A comparative study investigating the use of manipulatives at the transition from primary to post-primary education

References

• Adler, J. (2012). Knowledge resources in and for school mathematics teaching. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 3–32) Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Attard C. (2010). Students’ experiences of mathematics during the transition from primary to secondary school. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane, & C. Hurst (Eds.), Shaping the future of mathematics education: Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of the mathematics education research group of Australasia (pp. 67–74). Freemantle: MERGA.
   Google Scholar
• Ball, D. L. (1992). Magical hopes: Manipulatives and the reform of math education. American Educator, 16(2), 14–47.
   Google Scholar
• Barber, M. (1999, March). Bridges to assist a difficult crossing. Times Educational Supplement, 4315. Retrieved from https://www.tes.com/news/tes-archive/tes-publication/bridges-assist-a-difficult-crossingopinion
   Google Scholar
• Baroody, A. J. (1989). Manipulatives don't come with guarantees. Arithmetic Teacher, 37(2), 4–5.
   Google Scholar
• Bellonio, J. L. (2001). Multi-Sensory manipulatives in mathematics: Linking the abstract to the concrete. In Human intelligence: Theories and developmental origins, VI. Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute. Retrieved from http://www.yale.edu/ynhti/curriculum/units/2001/6/01.06.12
   Google Scholar
• Beswick, K., Swabey, K., & Andrew, R. (2008). Looking for attributes of powerful teaching for numeracy in Tasmanian K-7 classrooms. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(1), 3–31. doi: 10.1007/BF03217467
   Google Scholar
• Bicknell, B., Burgess, T., & Hunter, R. (2009). Explorations of year 8 to year 9 transition in mathematics. In Findings from the New Zealand numeracy development projects (pp. 145–157). Wellington: Learning Media Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Bicknell, B., Young-Loveridge, J., & Nguyen, N. (2016). A design study to develop young children’s understanding of multiplication and division. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 28(4), 567–583. doi: 10.1007/s13394-016-0180-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boggan, M., Harper, S., & Whitmire, A. (2010). Using manipulatives to teach elementary mathematics. Journal of Instructional Pedagogies, 3, 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Brahier, D. J. (2009). Teaching secondary and middle school mathematics (3rd ed.). Essex: Pearson Education Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Bruner, J. S. (1966). Towards a theory of instruction. New York, NY: Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Çepni, S., Özsevgeç, T., & Cerrah, L. (2004). Turkish middle school students’ cognitive development levels in science. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 1–24.
   Google Scholar
• Clements, D. H., & McMillen, S. (1996). Rethinking “concrete” manipulatives. Teaching Children Mathematics, 2(5), 270–279.
   Google Scholar
• Clerkin, A. (2012). Personal development in secondary education: The Irish transition year. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(38), 1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Education and Skills. (1999). Primary school curriculum: Mathematics. Dublin: The Stationary Press.
   Google Scholar
• Drijvers, P. (2012). Teachers transforming resources into orchestrations. In G. Gueudet, B. Pepin, & L. Trouche (Eds.), From text to ‘lived’ resources: Mathematics curriculum materials and teacher development (pp. 265–281). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ernest, P. (1989). The knowledge, beliefs and attitudes of the mathematics teacher: A model. Journal of Education for Teaching, 15(1), 13–33. doi: 10.1080/0260747890150102
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Friedel, J. M., Cortina, K. S., Turner, J. C., & Midgley, C. (2010). Changes in efficacy beliefs in mathematics across the transition to middle school: Examining the effects of perceived teacher and parent goal emphases. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 102–114. doi: 10.1037/a0017590
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fröbel, F., & Lilley, I. M. (1967). Friedrich Froebel. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Furner, J. M., & Worrell, N. L. (2017). The importance of using manipulatives in teaching math today. Transformations, 3(1), 2–25.
   Google Scholar
• Fyfe, E. R., McNeil, N. M., Son, J. Y., & Goldstone, R. L. (2014). Concreteness fading in mathematics and science instruction: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 9–25. doi: 10.1007/s10648-014-9249-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glenberg, A. M., Gutierrez, T., Levin, J. R., Japuntich, S., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children's reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 424–436. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.96.3.424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golafshani, N. (2013). Teachers’ beliefs and teaching mathematics with manipulatives. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(3), 137–159.
   Google Scholar
• Grootenboer, P., & Marshman, M. (2016). Mathematics, affect and learning: Middle school students’ beliefs and attitudes about mathematics education. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, R. (2012). Stretching student teachers’ understanding of fractions. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 24(4), 493–511. doi: 10.1007/s13394-012-0050-7
   Google Scholar
• Howard, P., Perry, B., & Tracey, D. (1997). Mathematics and manipulatives: Comparing primary and secondary mathematics teachers’ views. Retrieved from http://www.aare.edu.au/97pap/howap045.htm
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, R. (1979). Hands-on math: Misconceptions and abuses. Learning, 7(5), 76–78.
   Google Scholar
• Kontas, H. (2016). The effect of manipulatives on mathematics achievement and attitudes of secondary school students. Journal of Education and Learning, 5(3), 10–20. doi: 10.5539/jel.v5n3p10
   Google Scholar
• Kubitskey, B., Fishman, B., & Marx, R. W. (2002). Professional development, teacher learning, and student learning: Is there a connection? In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & Y. Satwicz (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 229–236). New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. London: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• McCormack, L., Finlayson, O. E., & McCloughlin, T. J. (2014). The CASE programme implemented across the primary and secondary school transition in Ireland. International Journal of Science Education, 36(17), 2892–2917. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2014.938711
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGee, C., Ward, R., Gibbons, J., Harlow, A. (2003). Transition to secondary school: A literature review. Hamilton: Ministry of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Moyer, P. S., & Jones, M. G. (2004). Controlling choice: Teachers, students, and manipulatives in mathematics classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 104(1), 16–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2004.tb17978.x
   Google Scholar
• Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., & Arora, A. (2012). TIMSS 2011 international results in mathematics. Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
   Google Scholar
• Nathan, M. J., Long, S. D., & Alibali, M. W. (2002). The symbol precedence view of mathematical development: A corpus analysis of the rhetorical structure of textbooks. Discourse Process, 33, 1–21. doi: 10.1207/S15326950DP3301_01
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Council for Curriculum and Assessment. (2005). Review of mathematics in post primary education: A discussion paper. Dublin: The Stationary Office.
   Google Scholar
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Standards for the professional development of teachers of mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
   Google Scholar
• Nührenbörger, M., & Steinbring, H. (2008). Manipulatives as tools in mathematics teacher education. In P. Sullivan, T. L. Wood, & D. Tirosh (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics teacher education (Volume 2) (pp. 157–181). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• O'Meara, N., Prendergast, M., Cantley, I., Harbison, L., & O'Hara, C. (2019). Teachers' self-perceptions of mathematical knowledge for teaching at the transition between primary and post-primary school. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology. doi:10.1080/0020739X.2019.1589004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paul, M. (2014). Managing the transition from primary school mathematics to secondary school mathematics: Teachers’ and learners’ perspectives. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 5(25), 205–215.
   Google Scholar
• Piaget J. (1976). Piaget’s theory. In Piaget and his school (pp. 11–23). Berlin: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Prendergast, M., O'Meara, N., O'Hara, C., Harbison, L., & Cantley, I. (2019). Bridging the primary to secondary school mathematics divide: Teachers' perspectives. Issues in Educational Research, 29(1), 243–260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prendergast, M., & O'Meara, N. (2016). A time profile of mathematics in a “gap year” in Irish secondary schools. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 4(3), 293–304.
   Google Scholar
• Prendergast, M., O'Meara, N., Harbison, L., & O'Hara, C. (2016). A difficult crossing. In B. Mooney (Ed.), Education matters: Shaping Ireland's educational landscape (Yearbook 2016–2017) (pp. 339–343). Dublin: Education Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Prophet, R. B., & Vlaardingerbroek, B. (2003). The relevance of secondary school chemistry education in Botswana: A cognitive development status perspective. International Journal of Educational Development, 23(3), 275–289. doi: 10.1016/S0738-0593(02)00056-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puchner, L., Taylor, A., O'Donnell, B., & Fick, K. (2008). Teacher learning and mathematics manipulatives: A collective case study about teacher use of manipulatives in elementary and middle school mathematics lessons. School Science and Mathematics, 108(7), 313–325. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2008.tb17844.x
   Google Scholar
• Şandır, H. (2016). Investigating preservice mathematics teachers’ manipulative material design processes. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 12(8), 2103–2114.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shayer, M., Ginsburg, D., & Coe, R. (2007). Thirty years on–a large anti-Flynn effect? The Piagetian test volume & heaviness norms 1975–2003. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(1), 25–41. doi: 10.1348/000709906X96987
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sowell, E. J. (1989). Effects of manipulative materials in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(5), 498–505. doi: 10.2307/749423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Zevenbergen, R. (2005). Increasing access to mathematical thinking. Australian Mathematical Society, Gazette, 32(2), 105–109.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, P., & Marshall, L. (2010). Revisiting mathematics manipulative materials. Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 15(2), 13–19.
   Google Scholar
• Szendrei, J. (1996). Concrete materials in the classroom. In A. Bishop et al. (Eds.), International handbook of mathematics education (pp. 411–434). Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, P. W. (1992). Notations, conventions, and constraints: Contributions to effective uses of concrete materials in elementary mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23(2), 23–147. doi: 10.2307/749497
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uribe-Flórez, L. J., & Wilkins, J. L. (2010). Elementary school teachers’ manipulative use. School Science and Mathematics, 110(7), 363–371. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2010.00046.x
   Google Scholar
• Veal, W. R., & Flinders, D. J. (2001). How block scheduling reform effects classroom practice. The High School Journal, 84(4), 21–31. doi: 10.1353/hsj.2001.0012
   Google Scholar
• West, P., Sweeting, H., & Young, R. (2010). Transition matters: Pupils’ experiences of the primary–secondary school transition in the West of Scotland and consequences for well-being and attainment. Research Papers in Education. 25, 21–50. doi: 10.1080/02671520802308677
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zeedyk, M. S., Gallacher, J., Henderson, M., Hope, G., Husband, B., & Lindsay, K. (2003). Negotiating the transition from primary to secondary school: Perceptions of pupils, parents and teachers. School Psychology International, 24(1), 67–79. doi: 10.1177/0143034303024001010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar