Content area
Full text
Contents
- Abstract
- Moderators of the Efficacy of Manipulatives: Instructional Characteristics
- Development of Abstract Reasoning
- Stimulating Real-World Knowledge
- Enactment Effects
- Learner-Driven Exploration
- Moderators of the Efficacy of Manipulatives: Methodological Characteristics
- Present Study
- Method
- Literature Search
- Criteria for Inclusion
- Study Coding
- Effect size
- Instructional Moderators
- Developmental status
- Perceptual richness
- Level of instructional guidance
- Mathematical topic
- Group versus individual instruction
- Instructional time
- Outcome measure
- Methodological Moderators
- Peer review status
- Research design
- Implementer
- Test type
- Assumption of independence
- Analyses
- Results
- Aggregated Data
- Moderator analysis
- Disaggregated Data
- Retention
- Problem solving
- Transfer
- Publication Bias
- Discussion
- Instructional Characteristics
- Developmental status
- Instructional guidance
- Perceptual richness
- Instructional time
- Methodological Characteristics
- Statistical conclusion validity
- Internal validity
- Limitations
- Conclusion
Figures and Tables
Abstract
The use of manipulatives to teach mathematics is often prescribed as an efficacious teaching strategy. To examine the empirical evidence regarding the use of manipulatives during mathematics instruction, we conducted a systematic search of the literature. This search identified 55 studies that compared instruction with manipulatives to a control condition where math instruction was provided with only abstract math symbols. The sample of studies included students from kindergarten to college level (N = 7,237). Statistically significant results were identified with small to moderate effect sizes, as measured by Cohen's d, in favor of the use of manipulatives when compared with instruction that only used abstract math symbols. However, the relationship between teaching mathematics with concrete manipulatives and student learning was moderated by both instructional and methodological characteristics of the studies. Additionally, separate analyses conducted for specific learning outcomes of retention (k = 53, N = 7,140), problem solving (k = 9, N = 477), transfer (k = 13, N = 3,453), and justification (k = 2, N = 109) revealed moderate to large effects on retention and small effects on problem solving, transfer, and justification in favor of using manipulatives over abstract math symbols.
Results from the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (National Center for Education Statistics, 2011) indicate 60% of fourth-grade and 57% of eighth-grade United States students failed to meet standards of proficiency in mathematics. Furthermore, with only 10% of fourth graders and 6%...





