This blog was co-written with Jessica Fleis and Mary Verberg.

When we moved to virtual instruction during the pandemic, we felt anxious about so many things, but one thing at the forefront was, "Are kids even able to learn this way?" We were forced to shift many of our standard pedagogical practices and teaching strategies. For many, teaching math online felt like a struggle, especially without the use of manipulatives and hands-on instruction in class. Teachers and schools were forced to make the shift to virtual manipulatives (through a variety of platforms and tools), but at the back of our mind, we were all thinking, "Is this really working?" And the short answer is yes. 

However, in order to fully answer this question, we have to consult some research. First, we have to consult TPACK. TPACK is the interconnectedness between technology (the tool itself), pedagogy (how we teach it), and content (what it is we are teaching). Here's a great introduction to TPACK if it's a new concept for you. Virtual manipulatives fit perfectly into the cross section of technology, pedagogy, and content. We have to teach math at our varying levels; this is the content. We know that manipulatives are helpful for students learning math concepts; this is the pedagogy that has been standard practice for years. The only thing we are shifting here is the technology. The technology used to be a physical manipulative - such as a counting bear - and is not a virtual manipulative - such an interactive image of a counting bear on a Chromebook.  Does switching from physical to virtual affect students ability to understand the content?

It was found that “while both [virtual manipulatives and concrete manipulatives] were significantly more effective at producing independent and accurate performance on the mathematics tasks than baseline conditions, the VM condition fared slightly better in terms of independence and accuracy” (Shurr et al., 2021).  Max was found to be 93% accurate when using virtual manipulatives, whereas he accurately solved 69% of the problems using concrete manipulatives (Shurr et al., 2021). Henry scored 92% accuracy using VM compared to 81% accuracy using CM (Shurr et al.,). Finally, Dane scored 100% accuracy using virtual manipulatives compared to 97% accuracy when using concrete manipulatives (Shurr et al., 2021). This study suggests that virtual manipulatives could be a valuable option for students with Autism Spectrum Disorder when working with addition operations.

Team Teaching

My teammates - Mary and Jess - and I worked together to synthesize this research and teach about the tool Toy Theater to our classmates in the MAET program. We spent a week going through what we learned and organizing it into a lesson plan to teach our peers. Below you will see the slide deck from that presentation.