Socialization in Online Mathematics Learning Environments
Hamide Dogan-Dunlap
University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP)
hdogan@utep.edu
Abstract: Mathematics teaching and learning have increasingly been associated with the
social constructive activities. A group of pre-service and in-service mathematics students
used an instructional technology (WebCT) to interact, communicate and discuss course
relevant topics. They were given a set of likert scale pre- and post- online surveys to
document their opinion on the use of technology in providing online social learning. The
surveys also gathered information on students’ experiences with computers, and in
general their perception of technology as learning tools in mathematics classroom. The
paper reports the findings of both qualitative and quantitative analysis of the surveys.
Mathematics teaching and learning have increasingly been associated with the social
constructive activities where socialization plays a major role in meaning making (Bishop,
1985; Schoenfeld, 1992). Interaction and discussion are undoubtedly among the main
vehicles for socialization in the classroom. One can make new connections toward a
further and better understanding of concepts by exposing the relations between concepts
through discussion among and communication between peers.
Over the years, physical classrooms are considered the primary places in which
social and communicative activities can be practiced. Naturally, this required instructors
to shift their perspective of mathematics classroom teaching as a process of transferring
information to a process of controlling the organization and dynamics of the classroom
for the purposes of sharing and developing mathematical meaning (Bishop, 1985).
Now advanced computer technologies are taking the role of classrooms at an
increasing pace. There is already a growing body of literature that supports and believes
in the use of the emerging technologies for the purpose of teaching and learning (Beevers
and Paterson, 2003; Dogan-Dunlap, 2003; 2004; Wolf, 1988). Reforms such as Principles
and Standards for School Mathematics (NCTM, 2000) portray a unified vision of
technology use in mathematics education. Its technology Principle points out the
importance of technology in meeting the needs of students. It adds that an effective
implementation of technology can help students of varying abilities learn mathematics on
a deeper level. Piaget and others believe in the potential of the instructional technologies
“in cognition in the sense that the technology can provide interaction, the intense pursuit
of knowledge through action on experiments with material objects as well as thoughts
about those objects” (Forman and Pufall, 1988; Wolf, 1988). Wolf adds, “Computers are
only as promising as our ability to realize engaging and demanding interactions through
them” (p. 213). Socialized constructivist learning environments can be established
through communication tools provided by course management/delivery systems such as
WebCT and Blackboard (Luca and McLoughlin, 2004).
WebCT is provided by our University to support undergraduate teaching and
learning. It consists of various instructional means such as discussion board, e-mail,
whiteboard and assessment tools. Instructors have freedom to reorganize the tools
according to theirs and students’ needs. They can also control student access to various
tools and sites. The tools are used to support teaching and learning in various
mathematics and mathematics education courses. This paper reports on the use of
discussion boards in two courses for prospective and in-service teachers in order to
provide increased interaction, communication, and discussion. The mathematics course
for pre-service teachers is offered twice a week in a classroom setting with technology
support at various levels. The course for in-service teachers is offered once a week with
alternating meetings; one week in a physical classroom, and the following week at the
online site. For the classes, there are both in-class and after class online activities
assigned. Both groups used discussion board and e-mail to post assignments,
communicate with their peers and instructors and discuss course relevant issues. Other
instructional means such as World Wide Web, virtual manipulatives, Microsoft Excel and
PowerPoint are used for research, presentations, writing assignments, and for
investigation, conjecture and generalization of mathematics concepts.
Pre-service and in-service teachers enrolled in the two mathematics courses in
Spring, Summer and Fall 2005 semesters were given a set of likert scale pre- and postonline surveys to document their opinion on the use of technology in providing online
socialization. The surveys also gathered information on their experience with computers,
their perception of technology as learning tools in mathematics classroom, and the
motivational aspects of learning mathematics with technology. The paper reports the
finding of both qualitative and quantitative analysis of these surveys.
In summary findings of the analysis indicate differences in prospective and inservice teachers’ opinion in the use of technology to provide social learning
environments. There were notably more pre-service teachers agreeing with the statements
of positive effect of the use of technology than the number of in-service teachers agreeing
with the same statements. Many of the in-service teachers indicated a preference of
physical classroom discussions then online discussions. This may be attributed to the
differences in the nature of the use of technology in both classes, or to the novelty effect
(the maturity level of the students). The paper further discusses the differences in the way
in which the online communication tools were used.
References
Beevers C. E. and Paterson, J. S., (2003). Automatic assessment of problem-solving skills
in Mathematics. Active Learning in Higher Education. Vol. 4. No. 2. pp127-144.
Bishop, A. J., (1985). The social construction of meaning-a significant development for
mathematics education. For the Learning of Mathematics, 5, 1, February, pp 26-27.
Dogan-Dunlap, H., (2004). Computers and Linear Algebra. WSEAS Transactions on
Mathematics, Vol. 3, Issue 3. pp. 537-542.
Dogan-Dunlap, H., (2003). Technology-Supported Inquiry Based Learning in Collegiate
Mathematics. The Electronic Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on
Technology
in
Collegiate
Mathematics
(ICTCM).
http://archives.math.utk.edu/ICTCM/EP16/C47/pdf/paper.pdf.
Forman G. and Pufall P. B., (1988). Constructivism in the computer age: A reconstructive
Epilogue. Constructivism in the Computer Age. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hilsdale.
pp. 235-251.
Luca, J. and McLoughlin, C., (2004). Using online forums to support a community of
learning. The proceedings of the EDMEDIA 2004 conference.
Schoenfeld, A., (1992). Learning to think mathematically: problem solving,
metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. Grouws, D. (Ed.) The Handbook for
Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning. New York: MacMillan. pp. 334-370.
Wolf, D. P. (1988)., The quality of interaction: domain knowledge, social interchange,
and computer learning. Forman, G. and Pufall, P.B. (Ed.) Constructivism in the Computer
Age. Lawrence Erlbaum associates, New Jersey. pp 203.