How children use ICT as a vehicle to learn mathematics.
Sharon Allcock
Prince Albert Primary
Summary
This investigation looked at the influence of ICT on the teaching of
mathematics for a group of Year 3 children. It found that ICT, and in particular
the interactive whiteboard influenced the children’s involvement in the
teaching and learning. Although this was the same for individual or group
computer use the nature of the software appeared to play an important role in
involvement. An observation schedule derived from the Effective Early
Learning (EEL) Project involvement criteria was used as the main research
instrument.
ICT Project background
The use of ICT in classrooms across schools is a topic for much discussion.
Whilst much research is being undertaken into the impact of ICT on standards
and attainment motivation there is still conflicting evidence about its impact. I
wanted to see how the children in my school use ICT during maths lessons.
The Context
The research project took place in a large three-form entry Birmingham
primary school. The school has invested heavily in ICT especially over the
past 2 years and has a newly developed computer suite this also incorporate
the library so it can be classed as a media-learning centre. There are 37
computers in the centre; this allows enough for 1 per child. The centre is
timetabled for each class to have at least 1 session each week. This is used
mainly for teaching of ICT skills in a cross curricular way. The majority of
classrooms have 4 networked computers. At the time the research was
carried out there were 9 Interactive whiteboards in classrooms and 1 in the
media-learning centre. The school also have a number of laptop computers
and wireless network terminals at various points around the school this allows
mobile technology to be used almost anywhere in the school building. This
allows children to access their work in all areas of the school.
What I wanted to find out?
At the time of the research I was working with a year 3 class. I wanted to find
out if using technology during their mathematic lessons engaged children in
learning activities more than when more conventional methods were used.
This would help in identifying where ICT can be best implemented during
maths lessons to engage the children.
The Research Methodology
Action research is usually associated with ‘hands-on’, small-scale research. It
is aimed at dealing with real life problems and issues. Its purpose is to
provide evidence to change things. In this case the purpose was to identify
where and what activities children were most engaged in.
As the chosen group were to remain anonymous and the research was linked
to observations of normal teaching and learning activities I decided there was
no need to gain permission from parents. The data was collected by way of
observations during lesson time. To try and stay as objective as possible but
still make informed judgements about the levels children’s involvement within
activities I decided to base my methodology on the Effective Early Learning
Programme (EEL), EEL is an evaluation and improvement programme for
early years settings that was developed by Professor Christine Pascal and
Tony Bertram of University College Worcester. (Pascal, 1993; Pascal and
Bertram, 1994)
The EEL project measures how involved children are in a particular activity for
a period of time. It measures how involved a child is during a period of time,
in this instance 4 minute periods, and the observer makes a judgement as to
what scale the involvement was; ranging from level 1 where no activity to level
5 sustained intense moments.
The EEL project defines involvement as;
Involvement is a quality of human activity;
 Which can be recognised by a child’s concentration and persistence
 Is characterised by motivation, fascination, openness to stimuli and
intensity of experience both at the physical and cognitive level, and a
deep satisfaction with a strong flow of energy.
 Is determined by the explanatory drive and the child’s individual
developmental needs
 As a result of involvement there is evidence to suggest that
development occurs (Laevers, 1993)
The EEL project have identified signals that observers can use to inform their
judgements about involvement, they are called Involvement Signals.




Concentration – this is characterised by the attention the child
directs to an activity.
Energy – A child will invest a great deal of energy into and activity,
they are eager and stimulated.
Complexity and Creativity – they will try their hardest to solve a
problem. They are being their most creative.
Facial Expression and Posture – nonverbal signs are very
important in judging how involved a child is.





Persistence - this is the duration that a child will persist at an activity.
This is very significant as children in the study persisted and were
less easily distracted from an activity.
Precision – Involved children show specials care for their work and
are attentive to detail.
Reaction time – children are alert and ready to react quickly to
stimuli.
Language – this is characterised by the comments the children say
during or after the activity e.g. they say they enjoyed it
Satisfaction – Children will display a feeling of satisfaction with their
achievements.
These signals are used to help the observer make judgements as to the level
of involvement the child shows during an activity.
One of the most predominant characteristics of involvement is motivation. An
involved child is totally absorbed in the activity and cannot be easily
distracted. It is these intense moments that we must provide for our children
if they are to gain long term learning experiences. I wanted to discover if
more of these episodes were when children were using ICT.
Explanation of the involvement scale used (taken from EEL )
Level 1 – No activity
Activity at this level can be simple, stereotypic, repetitive and passive. The
child is absent and displays no energy. There is an absence of cognitive
demand. The child characteristically may stare into space
Level 2 – A frequently Interrupted Activity
The child is engaged in an activity but half of the observer period includes
moments of non-activity, in which the child is not concentrating and is staring
into space. There may be frequent interruptions in the child’s concentration,
but his/her involvement is not enough to return to the activity.
Level 3 – Mainly Continuous Activity
The child is busy at an activity but it is at a routine level and the real signals
for involvement are missing. There is some progress but energy is lacking
and concentration is done at a routine level. The child can be easily
distracted.
Level 4 – Continuous Activity with Intense Moments
The child’s activity has intense moments during which activities at level 3 can
come to have special meaning. Level 4 is reserved for the kind of activity
seen in those intense moments, and can be deduced from the ‘involvement
signals’. This level is resumed after interruptions. Stimuli, from the
surrounding environment, however attractive cannot seduce the child away
from the activity.
Level 5 – Sustained Intense Activity
The child shows continuous and intense activity the greatest involvement. In
the observed period not all the signals for involvement need to be there, but
essential ones must be present: concentration, creativity, energy and
persistence. This intensity must be present for almost all the observation
period.
I also looked at the different groups the children were working in. These fell
into 4 areas.
Whole class situation- such as mental maths, introduction and plenary
sessions
Individual work – on a computer or working on practical or paper based
activities
Paired work – either on a computer or working on practical or paper based
activities
Small group work – again either on a computer or working on practical or
paper based activities
This allowed me to determine if grouping affected the level of involvement.
After much deliberation I decided to carry out “qualitative” research.
The criteria linked to the EEL project guided the construction of an
observation schedule that was used to observe the children.
I worked with a year 3 class and observed daily maths lessons. I identified
the third ability group as my target group.
What I found out
When children were working in whole class situations the ICT involved was
always using an interactive whiteboard. The children were much more
focused on the teaching point when an interactive whiteboard was being used
than on occasions when it was not being used. The same was true when
children were working on their own on a computer, there were more periods of
intense involvement than when using more traditional pen and paper
activities. However there was one significant observation; that the software
must be challenging, not too difficult or too easy. When the software was easy
the children would click randomly to finish the activity. Also where the
software was multiple-choice children clicked through each answer until the
found the correct one without working out a single answer! The involvement
level when working in pairs and small groups was not significantly affected by
ICT.
ICT to support the teacher – helping in the preparation of teaching materials,
providing a flexible and time saving resource that can be used in different
ways. This was especially evident in a large 3-form entry school. It allows the
teacher to save time on preparation of resources and to share expertise. This
expertise can either be in mathematics or ICT or both, in any event it goes to
support teachers.
Conclusion
A significant finding of the Becta ImpaCT2 (BECTA, 2002) research was that
the integration of ICT into subject teaching depends upon teacher confidence
and skill and varies widely within a school.
The school has set about to develop an ethos for learning with ICT. It is
evident from this research that ICT can motivate, stimulate and extend a
child’s learning. The use of interactive whiteboards goes a long way to build
computer supported learning environments. The teachers who have
interactive whiteboards are gaining in confidence and skills when using ICT to
support learning, therefore it is like the chicken and the egg analogy; if we
install whiteboards and provide sufficient training and technical support for the
teachers they will develop a learning environment that has integrated
computer use.
References
BECTA (2003): Key research evidence about the motivational effects of ICT
in teaching and learning
Laevers, F (1994) The Innovative Project Experimental Education and the
Definition of Quality in Education in: Laevers, F (Ed), Defining and Assessing
Quality in Early Childhood Education, Studia Paedagogica, No. 16 (Leuven,
Belgium, Leuven University Press)