Working through the framing an issue assignment is quite reflective and is allowing some of my assumptions to be dispelled and some supported. One thing that I find surprising is that there is limited research in term of the efficacy of digital manipulatives in mathematics. That being said, there are some studies comparing physical manipulatives to digital manipulatives and the evidence seems clear that manipulatives do provide for more meaningful learning. Suprisingly, there seems to be little difference between the two in terms of learning outcomes. That being said, the competence, teaching strategies and perspectives of the educator are also being hilighted as one of the most important factors in the learning outcomes. So, in essense, manipulatives work if used effectively.

In analyzing these thoughts, it seems that teacher efficacy and perspectives are one of the most important aspects to student learning. Teacher training, in effect, should be progressive, supportive and challenging. It should encapsulate current research and educational reforms in terms of STEM and in this way provide educators with a good platform in which to begin their careers. In addition, educators require time, training and support in order to implement these new reforms, including the use of digital and physical manipulatives and hands-on activities to assist students with their learning. It is not enough to tell teachers to use these resources, but teachers require an understanding of how they work, why they work as well as the tools to provide students with these experiences.

Another interesting point is the idea that students with ESL and students with learning disabilities benefit from digital manipulatives. It has the ability to level the playing field. Again, this depends on how these are being used. So these two ideas seem to intersect and I look forward to delving further into the research to see what other correlations I find.