Math and Embodied Learning

Winn’s (2003) article was an interesting read. Winn (2003) describes embodiment as, “the physical dimension of cognition” (p.7) and discusses how there is a real connection between cognitive activity and the environment. Winn (2003) also discusses how the three concepts, “embodiment, embeddedness and adaptations form a viable theoretical framework” (p. 6). When reading the article this part stood out for me, “To say cognition is embodied is to say that it involves our entire bodies not just our brains” (p. 8).  This means that our bodies and movement contribute to learning and understanding of concepts.

Thinking about my practice as a learning support specialist teacher in Mathematics I incorporate collaborative activities and use hands-on on manipulatives regularly, as the movements and physical presence of objects help my students understand concepts. Roschelle & Singleton’s (2008) article describes the benefits of graphic calculators. The benefits of using graphic calculators include “chang[ing] how students learn by reducing the cognitive load, increasing opportunities for complex and multi-step problem solving and enabling teachers to emphasize mathematical reasoning, not just calculation” (p. 951). This is an area that I have been working on with my students this past term. Even though we are not at that level of using graphing calculators, we do use regular calculators to help with multi-step word problems and application so students don’t need to focus on computation. Roschelle & Singleton (2008) state that “40% of high school mathematics classrooms use graphing calculators, whereas only 11% of mathematics classroom use computers” (p. 952). This shows that graphing calculators are a powerful handheld tool that support student learning. Further, Roschelle & Singleton (2008) mention that school districts are providing professional development opportunities around the use of graphing calculators to enhance teaching and learning. Another affordance discussed in the article includes allowing students to check their work and to help justify their answers. I encourage this in my classroom as it gives students responsibility and ownership of their learning. Roschelle et al. (2010) discuss using TechPALS, a small handheld device that provides feedback to students working together in small groups when solving fractions. This was compared to students using a desktop application which provided feedback to the student individually as the student works on tasks independently. The study showed that when students worked together and collaborated using TechPALS, this enhanced student learning vs when students worked independently. This emphasizes the importance of repeated practice in activities where students learn by exploring and discussing in a collaborative form.

Questions:

1. Winn (2003) suggests that cognition involves our entire bodies not just our brains. How can the use of technology such as personal devices be used to involve our entire bodies?

2. Roschelle & Singleton (2008) show how powerful graphing calculators are to student learning. If this is the case, why at the elementary level are calculators looked down upon by many educators?

Roschelle, J., & Singleton, C. (2008). Graphing calculators: Enhancing math learning for all students. (pp. 951-959). Boston, MA: Springer US.10.1007/978-0-387-73315-9_60

Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Bhanot, R., Estrella, G., Penuel, B., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2010). Scaffolding group explanation and feedback with handheld technology: Impact on students’ mathematics learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 399-419. 10.1007/s11423-009-9142-9

Winn, W. (2003). Learning in artificial environments: Embodiment, embeddedness, and dynamic adaptation. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning, 1(1), 87-114. Full-text document retrieved on January 17, 2013, from: http://www.hitl.washington.edu/people/tfurness/courses/inde543/READINGS-03/WINN/winnpaper2.pdf