Abstract
Student participation is an issue of equity. Without participation there can be no learning. This study focuses on the participation (and therefore learning) of struggling students (those with individual education plans [IEPs]) during the implementation of a relational thinking routine in a third-grade inclusion classroom. Students with IEPs often initially used direct modeling with linking cubes as a resource for presenting their thinking. In this way, they were able to demonstrate their ability to think relationally. As the year progressed, these students, who had earlier been reluctant to share and had done so only by using several of the resources that the participation structure of the routine provided, often showed a growth in their abilities to explain their thinking verbally.
Résumé
La participation des étudiants est une question d’équité. Sans participation aucun apprentissage n’est possible. Cette étude est centrée sur la participation (et donc l’apprentissage) d’étudiants qui éprouvent des difficultés d'apprentissage (ceux qui font l’objet de programmes de formation individuelle), lors de la mise en place d'une séquence structurée pour favoriser l’expression de la pensée relationnelle dans une classe d’intégration de troisième année. Au début, les élèves suivant un programme de formation individuelle utilisaient plus souvent les cubes ou d’autres modèles directs comme ressources pour représenter leur pensée. Ainsi, ils étaient en mesure de démontrer leur capacité de penser de façon relationnelle. Plus tard dans l’année scolaire, ces élèves, qui auparavant s’étaient montrés peu enclins à s’exprimer, et l’avaient fait seulement par le biais des ressources fournies par les séquences structurées prévues, ont dans plusieurs cas manifesté une meilleure capacité d’exprimer verbalement leur pensée.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by a grant to the Diversity in Mathematics Education Center for Learning and Teaching (DiME) from the National Science Foundation (ESI9911679). The opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the position, policy, or endorsement of the NSF.
Notes
1. The names of all participants are pseudonyms.
2. Janice was a student with poor attendance who was also persistently tardy. This meant that she often arrived at school after the relational thinking routine was completed. This impacted her opportunities to participate both in problem solving and in presenting her thinking. Nonetheless, Janice took up the role of solution presenter three times during the year, more often than two of the regular education students in the class.