The View From Here:
Lynne Fukuda
(Stay tuned to December 2008 issue)

Strengthening Intermediate-Level Mathematics Teaching Using Manipulatives:
A Theory-Backed Discourse

Jennifer Lira, M.Ed.
Vice Principal
Greater Essex County District School Board
Ontario, Canada
E-mail: jennifer.lira@gecdsb.on.ca

Anthony N. Ezeife, PhD
Professor of Math/Science Education
Faculty of Education
University of Windsor
E-mail: aezeife@uwindsor.ca

Stressing the key role that mathematics plays in human affairs and activities, the Report of the Expert Panel on Student Success in Ontario’s Leading Math Success: Mathematical Literary Grades 7 – 12 states that “mathematics is a fundamental human endeavour that empowers individuals to describe, analyse, and understand the world we live in” (2004, p. 9). In the same vein, the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) draws attention to the increasing importance of math in today’s number-governed, technology-oriented society when it observes that, “In this changing world, those who understand and can do mathematics have significant opportunities and options for shaping the future” (NCTM, 2000, p. 5).  To be able to fit into this changing world where every individual comes face to face with numbers and calculations on a daily basis, students must acquire mathematical literacy and related skills right from the early stages of their academic career. One of the recommendations of the Expert Panel on Student Success in Ontario (2004) for creating mathematically literate students is to actively engage students in math teaching and learning through the use of manipulatives, both visual and tactile. It is the view of the Panel that manipulatives can be used to effectively bridge the gap between the abstract ideas for which math is known and dreaded by many, and familiar concrete experience that form part and parcel of students’ day-to-day life in the environment.

full text >>>

Pre-service ESL Teachers’ Constructed Knowledge about Using
Content-Based ESL Instruction and Curriculum

Clara Lee Brown, Ed.D.
Associate Professor
ESL Education
Department of Theory and Practice in Teacher Education
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
E-mail:  cbrown26@utk.edu

Trena Paulus, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Collaborative Learning and Applied Educational Psychology
Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville
E-mail:  tpaulus@utk.edu

Background of the Study   

The idea for this study emerged from the listed first author’s (Clara Lee Brown) own needs as a second-year faculty teaching a new course for the first time in a Masters of Art in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (MATESOL) program. Brown wanted to investigate to what degree her students internalized course content as pedagogical knowledge. In her first year of teaching, Brown created an English as a Second Language methods course, entitled Content-Based ESL Methods, based on her own beliefs about “how ESL students should best be taught.” Her beliefs about ESL methods, in particular, have been formed based on her own experience as a second language learner, as an ESL public school teacher, and as a teacher educator and ESL classroom observer. Her beliefs have also been informed by research findings and evidence regarding effective ESL methods.

full text >>>

Evaluating Research Methods:
Assumptions, Strengths, and Weaknesses of Three Educational Research Paradigms

Angela M. Velez, PhD
Faculty Development Coordinator
English Instructor
Davenport University
E-mail:  angela.velez@davenport.edu

Introduction

In educational research, two distinct research paradigms are common—qualitative and quantitative.  Scholars who utilize these paradigms have generally deemed themselves either qualitative or quantitative researchers, called “purists” (Onwuegbuzie & Leech, 2005). Rarely, though, does one see a qualitative researcher cross the border to quantitative territory, and vice versa, because the epistemological and axiological assumptions are distinct in these research paradigms. However, there has been a recent surge in the use of mixed methodology research in education because the data that emerge from these studies involve crossing borders and mixing methods to understand problematic situations; data are stronger, more valid, more generalizable, and tend to be much more extensive than data that emerge from single-method studies. This article seeks to explore the assumptions, strengths, and weaknesses of all three research paradigms—qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods—to inform doctoral students or doctoral candidates about methodological issues that need consideration when they consider a research study.

full text >>>