Effects of Embodied Dynamic Visualization on Middle-school Students’Learning of Algebraic Manipulation
Author: Tai-Yih Tso (Department of Mathematics, National Taiwan Normal University), Feng-Lin Lu (Department of Mathematics, National Taiwan Normal University), Kin Hang Lei (Department of Mathematics, National Taiwan Normal University)
Vol.&No.:Vol. 67, No. 4
Date:December 2022
Pages:285-318
DOI:https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202212_67(4).0009
Abstract:
Mathematical objects are artifacts of abstract thinking achieved by both conceptual and procedural knowledge. Mathematical thinking is usually communicated and constructed with external representations such as texts, symbols, or diagrams. Since it is difficult to demonstrate the dynamic nature of mathematical objects using static representations, teachers and instructional designers often apply dynamic visualization to present abstract or complex content in digital learning materials. While this illustrates abstract concepts and procedures with mathematical discipline, the accompanying transient effects may impede perceptual and cognitive processing over the short term, such that the intended learning effect may not be achieved. These transient effects are more pronounced for mathematical content with a high intrinsic cognitive load which require the integration of concepts and procedures. Relevant studies have suggested that the learning effect of dynamic visualization can be enhanced using physical experiences such as moving the body while learning. This includes demonstrating learning content using embodied simulation, which means combining gestures and actions in the process of dynamic visualization. This approach is termed embodied dynamic visualization.
To facilitate the connection between physical gestures and procedural knowledge in the creation of mathematical meaning, this study adopted conceptual metaphor theory to develop related research instruments, including learning materials for embodied simulation. In addition to determining whether students can successfully integrate mathematical concepts and the processes of calculation in the cognitive process of procept formation, we investigated affective factors. Affective factors which have been shown to affect learning outcomes include aspects of cognitive load, mental effort, self-efficacy, learning strategies, and degree of initiative. Therefore, this study applied a quasi-experimental design to explore the effects of different demonstration methods (i.e., embodied simulations, instructional animations, and static illustrations) on the cognition and emotions of seventh-grade students learning algebraic manipulation.
Criteria for inclusion in the experiment were participation in the whole process of the instructional experiment and a score of less 85% in the pre-test (to ensure the subjects had not already mastered the basic concepts and problem-solving skills relevant to algebraic manipulation). Based on these criteria, we recruited 96 seventh grade students, who were randomly provided with embodied simulations, instructional animations, or static illustrations. They were expected to engage in self-regulated learning of content related to algebraic manipulation. Data on both cognitive and affective aspects was collected and analyzed. For the former, students’ comprehension of algebraic manipulation was evaluated using a pre-test and a post-test. For the latter, students completed a self-reported questionnaire on their learning perceptions. Cronbach’s α for these two aspects were .743 and .887, respectively, thereby confirming reliability.
Our results were as follows: (1) Students’ overall learning outcomes can be significantly enhanced by including embodied simulation, instructional animation, or static illustration. All three types of demonstration helped students solve problems related to basic algebraic manipulation. They also increased the positive learning effects on misconceptions and near-transfer problems as well as far-transfer problems. However, static illustrations did not have a significant effect on the learning performances of the seventh-grade students in solving far-transfer problems. This type of demonstration illustrates the algorithm and structure of algebraic manipulation; however, the procedure and approach to calculation are not shown. Therefore, students must depend on their own imagination to determine how these algebraic expressions are calculated based on the result alone. This places a high cognitive demand on students and may thus hinder the learning effects on far-transfer and other applications relevant to algebraic manipulation. (2) For high-performing students, exposure to embodied simulation enabled the students to perform significantly better on basic questions related to algebraic manipulation than did exposure to instructional animation. Moreover, students exposed to embodied simulation performed significantly better on far-transfer problems than did students exposed to static illustration. This indicates the value of using different gestures to simulate the operations involved in the calculation process, such as distribution expansion or the merging of similar items. This enabled high-performing students to acquire basic operating rules and calculation skills more effectively. In addition, embodying the process of the calculation exerted a more positive learning effect for high-performing students solving far-transfer problems than did exposure to static illustrations. This is because embodied simulation not only offers a form of dynamic visualization, but also connects the elements of the calculation based on operation processes. In addition, the simulated gestures help students understand the meaning of the operations, thereby generating meaningful dynamic mental images. (3) For low-performing students, exposure to either embodied simulation or instructional animation resulted in significantly better performance in the solution of basic questions related to algebraic manipulation than did exposure to static illustration. This means that dynamic visualization methods such as embodied simulation or instructional animation help improve understanding of procedural knowledge of algebraic manipulation for low-performing students. However, a lack of sufficient prior knowledge or proficiency at solving basic problems hampered the learning effects for low-performing students in the topic of far-transfer problems. For these, the results of exposure to embodied simulation or static instruction did not differ from those of exposure to static illustration. (4) We found significant interaction effects in terms of students’ learning perceptions among the different forms of demonstration and high and low performance groups. That is, for different forms of demonstration, students’ learning perceptions differ according to their level of mathematics learning achievement. To be specific, for high-performing students, exposure to instructional animation enable the students to perceive significantly better on the degree of initiative than did exposure to embodied simulation. However, for low-performing students, exposure to instructional animation showed significantly better on the self-efficacy and learning strategies than did exposure to static illustration.
Based on these results, we make the following recommendations for future studies into the use of dynamic visualization in mathematical instruction: (1) The current study focused on embodied simulation, instructional animation, and static illustration. It would be worth exploring whether other forms of dynamic visualization (such as an instructional video with a human instructor) could help students in the learning of algebraic manipulation, enabling them to successfully integrate the concept and process of algebraic manipulation. (2) In the current study, students studied algebraic manipulation using non-interactive demonstration. In future studies, it would be worth investigating the effects of interactive gestures on students’ learning performances and perceptions. (3) As the complexity of algebraic manipulation problems may have been too low for high-performing students, it would be worth exploring the effects of embodied simulation or interactive gestures on other algebraic topics of higher cognitive complexity, such as solving square-root equations or completing the square, as well as geometric calculation and geometric reasoning.
Keywords:algebraic manipulation, conceptual metaphor, procept, embodied simulation, embodied dynamic visualization
《Full Text》
References:
- 左台益、李健恆(2018)。素養導向之數學教材設計與發展。教育科學研究期刊,63(4),29- 58。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0002[【Tso, T.-Y., & Lei, K.-H. (2018). Design and development of mathematical literacy-oriented subject materials. The Journal of Educational Sciences, 63(4), 29-58. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0002】
- 左台益、呂鳳琳、曾世綺、吳慧敏、陳明璋、譚寧君(2011)。以分段方式降低任務複雜度對專 家與生手閱讀幾何證明理解的影響。教育心理學報,43(閱讀專刊),291-314。https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.20110517【Tso, T.-Y., Lu, F.-L., Tzeng, S.-C., Wu, H.-M., Chen, M.-J., & Tan, N.-C. (2011). Impact of reducing task complexity by segmentation on experts’ and novices’ reading comprehension of geometric proof problems. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 43(Special Issue on Reading), 291-314. https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.20110517】
- 吳昭容、鄭鈐華、張凌嘉(2021)。從算式或文字閱讀數學科普文章:共變數分析與階層線性模式的比較。教育科學研究期刊,66(1),107-139。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202103_66(1).0004【Wu, C.-J., Cheng, C.-H., & Chang, L.-C. (2021). Reading popular mathematics from equations or words: Comparison of analysis of covariance and hierarchical linear modeling. The Journal of Educational Sciences, 66(1), 107-139. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202103_66(1).0004】
- 教育部(2018)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校-數學領域。作者。【Ministry of Education. (2018). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education for elementary, junior high Schools and general senior high schools – Mathematics. Author.】
- 連宥鈞、吳昭容(2020)。手勢融入範例對低能力學生運算與幾何學習的影響。臺灣數學教育期刊,7(2),45-70。https://doi.org/10.6278/tjme.202010_7(2).003【Lien, Y.-C., & Wu, C.-J. (2020). The effects of gesture on low-ability students’ learning of arithmetic and geometry using worked examples. Taiwan Journal of Mathematics Education, 7(2), 45-70. https://doi.org/10.6278/tjme. 202010_7(2).003】
» More
- 左台益、李健恆(2018)。素養導向之數學教材設計與發展。教育科學研究期刊,63(4),29- 58。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0002[【Tso, T.-Y., & Lei, K.-H. (2018). Design and development of mathematical literacy-oriented subject materials. The Journal of Educational Sciences, 63(4), 29-58. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.201812_63(4).0002】
- 左台益、呂鳳琳、曾世綺、吳慧敏、陳明璋、譚寧君(2011)。以分段方式降低任務複雜度對專 家與生手閱讀幾何證明理解的影響。教育心理學報,43(閱讀專刊),291-314。https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.20110517【Tso, T.-Y., Lu, F.-L., Tzeng, S.-C., Wu, H.-M., Chen, M.-J., & Tan, N.-C. (2011). Impact of reducing task complexity by segmentation on experts’ and novices’ reading comprehension of geometric proof problems. Bulletin of Educational Psychology, 43(Special Issue on Reading), 291-314. https://doi.org/10.6251/BEP.20110517】
- 吳昭容、鄭鈐華、張凌嘉(2021)。從算式或文字閱讀數學科普文章:共變數分析與階層線性模式的比較。教育科學研究期刊,66(1),107-139。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202103_66(1).0004【Wu, C.-J., Cheng, C.-H., & Chang, L.-C. (2021). Reading popular mathematics from equations or words: Comparison of analysis of covariance and hierarchical linear modeling. The Journal of Educational Sciences, 66(1), 107-139. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202103_66(1).0004】
- 教育部(2018)。十二年國民基本教育課程綱要國民中小學暨普通型高級中等學校-數學領域。作者。【Ministry of Education. (2018). Curriculum guidelines of 12-year basic education for elementary, junior high Schools and general senior high schools – Mathematics. Author.】
- 連宥鈞、吳昭容(2020)。手勢融入範例對低能力學生運算與幾何學習的影響。臺灣數學教育期刊,7(2),45-70。https://doi.org/10.6278/tjme.202010_7(2).003【Lien, Y.-C., & Wu, C.-J. (2020). The effects of gesture on low-ability students’ learning of arithmetic and geometry using worked examples. Taiwan Journal of Mathematics Education, 7(2), 45-70. https://doi.org/10.6278/tjme. 202010_7(2).003】
- 曾明基(2021)。成功期望與興趣價值對數學成就的動態影響:動態結構方程模型分析。教育科學研究期刊,66(2),145-173。https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202106_66(2).0005【Tseng, M.-C. (2021). Dynamic effect of success expectation and interest value on mathematic achievement: Dynamic structural equation model analysis. The Journal of Educational Sciences, 66(2), 145-173. https://doi.org/10.6209/JORIES.202106_66(2).0005】
- Arnon, I., Cottrill, J., Dubinsky, E., Oktaç, A., Fuentes, S. R., Trigueros, M., & Weller, K. (2014). APOS theory: A framework for research and curriculum development in mathematics education. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7966-6
- Ayres, P. (2006). Impact of reducing intrinsic cognitive load on learning in a mathematical domain. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20(3), 287-298. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1245
- Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2007). Making instructional animations more effective: A cognitive load approach. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21, 695-700. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1343
- Bell, L., Juersivich, N., Hammond, T. C., & Bell, R. L. (2012). The TPACK of dynamic representations. In R. Ronau, C. Rakes, & M. Niess (Eds.), Educational technology, teacher knowledge, and classroom impact (pp. 103-135). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1- 60960-750-0.ch005
- Boaler, J., Chen, L., Williams, C., & Cordero, M. (2016). Seeing as understanding: The importance of visual mathematics for our brain and learning. Journal of Applied & Computational Mathematics, 5(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.4172/2168-9679.1000325
- Bos, R., & Renkema, W. (2022). Metaphor-based algebra animation [paper presentation]. The 15th International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching, Copenhagen, Denmark.
- Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2015). The potential of embodied cognition to improve STEAM instructional dynamic visualizations. In X. Ge, D. Ifenthaler, & J. M. Spector (Eds.), Emerging technologies for STEAM education: Full STEAM ahead (pp. 113-136). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02573-5_7
- Castro-Alonso, J. C., Ayres, P., & Paas, F. (2016). Comparing apples and oranges? A critical look at research on learning from statics versus animations. Computers & Education, 102, 234-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.004
- Church, R. B., Ayman-Nolley, S., & Mahootian, S. (2004). The role of gesture in bilingual education: Does gesture enhance learning? International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7(4), 303-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050408667815
- De Koning, B. B., & Tabbers, H. K. (2011). Facilitating understanding of movements in dynamic visualizations: An embodied perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 501-521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9173-8
- De Koning, B. B., & Tabbers, H. K. (2013). Gestures in instructional animations: A helping hand to understanding non-human movements? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(5), 683-689. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.2937
- Dubinsky, E., & McDonald, M. A. (2001). APOS: A constructivist theory of learning in undergraduate mathematics education research. In D. Holton, M. Artigue, U. Kirchgräber, J. Hillel, M. Niss, & A. Schoenfeld (Eds.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: An ICMI study (Vol. 7, pp. 275-282). Kluwer Academic. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-47231-7_25
- Ginns, P., Hu, F. T., Byrne, E., & Bobis, J. (2016). Learning by tracing worked examples. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 30(2), 160-169. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.3171
- Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Kelly, S. D., & Wagner, S. (2001). Explaining math: Gesturing lightens the load. Psychological Science, 12(6), 516-522. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280. 00395
- Goldin-Meadow, S., & Wagner, S. (2005). How our hands help us learn. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(5), 234-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.03.006
- Gray, E., & Tall, D. (1994). Duality, ambiguity, and flexibility: A “proceptual” view of simple arithmetic. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25(2), 116-140. https://doi.org/10. 2307/749505
- Höffler, T. N., & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 17(6), 722-738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.013
- Karadag, Z., & McDougall, D. (2011). GeoGebra as a cognitive tool: Where cognitive theories and technology meet. In L. Bu & R. Schoen (Eds.), Model-centered learning: Pathways to mathematical understanding using GeoGebra (pp. 169-181). Sense. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-618-2_12
- Lakoff, G. (2009). The neural theory of metaphor. SSRN Electronic Jorunal. https://doi.org/10. 2139/ssrn.1437794
- Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. Basic Books.
- McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. University of Chicago Press.
- Moreno-Armella, L., Hegedus, S. J., & Kaput, J. J. (2008). From static to dynamic mathematics: Historical and representational perspectives. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68, 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-008-9116-6
- Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429-434. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.429
- Presmeg, N. (2014). Contemplating visualization as an epistemological learning tool in mathematics. ZDM-Mathematics Education, 46(1), 151-157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0561-z
- Radford, L. (2003). Gestures, speech, and the sprouting of signs: A semiotic-cultural approach to students’ types of generalization. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(1), 37-70. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327833MTL0501_02
- Renkema, W. (2019). Effectiveness of dynamic visualisation in video-based animated algebra instruction [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Utrecht University.
- Rohr, M., & Reimann, P. (1998). Reasoning with multiple representations when acquiring the particulate model of matter. In M. W. van Someren, P. Reimann, H. P. A. Boshuizen, & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with multiple representations (pp. 41-66). Pergamon.
- Robutti, O. (2020). Gestures in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 311-315). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15789-0_100042
- Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00302715
- Shimada, S., & Oki, K. (2012). Modulation of motor area activity during observation of unnatural body movements. Brain and Cognition, 80(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2012.04.006
- Skemp, R. R. (1976). Relational understanding and instrumental understanding. Mathematics Teaching, 77, 20-26.
- Sweller, J., & Cooper, G. A. (1985). The use of worked examples as a substitute for problem solving in learning algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 2(1), 59-89. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0201_3
- Valenzeno, L., Alibali, M. W., & Klatzky, R. (2003). Teachers’ gestures facilitate students’ learning: A lesson in symmetry. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28(2), 187-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-476X(02)00007-3
- Wagner, I., & Schnotz, W. (2017). Learning from static and dynamic visualizations: What kind of questions should we ask? In R. Lowe & R. Ploetzner (Eds.), Learning from dynamic visualization – Innovations in research and application (pp. 69-91). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56204-9_4
- Weller, K., Arnon, I., & Dubinsky, E. (2009). Preservice teachers’ understanding of the relation between a fraction or integer and its decimal expansion. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 9(1), 5-28. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926150902817381
- Wittmann, M. C., Flood, V. J., & Black, K. E. (2013). Algebraic manipulation as motion within a landscape. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82(2), 169-181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649- 012-9428-4
- Wong, A., Marcus, N., Ayres, P., Smith, L., Cooper, G. A., Paas, F., & Sweller, J. (2009). Instructional animations can be superior to statics when learning human motor skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 339-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.012
- Yang, K.-L., Lin, F.-L., & Tso, T.-Y. (2021). An approach to enactivist perspective on learning: Mathematics-grounding activities. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 31, 657-666. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00616-3
- Yeo, L.-M., & Tzeng, Y.-T. (2020). Cognitive effect of tracing gesture in the learning from mathematics worked examples. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(4), 733-751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-019-09987-y
- Yerushalmy, M., Shternberg, B., & Gilead, S. (1999). Visualization as a vehicle for meaningful problem solving in algebra. In O. Zaslavsky (Ed.), Proceedings of the 23rd Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 1, pp. 197-211). Haifa, Israel: PME.
- Zazkis, R., Dubinsky, E., & Dautermann, J. (1996). Coordinating visual and analytic strategies: A study of students’ understanding of the group D4. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 435-457. https://doi.org/10.2307/749876