International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education

Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program
AMA 10th edition
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Kalogeropoulos P, Russo JA, Sullivan P, Klooger M, Gunningham S. Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2020;15(1), em0545. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5881
APA 6th edition
In-text citation: (Kalogeropoulos et al., 2020)
Reference: Kalogeropoulos, P., Russo, J. A., Sullivan, P., Klooger, M., & Gunningham, S. (2020). Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), em0545. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5881
Chicago
In-text citation: (Kalogeropoulos et al., 2020)
Reference: Kalogeropoulos, Penelope, James A. Russo, Peter Sullivan, Michele Klooger, and Sue Gunningham. "Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education 2020 15 no. 1 (2020): em0545. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5881
Harvard
In-text citation: (Kalogeropoulos et al., 2020)
Reference: Kalogeropoulos, P., Russo, J. A., Sullivan, P., Klooger, M., and Gunningham, S. (2020). Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 15(1), em0545. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5881
MLA
In-text citation: (Kalogeropoulos et al., 2020)
Reference: Kalogeropoulos, Penelope et al. "Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program". International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, vol. 15, no. 1, 2020, em0545. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5881
Vancouver
In-text citation: (1), (2), (3), etc.
Reference: Kalogeropoulos P, Russo JA, Sullivan P, Klooger M, Gunningham S. Re-enfranchising Mathematically-alienated Students: Teacher and Tutor Perceptions of the Getting Ready in Numeracy (G.R.I.N.) Program. INT ELECT J MATH ED. 2020;15(1):em0545. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5881

Abstract

This paper outlines a tutoring initiative intended to re-engage students who have become alienated from mathematics class at school. The initiative is focused on priming students for their subsequent mathematics lessons, and is referred to as “Getting Ready in Numeracy” (G.R.I.N.). Following a discussion outlining the principles of G.R.I.N., data from interviews with G.R.I.N. tutors and classroom teachers are presented. Findings suggest that participating in G.R.I.N. enhanced student engagement in mathematics and helped foster a growth mindset. Analysis of interviews also revealed some of the challenges associated with the initiative, in particular, issues relating to communication and coordination, such as: understanding the purpose of G.R.I.N., timetabling, planning and having sufficient students in the target group. In addition, in some instances, tensions between the professional and pedagogical expertise of the G.R.I.N. tutor and classroom teacher required navigation. Recommendations for mitigating these challenges and tensions are put forward, all of which are reliant on strong leadership and support for the program at the school level.

References

  • Alzahrani, K. S. (2017). Metacognition and Cooperative Learning in the Mathematics Classroom. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 12(3), 475-491.
  • Bransford, J. B., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. London: Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, National Research Council.
  • Clarke, B., Doabler, C. T., Kosty, D., Kurtz Nelson, E., Smolkowski, K., Fien, H., & Turtura, J. (2017). Testing the efficacy of a kindergarten mathematics intervention by small group size. AERA open, 3(2), 2332858417706899. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417706899
  • Davadas, S. D., Lay, Y. F. (2018). Factors Affecting Students’ Attitude toward Mathematics: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(1), 517-529. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80356
  • Desforges, C., & Cockburn, A. (1987). Understanding the mathematics teacher: A study of practice in first schools. London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
  • DiNapoli, J. (2019). Persevering toward What? Investigating the Relationship between Ninth-grade Students’ Achievement Goals and Perseverant Actions on an Algebraic Task. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 14(3), 435-453. https://doi.org/10.29333/iejme/5747
  • Dweck, C. S. (2000). Self theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, VA: Psychology Press.
  • Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. New York, NY: Random House Digital, Inc.
  • Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals. Educational Psychologist, 34 (3), 169–189. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3403_3
  • Fielding-Wells, J., & Makar, K. (2008). Student (dis)engagement in mathematics. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Brisbane, Australia. http://www.aare.edu.au/08pap/mak08723.pdf
  • Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of educational research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059
  • Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Winikates, D., Mehta. P., Schatschneider, C, & Fletcher. J. M. (1997). Early interventions for children with reading disabilities. Scientific Studies of Reading, 1(3), 255-276. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0103_5
  • Glaser, B. G. (1965). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social problems, 12(4), 436-445. https://doi.org/10.2307/798843
  • Gottfried, M. A. (2019). Chronic absenteeism in the classroom context: Effects on achievement. Urban Education, 54(1), 3-34.
  • Graham, L., Bellert, A., Thomas, J., & Pegg, J. (2007). QuickSmart: A basic academic skills intervention for middle school students with learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(5), 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400050401
  • Hannula, M. (2004). Affect in mathematical thinking and learning. Turku: Turun Yliopisto.
  • Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: a synthesis of meta-analysis relating to achievement. Falmer: Routledge.
  • Huang, Y.-H. (2018). Influence of Instructional Design to Manage Intrinsic Cognitive Load on Learning Effectiveness. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(6), 2653–2668. https://doi:10.29333/ejmste/90264
  • Kieran, C. (2001). The mathematical discourse of 13-year-old partnered problem solving and its relation to the mathematics that emerges. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 46(1-3), 187-228. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1014040725558
  • Kong, Q.-P., Wong, N.-Y., & Lam, C.-C. (2003). Student engagement in mathematics: Development of instrument and validation of construct. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 15(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf03217366
  • Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W. (2006). Academic resilience and its psychological and educational correlates: A construct validity approach. Psychology in the Schools, 43(3), 267-281. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20149
  • Pijls, M., Dekker, R., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. (2007). Reconstruction of a collaborative mathematical learning process. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 65(3), 309-329. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-006-9051-3
  • Pollock, E., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and instruction, 12(1), 61-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(01)00016-0
  • Russo, J., & Hopkins, S. (2017). Student reflections on learning with challenging tasks: ‘I think the worksheets were just for practice, and the challenges were for maths’. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29(3), 283-311. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0197-3
  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology. Handbook of qualitative research, 17, 273-85.
  • Sullivan, P., & Gunningham, S. (2011). A strategy for supporting students who have fallen behind in the learning of mathematics. In J. Clarke, B. Kissane, J. Mousley, T. Spencer, & S. Thornton (Eds.), Mathematics: Tradition and [New] Practices. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia and the Australian Association of Mathematics Teachers (pp. 719-727). Adelaide: AAMT and MERGA.
  • Sullivan, P., & McDonough, A. (2007). Eliciting positive student motivation for learning mathematics. In J Watson, J. & K Beswick (Eds.), Mathematics: Essential Research, Essential Practice: Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 698-707). Hobart: MERGA.
  • Sullivan, P., Mousley, J., & Zevenbergen, R. (2006). Developing guidelines for teachers helping students experiencing difficulty in learning mathematics. In P. Grootenboer, R. Zevenbergen & M. Chinnappan (Eds.), Identities, cultures and learning space: Proceedings of the 29th annual conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 496–503). Sydney: MERGA.
  • Sweller, J. (2010). Element interactivity and intrinsic, extraneous, and germane cognitive load. Educational psychology review, 22(2), 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9128-5
  • Thomson, S., Wernert, N., O’Grady, E., & Rodrigues, S. (2016). TIMSS 2015: A first look at Australia’s results. ACER: Camberwell.
  • Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational psychology review, 17(2), 147-177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-005-3951-0
  • Vaughn, S., Cirino, P. T., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Fletcher, J. M., Denton, C. D., . . . Francis, D. J. (2010). Response to intervention for middle school students with reading difficulties: Effects of a primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review, 39(1), 3–21.
  • Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, S., Kouzekanani, K., Pedrotty Bryant, D., Dickson, S., & Blozis, S. A. (2003). Reading instruction grouping for students with reading difficulties. Remedial and Special Education, 24(5), 301-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325030240050501
  • Wanzek, J., & Vaughn, S. (2007). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. School Psychology Review, 36(4), 541-562.
  • Yoon, J., Thye, S. R., & Lawler, E. J. (2013). Exchange and cohesion in dyads and triads: A test of Simmel’s hypothesis. Social science research, 42(6), 1457-1466. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2013.06.003
  • Zakaria, E., Chin, L. C., & Daud, M. Y. (2010). The effects of cooperative learning on students’ mathematics achievement and attitude towards mathematics. Journal of social sciences, 6(2), 272-275. https://doi.org/10.3844/jssp.2010.272.275

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.