Instructional models in early mathematics: Can the “I do, We do, You do” model support the development of mathematical thinking?

• In Event: Partnering with the Global South: Why Early Numeracy Skills Deserve an Equal Role in Early Grade Literacy Interventions - Part I

Proposal

The purpose of this presentation is to explore the applicability of the direct instruction (DI) model (also known as the “I do, We do, You do” model) for early grades mathematics instruction in low-income contexts through data gathered on two projects, the Tayari Early Childhood Project in Kenya and the Liberia Teacher Training Project (LTTP2).
The DI model has been widely adopted in early grade reading interventions in low-income contexts (Kim, Boyle, Zuilkowski & Nakamura, 2016). However, the implications of this model for early grade mathematics instruction have not been fully explored. The literature points to key practices in early mathematics instruction, including the use of developmental trajectories, connections between formal and informal mathematics, explanation and justification, and use of multiple representations (Baroody & Wilkins, 1999; Carpenter, Fennema & Franke, 1996; Clements & Sarama, 2014; Ginsburg, Klein, & Starkey, 1998; Sitabkhan & Platas, 2015 Van de Walle et al. 2014.) However, the extent that these practices, and corresponding content, are aligned with the DI model has not been fully explored.
Two qualitative studies were conducted in Kenya and Liberia. The LTTP2 project used the “I do, we do you do” model as the core methodology for instruction in early math. The Tayari project used a workshop model for early math instruction, consisting of whole class mini-lessons, and then small group work. For both studies, the data sources were: review of the materials produced, classroom observations (n=7 in Kenya, n=12 in Liberia), and teacher interviews.
The results of the two studies revealed different ways of organizing instruction according to the two models. In Liberia, the lessons followed the I do, We do, You do Model, with a concept being modeled by the teacher, then done with the students, and then done independently with students. Observations revealed that this model did not foster the types of best practices mentioned above, and majority of the time in the classroom involved the teacher talking to the students, with very little time for independent work and practice.
In Kenya, the lessons followed a workshop model, consisting of whole class time where the activity is guided, and then small group work, where the activity is not guided by the teacher and students work independently. Observations revealed that in 6 out of the 7 classrooms, teachers had students working in small groups, with 43% of teachers spending more than 50% of the lesson time on small group work. The observations were more aligned with the best practices mentioned above, though they did not address all of them.
The results from the two studies point to the effectiveness of the gradual release of responsibility model for early mathematics instruction. The model as it is, with an explicit I do, we do, and you do” section for each concept, does not align with best practices in early mathematics instruction. However, the workshop model, which essentially is a “we do, you do” model, may foster more productive instruction that encourages critical thinking and problem-solving behavior.
There is an increasing interest in funding early grade mathematics interventions, alongside early reading interventions. Given the differences in content and pedagogy, it is important to closely examine the similarities and differences between the two areas to inform future implementations.

Author

• Yasmin Sitabkhan, RTI International