Using a Research-Practice Partnership to Test Gesture-Based Instruction in a Classroom Environment

• In Event: A Continuum of Constructivism: From Childhood to Candidacy

Abstract

Objectives
Across many cultures, people use gestures to accompany speech. Gestures not only assist communication, but they can also help us learn (Goldin-Meadow & Wagner, 2005). Gestures can help children retain what they learn and apply their knowledge to more advanced problems, specifically in mathematics (Wakefield et al., 2018). The benefits of gesture-based instruction have been well documented within the laboratory, but few studies have tested their impact in an authentic learning environment. The purpose of this study is to (1) determine if we see the same benefits of gesture-based instruction in the classroom as we do in the laboratory and (2) establish and maintain a research-practice partnership with the local public school district.

Perspective
Using a constructivist approach, we will be testing the effects of gesture-based instruction in math within 3rd to 5th grade public school classrooms. We will provide the opportunity for students to learn with one another in a collaborative environment, where they have autonomy over their own learning experience.

Method & Data Sources
We will present a 15-minute lesson on how to solve math equivalence problems (e.g., 5 + 4 + 3 = __ + 3). Some classrooms will be taught using gesture-based instruction where we will point to the two numbers that must be combined to solve the problem correctly. Other classrooms will be taught using action-based instruction involving the physical movement of manipulatives. Laboratory based studies have shown that action-based instruction does not result in the same enhanced generalization abilities as gesture-based instruction does (Novack et al., 2014). A pre- and post-test with math equivalence problems of varying difficulty will be administered to bookend the lesson. We will also be recording neurological data using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) from a few students throughout the duration of the study. We are interested in testing if brain activation patterns in the classroom are consistent with what has been shown in the lab during gesture- and action-based instruction. After we conduct the study in each classroom, we will engage the teacher and students in activities and lessons on the brain, fNIRS, neuromyths, learning myths, and the basics of research. After data collection, we plan to follow-up with school administrators, teachers, and students to discuss our results.

Predicted Results
We hypothesize that students who receive gesture-based instruction will perform significantly better on the post-test than those who receive action-based instruction. We also predict that the benefits of gesture-based instruction may be leveraged when students are learning how to solve math equivalence problems together, in a classroom environment.

Scholarly Significance
If we show that the benefits of gesture-based instruction and the limitations of action-based instruction extend beyond the laboratory, then we can work with educators to include more structured embodiment within the curricula in a way that could enhance or replace manipulatives, which can in some cases be prohibitively expensive or time-consuming. This partnership will also help establish a protocol for connecting researchers and practitioners and promote study designs that result in useful, accessible outcomes for educators.

Authors

• Amanda Seccia, Nazareth University

• Abby R. Clements, University of Chicago

• Seth Severns, University of Chicago