, S. A., Nuland, L. R., & Parsons, A. W. (2014). The ABCs of student engagement. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(8), 23-27. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F003172171409500806
Poellhuber, B., Chomienne, M., & Karsenti, T. (2008). The effect of peer collaboration and collaborative learning on self-efficacy and persistence in a learner-paced continuous intake model. International Journal of E-Learning & Distance Education / Revue Internationale du e-Learning et la Formation à Distance, 22(3), 41-62.
Pokhrel, S., & Chhetri, R. (2021). A literature review on impact of COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and learning. Higher Education for the Future, 8(1), 133-141. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2347631120983481
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Scott, S., McGuire, J. M., & Embry, P. (2002). Universal design for instruction fact sheet. University of Connecticut, Center on Postsecondary Education and Disability. https://www.westga.edu/student-services/counseling/assets-counseling/docs/universal_design_fact_sheet.pdf
Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924
Sirin, S. R., & Rogers-Sirin, L. (2005). Components of school engagement among African American adolescents. Applied Developmental Science, 9(1), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532480xads0901_2
Smirnova, L. A. (2016). Scaffolding preparation for a reading exam. Journal of Teaching English for Specific and Academic Purposes, 4(2), 391-398.
Smith, D. C., Ito, A., Gruenewald, J., & Yeh, H. L. (2010). Promoting school engagement: Attitudes toward school among American and Japanese youth. Journal of School Violence, 9(4), 392-406. https://doi.org/10.1080/15388220.2010.509308
Smith, M. R. (2004). Math anxiety: Causes, effects, and preventative measures [Senior honors thesis. Liberty University]. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/honors/255
Thoonen, E. E., Sleegers, P. J., Oort, F. J., Peetsma, T. T., & Geijsel, F. P. (2011). How to improve teaching practices: The role of teacher motivation, organizational factors, and leadership practices. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47(3), 496-536. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0013161X11400185
Umugiraneza, O., Bansilal, S., & North, D. (2017). Exploring teachers’ practices in teaching mathematics and statistics in KwaZulu-Natal schools. South African Journal of Education, 37(2). https://doi.org/10.15700/saje.v37n2a1306
Williams, K. C., & Williams, C. C. (2011). Five key ingredients for improving student motivation. Research in Higher Education Journal, 12, 1.
Yengin, ?., Karahoca, D., Karahoca, A., & Yücel, A. (2010). Roles of teachers in e-learning: How to engage students & how to get free e-learning and the future. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 5775-5787. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.942
Zyngier, D. (2008). (Re)conceptualising student engagement: Doing education not doing time. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1765-1776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2007.09.004
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
e-ISSN: 1694-2116
p-ISSN: 1694-2493