Poster #40 - Mathematics Learning From Instructional Gestures: Do Strategy Variability or Working Memory Matter?

• In Event: Poster Session 04

Abstract

Math achievement depends on children's understanding of the equal sign, which up to 80% of U.S. children fail to understand in pre-algebraic problems like 3 + 4 + 5 = __ + 5 (Hornburg et al., 2018 ). Instructional gestures are a promising tool for improving children's math understanding. Gestures with speech instruction provide accessible, concrete imagery (e.g., hand gestures indicating that sides of an equation are the same) which improves children’s equal sign understanding compared to verbal instruction without gesture (Koumoutsakis et al., 2016). However, not all children benefit from instructional gestures. We investigated whether two cognitive factors, strategy variability and working memory capacity (WMC), predict which children benefit most from instructional gestures.

Children who produce multiple problem-solving strategies are more likely to advance in their math understanding than children who use a single strategy (Siegler, 1996; Pinet et al., 2021). Considering multiple problem solutions suggests flexibility and openness to alternative views (Church & Goldin-Meadow, 1986), however whether strategy variability interacts with gestured instruction is an open question. Research with adults suggests individuals with higher WMC learn more from gestured instruction than those with lower WMC (Algodum et al., 2021), however this relationship has received little attention in children. We asked: (1) Do children who use many problem-solving strategies benefit more from instructional gestures than children who use fewer strategies? (2) Do children with greater WMC benefit more from instructional gestures than children with lower WMC?

Children aged 7-11 years (N = 183) completed a pretest-instruction-posttest protocol on Zoom. Children completed 12 equivalence problems (e.g., 3 + 4 + 5 = _ + 5) before and after instruction. Children were randomly assigned to the speech-only and speech+gesture video lessons from Koumoutsakis et al. (2016). To measure strategy variability, we coded the number of unique incorrect solution strategies used at pretest. To measure WMC, children completed a Backward Digit Span task at the beginning of the session.

To examine learning, we used Bayesian GLMMs on the posttest performance of 95 children who scored 0 on the pretest. There were two major results. First, WMC was a positive predictor of learning regardless of instruction condition (Figure 1). Second, there was a strategy variability by instruction condition interaction (Figure 2). Children with less strategy variability learned more than children with more strategy variability. Further, children with low strategy variability benefited more from gesture than children with high strategy variability.

Theoretical models of cognitive change have yet to clarify how input gets incorporated into the system. How much input is required and what format best promotes conceptual change (Sherin, 2021)? These findings further our awareness of how cognitive individual differences may constrain the benefits of instruction containing multiple formats. Input that includes multiple complementary formats (i.e., speech+gesture) may be an important vehicle for cognitive change, but only if learners have capacity to absorb this complex input. This research suggests children with high strategy variability or low WMC may not have bandwidth to process multiple modalities in instruction. More evidence suggesting that one size does not fit all.

Authors

• Samantha Andrea Macksey, Northeastern Illinois University
  Presenting Author

• Michele Villacres, Northeastern Illinois University

• Kayla Nuszen, Northeastern Illinois University

• Jan Rodriguez - Cruz, University of Chicago

• Jackelyn Castaneda, DePaul University

• Ruth Breckinridge Church, Northeastern Illinois University

• Andrew Young, Northeastern Illinois University