The Effects of Developing Mental Math Skills of Pre-service Teachers

Sally Kleinknecht

Education 671: Integrated Seminar

University of Southern Indiana

December 3, 2002

 


 

 

The Effects of Developing Mental Math Skills of Pre-service Teachers

 

Review of Literature

 

            The goals of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000) include both a student’s proficiency in estimation skills and mental math, and the student’s expertise of the use of the available technology (e.g. the calculator). Teachers must not only be practiced in these areas, but must be able to train their students in the use of these skills. The training of students in estimation skills, mental math, and the use of the calculator as a tool should begin in elementary school, but Ralston (1999) believes that most elementary teachers are afraid of math. Therefore, pre-service teachers (and, in particular, pre-service elementary teachers) need a mathematical education that will not only increase their mathematical knowledge, but also their confidence in their ability and their attitudes toward math (Quinn, 1998; Glasgow, 1998). This review of literature will address the areas pertinent to this study: mathematics and the pre-service teacher, the standards of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, mental math and estimation skills, and the use of the calculator.

Pre-service teachers

            The mathematical education methods courses of pre-service teachers will not only increase their knowledge of mathematical content, but will also improve their attitude toward math (Quinn, 1998). Improving these two areas will greatly enhance their students’ understanding and learning of mathematics.

            Mathematical education of pre-service teachers.  According to Glasgow (1998), two problem areas of pre-service teacher education need to be addressed. The first is the pre-service teachers’ lack of confidence in their own estimation skills. He says they need a better foundation of number sense, not just a teaching of different estimation strategies. The second, and greater, problem is the disinclination to question and reflect on information given them through technology (e.g. a calculator) or their own mathematical thinking. He says that they should be given many opportunities in the classroom to ask questions and think about the processes of math instead of just finding the right answer.

            Quinn (1998) found that even though an elementary mathematical methods course greatly improved the pre-service teacher’s knowledge of mathematical content, their scores were still only 70.4% on a sixth-grade-level test. The problems areas for pre-service elementary teachers were fractions, long division, geometry, statistics, and probability. He felt that spending more time in mathematical methods courses, in these different content areas, would be beneficial for the pre-service teachers, and thus improve mathematical education (Quinn, 1998).

            The mathematical attitudes of pre-service teachers. The mathematical attitudes of pre-service teachers are very important because if they do not have a good understanding of mathematics, they will be unable to create an atmosphere for their students to appreciate mathematics (Glasgow, 1998).  Hart (2002) agrees that there is much evidence that teachers’ beliefs about mathematics will affect their teaching of the subject. Teachers’ mathematical attitudes have been found to be closely related to the performance of the student in the classroom and on standardized tests (Putney & Cass, 1998).

Pre-service elementary teachers’ attitudes toward math, according to Kelly & Tomhave (1985, as cited in Quinn, 1998) and Rech, Hartzell, & Stephens (1993, as cited in Quinn, 1998), are less favorable than that of the general university population. Ralston (1999) believes that most elementary teachers are afraid of math and that also they are less interested in math than the other subjects they are required to teach.

Quinn (1998) found that an elementary mathematics methods course improved the pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward math. To improve math education, not only do pre-service teachers need to understand mathematical content, but they also need to have a positive attitude toward mathematics.  Reflection of their own thought processes along with observing the thought processes of others is a key in changing the pre-service teachers’ attitude toward mathematics (Hart, 2002).

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics

            The Principles and Standards for School Mathematics put a high priority on both using technology to its full advantage and on learning estimation and mental math skills (National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000).

            Mental math and estimation skills.  From early elementary school through high school, computing fluently and making reasonable estimates are key standards in mathematics. Given any problem, students need to be able to select appropriate methods of solving: mental calculation, estimation, calculator (computer), or pencil and paper. They also need to develop and use strategies for estimation, so that they will be able to judge the reasonableness of their numerical computations and results (NCTM, 2000).

            Use of calculators.  The NCTM (2000) states that technology is an indispensable tool for teaching, and ultimately learning and doing mathematics. Students’ understanding of abstract mathematical concepts can be greatly enhanced by using the calculator. The effective use of calculators depends greatly on the teacher. Technology should be used as a tool, not as a replacement for teaching. Graphing, visualizing concepts, and computing are enhanced when using the calculator. They can also be used to help teachers bring together for the students the skills of mathematics with the overall understanding of mathematics (NTCM, 2000).

Mental math and estimation skills

            Pomerantz (1997) says that mental math, along with pencil and paper and estimation, is essential in the development of mathematical learning skills. It is not only necessary if one does not have a calculator, but, more importantly, it is necessary to check the reasonableness of the calculator answer. In fact, mental math and estimation is even more crucial when using a calculator (Ralston, 1999).

            Sowder and Kelin (1993, as cited by Reys & Reys, 1998) show that understanding of mathematical concepts increase as students use estimation and mental math – especially when teachers encourage student discovery. An added benefit for the student using estimation and mental math is increased attention span.

            The use of mental math and estimation skills. Mental math should be the first choice in problem solving if possible. If not, then estimation of the answer is the second choice. If an exact answer is needed, than a calculator or a standard written computational algorithm (pencil and paper method) would be used, but the estimation of the answer is still crucial for accuracy (Reys & Reys, 1998). If mental math is not encouraged and a student only resorts to a standard written computational algorithm, then the student will see mathematics as only algorithms.

            The timetable in teaching mental math and estimation skills. Elementary students should be encouraged to invent their own computational strategies, which involves a great deal of mental math. Estimation should only be used in gaining a sense of numbers for the elementary students such as guessing how many marbles may be in a jar. It is recommended that computational estimation be introduced later in the intermediate grades after the students have a good grasp on large numbers (Reys & Reys, 1998).

As students move into the intermediate grades, they should continue sorting out different strategies as new problems arise, increasing their mental math skills and thus their understanding of mathematical concepts. By the middle grades, the students should have a good grasp of whole numbers and should be extending their conceptual knowledge to include fractions by using mental math of the student’s invention. Estimation should be a major focus at this time. (Reys & Reys, 1998).

Rubenstein (2001) says that mental math and estimation should be taught not only in elementary and middle school, but also in the high school and college math courses. Adults use mental math and estimation in their daily lives at home and at work such as interest on loans or investments, shopping, taxes, tips for waiters, traveling, etc. Sharing mental math strategies gives many opportunities to study mathematical properties and to understand them, for example, the inverse operations and the distributive property. Mental math also combats calculator-dependency as students learn calculator-free strategies. Mental math skills give them flexibility as they see the many options before them in problem solving. It gives the students the feeling of empowerment when they are confident in their estimation and mental math skills (Rubenstein, 2001). He believes that every mathematical course has built-in mental math strands that can be used and taught.

Mental math. Ralston (1999) argues that mental math in many instances is less time-consuming than using a calculator and can be very efficient, for both computing an answer and checking an answer (Reys & Reys, 1998). Mental math encourages a student to design his own personal algorithms and thus it promotes a deeper understanding of the concepts (Ralston, 1999). The student who uses mental math well not only improves his number sense, but also he knows how to organize his thought processes which is a useful life skill.

            Estimation skills. Estimation skills play a key role in mathematical reflection. Mathematics teachers value reflection of the computed answer, whether the computation was done via calculator or pencil and paper. By estimating an answer, the student can compare his exact results with his estimated results to see if his answer is in a reasonable range (Glasgow, 1998).

            Most students only use a few strategies that were taught to them in the classroom to estimate answers, such as rounding numbers off. The best estimators are those that form their own strategies from their understanding of the concept. A teaching method that presents a wide variety of estimation strategies, most of them student-driven based on the understanding of number sense and problem solving strategies, will be much more effective (McIntosh, Reys & Reys, 1992; Sowder, 1992 as cited in Glasgow, 1998).

            Many students are not confident in their own estimation skills, especially when it conflicts with a calculator-produced result. The students place more trust in the calculator than in their own estimation skills (Glasgow, 1998). It is imperative that teachers communicate to their students the value of estimation and reflection when using the calculator.

 Calculators

            There is still much disagreement about the usage of calculators in the classroom. Many purport that calculators have great advantages for students, allowing them to visualize the mathematical concepts without sacrificing the time and energy for tedious computations (Glasgow, 1998; Pomerantz, 1997). Others argue that using calculators will weaken students’ ability to perform math or understand its processes (Hunsaker, 1997). To eliminate rote memorization and learning algorithms will only increase mathematical illiteracy. Bracey (1998) argues that to say students need to know how to calculate by rote instead of using a calculator is the same reasoning that Socrates used for oral recitation vs. writing. Socrates argued that learning to write would destroy people’s memory. It appears, Bracey (1998) says, that in this country we seem to be of two opinions about the use of the calculator.

            The advantages of the use of the calculator. “Calculators are valuable educational tools that allow the students to reach a higher level of mathematical power and understanding” (Pomerantz, 1997, p. 1). When students use calculators, they are able to focus on understanding the concept, setting up the problem and then interpreting the results instead of worrying about tedious calculations (Dick, 1992; Hopkins, 1992 as cited in Beckmann, Senk & Thompson, 1999). Meel (1997, as cited in Bracey, 1998) and Glasgow (1998) agree that by freeing up students from having to expend a lot of time and energy in doing calculations, the use of calculators actually gives the students more time in solving and conceptualizing problems. In addition, Pomerantz (1997) states that the use of calculators allows students more time in developing number sense and mathematical reasoning. Calculators are more efficient, accurate, and faster for laborious computations (Glasgow, 1998; Pomerantz, 1997). Therefore, teachers are able to give students more “real life” problems, even at a younger age that would be otherwise too difficult to grasp without the calculator.

Calculators should not replace mental skills or pencil and paper methods – they should complement them by giving students the ability to solve problems in multiple ways (Pomerantz, 1997). They are also a mathematical equalizer. For students who have always been frustrated with long computations or have given up on math, calculators allow them the ability to experience mathematics and cultivate an understanding of mathematics without being bogged down or hating it.

            Bracey (1998) believes that one actually has to know more to use a calculator, since the student has to determine whether the answer is reasonable or not. Students have better attitudes and are more confident when they are able to use calculators on assessments (Meel, 1997 as cited by Bracey, 1998). Students who use a calculator on the SAT score slightly higher than those that do not because of less computational error (Lee, 1999).

            The disadvantages of the use of the calculator.  Glasgow (1998) states that his research found that students showed a disinclination to question the results of the calculator, that is, the student gives the calculator too much authority instead of using it as a tool. The attitude of the calculator-driven student is that if the calculator says it, then it must be right. Hunsaker (1997) affirms these findings. He says that a calculator encourages a student to try every combination of mathematical operations to find an answer, instead of thinking through and deciding which operation would be the best. Calculators prohibit the student from seeing the principle behind the mathematical process, such as long division. Therefore, the student misses the “inherent structure and beauty in math” (Hunsaker, 1997, p. 20). A student who has grown up using a calculator will not only struggle with the why of math, but also the how of math. They have no number sense and very little estimation skills, and in many cases, cannot generalize mathematical principles. Pomerantz (1997) calls such arguments myths, and argues that calculators used as a tool are of great value. Hunsaker (1997) disagrees and believes strongly that the prolonged use of the calculator will stagnate the mind of the child. She thinks there are many uses of the calculator, but not as an educational tool, unlike Glasgow (1998).

            Teachers must change how they teach and assess their students who are using a calculator. Students can now program their calculators to do much of the mathematical processes for them. Thus, many teachers clear all programs in the memory of the students’ calculator prior to exams. In addition, when the students are bored, they can play games on their calculators during lectures (Lee, 1999). This can be a disruption in the classroom.

Discussion of the Review of Literature

            As a teacher, I have the seen both the use and misuse of the calculator in mathematics classes. As the literature has borne out, the calculator is a great tool in the hand of a wise student. This places the burden on the teacher to train their students to use the calculator as a tool and not as a crutch. I think the reason why our students rely on their calculator as the ultimate authority is that their estimation skills and mental math strategies are poor to none. These important skills are taught beginning in elementary school. However, many elementary teachers are not confident in their own math abilities and therefore teaching math can become just a job and not a passion. As this cycle progresses, we see students entering high school and college who rely totally on their calculator for their answers because they do not trust their own judgment. Research has shown that mathematical methods courses have improved pre-service teachers knowledge of math and attitudes about math. If pre-service elementary teachers were confident in their own mental math and estimation skills and knew how to use the calculator as an educational tool to visualize math, elementary students may turn into stronger high school math students. Mental math and estimation skills should be taught (or discovered) not only in elementary school, but also in middle school, high school, and college. Therefore, we should not put the burden on the elementary teacher alone, but we (i.e. high school and college teachers) should train our own students to be proficient in these skills. Researchers differ on the solution: some say to throw out the calculators, others to abandon pencil and paper. I think we should train our students in the use of all tools available: pencil and paper, estimation skills, mental math strategies, and the calculator. The student has thus reached proficiency and maturity when, first of all, he reflects on the problem itself to determine which strategies will be the most effective and secondly, he judges the reasonableness of the computed answer.

Questions to be explored.

            In addition to current research, there needs to be other questions addressed. Concerning the calculator, why, if the majority of the studies finds that calculators do not hinder the learning of students, do those findings not play out in the classroom? If one would interview math teachers, most would agree that students are far too calculator-dependent. Why does the research not confirm that? Calculator-dependency is related to the lack of estimation skills and mental math capabilities. Where does this breakdown occur for students? Is it in the elementary grades? Is it because many elementary teachers are not confident in their own math skills? Would increasing the mathematical confidence of elementary school teachers affect the student’s use of the calculator and their estimation and mental math skills? Is it too late to change pre-service teachers’ attitudes and aptitudes toward math in a mathematical methods class? If change is attainable, what is the best way to affect a permanent change?


References

 

            Beckmann, C., Senk, S., & Thompson, D. (1999). Assessing students’ understanding of functions in a graphing calculator environment. School Science & Mathematics, 99(8), 451-456.         

            Bracey, G. (1998). Calculations about calculators. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(6), 473.

            Dick, T. (1992). Super calculators: Implications for calculus curriculum, instruction, and assessment. In J.T. Fey (ed.), Calculators in mathematics education, 1992 yearbook (pp. 145-157). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

            Glasgow, B. (1998). The authority of the calculator in the minds of college students. School Science and Mathematics, 98(7), 383-387.

            Hart, L. (2002). Preservice teachers’ beliefs and practice after participating in an integrated content/methods course. School Science & Mathematics, 102(1), 4-24.

            Hopkins, M. (1992). Mathematics testing with calculators: Ransoming the hostages. In J.T. Fey (ed.), Calculators in mathematics education, 1992 yearbook (pp. 158-166). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

            Hunsaker, D. (1997). Ditch the calculators. Newsweek, 130(18), 20.

            Kelly, W., & Tomhave, W. (1985). A study of math anxiety/math avoidance in preservice elementary teachers. Arithmetic Teacher, 32(5), 51-53.

            Lee, J. (1999). Calculators throw teachers a curve. New York Times Upfront, 132(5), 34-35.

            McIntosh, A., Reys, B., & Reys, R. (1992). A proposed framework for examining basic number sense. For the learning of mathematics, 12(3), 2-8, 44.

            Meel, D. (1997). Calculator-available assessments: The why, what and how. Educational assessment 4(3), 149-174.

            National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000). Principles for school mathematics: The technology principle. Retrieved October 3, 2002 from: http://www.standards.nctm.org/document/chapter2/techn.htm

            Pomerantz, H. (1997). The role of calculators in math education. Retrieved October 2, 2002 from: http://education.ti.com/us/t3/resources/therole.html

            Putney, L., & Cass, M. (1998). Preservice teacher attitudes toward mathematics: Improvement through a manipulative approach. College Student Journal, 32(4), 626-632.

            Quinn, R. (1998). Effects of mathematics methods courses on the mathematical attitudes and content knowledge of preservice teachers. Journal of Educational Research, 91(2), 108-113.

            Ralston, A. (1999). Let’s abolish pencil-and-paper arithmetic. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 18(2), 173-193.

            Rech, J., Hartzell, J., & Stephens, L. (1993). Comparisons of mathematical competencies and attitudes of elementary education majors with established norms of a general college population. School Science and Mathematics, 93(3), 141-145.

            Reys, B., & Reys, R. (1998). Computation in the elementary curriculum: shifting the emphasis. Teaching Children Mathematics, 5(4), 236.

            Rubenstein, R. (2001). Mental mathematics beyond the middle school. Mathematics Teacher, 94(6), 442.

            Sowder, J. (1992). Estimation and number sense. In D. Grouws (ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371-389). New York: Macmillan.

            Sowder, J., & Kelin, J. (1993). Number sense and related topics. In D. Owens (ed.), Research ideas for the classroom: Middle grades mathematics (pp. 41-57). New York: Macmillan.