Mastery
Learning, Mathematics & Technology
My interest in the
mathematics achievement of students has given me the opportunity to read many
articles and studies related to theories that aid in the mathematics
achievements of students. This has lead
me to mastery learning. In this paper,
the reader will garner a better understanding of mastery learning and how is
can be used as a tool to improve student achievement in mathematics.
The mathematics
achievement of elementary, middle, and high school students in the United
States is an issue of concern for educators and policy makers, alike. The
influential book The World Is Flat
(Friedman, 2005) claimed that secondary mathematics achievement is a predictor
of a nations long-term economic potential.
The National Mathematics Advisory Panel (2008) argued that to continue
to progress in mathematics achievement, we must improve the quality of math
instruction received by all students.
Although many factors affect a student’s mathematics learning, one
factor over which schools have the most immediate control is the choice of
mathematics programs to be implemented by teachers, administrators and
curriculum developers.
One
possibility is mastery learning. Mastery
learning (Collins & Halverson, 2009) is an approach to learning intended to
bring all students to a specific level of mastery on a set of instructional
objectives. This model provides teachers
with timely feedback about the improvement and deficiencies of students in
specific areas and presents a curriculum that provides for extended time and
opportunities for all students to gain mastery.
One
definitive characteristic of mastery learning is the establishment of a standard
baseline of achievement that signifies “mastery” of a specific concept or
skill. Mastery learning is measured by
frequent assessments of student progress toward the mastery standard with
opportunities to do so on later comparable assessment (Slavin, 1987; Guskey
& Pigott, 1988). A baseline for
mastery learning is in the range of 80% correct on the assessment
instrument. Corrective instruction may
take the form of tutoring, re-teaching, computer assisted instruction, or
inverted teaching by the teacher, student tutors or classmates who have
achieved mastery of the topic.
Additionally, small groups may be formed in which students review
concepts or alternate assessment activities may be created for students to complete
independently (Bloom, 1978).
A
second characteristic of mastery learning is frequent and concise formative
assessments that guide both learning and teaching (Guskey, 2005). Theses assessments provide both students and
teachers with feedback about whether a particular concept or kill was
mastered. Those students who do not
achieve the baseline standard for mastery are given alternate activities, peer
tutoring, computer assisted instruction, and then, the student is assessed a
second time. If they are still
unsuccessful, additional opportunities to study and re-take the test are given
until the student reaches mastery. Therefore,
practically all student achieve mastery before moving on. Students who achieve mastery on the initial
assessment are given enrichment activities or given the opportunity to advance
through the curriculum at an accelerated pace (Zimmerman & Dibenedetto,
2008).
Finally,
technology and mastery learning in mathematics are natural companions. In this time of economic belt tightening,
schools may be unable to hire tutors to help those students in need of
remediation. One such solution is the
use of corrective math materials online available anytime and anywhere an
Internet connection can be established. Similarly,
students that have mastered the concept can proceed by accessing materials
online, too. For example, BrainPOP creates animated, curriculum-based
content that engages students, supports educators, and bolsters achievement. Mastery learning teachers can retrieve free
lesson plans, video tutorials, professional development tools, graphic
organizers, best practices, groups and forums, to name a few uses of
BrainPop.
Technology use in the mathematics
classroom can aid students in working out solutions to problems that teachers
would theoretically spend hours of instructional time teaching. In this era of technology, mathematically
thinking has become more important than ever (Slavin, Lake & Groff,
2009). Finally, understanding
mathematical concepts in the mastery learning environment may have been
complicated in our past life of paper and pencil learning. Conversely, with the use of the Internet,
mastery teachers are able to provide dynamic and remedial lesson using online
videos, software, simulated games, and so forth that presents materials using
multiple representations as well as customized remedial lessons tailored to the
individual student’s deficiencies.
References
Bloom, B.S. (1978). New views of
the learner: Implications for instruction and
curriculum. Educational Leadership, 35(7), 563-576.
Collins, A. & Halverson, R.
(2009). Rethinking education in the age
of technology. New
York: Teachers
College Press.
Friedman, T. (2005). The
world is flat. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Guskey, T.R. (2005). Formative
classroom assessment and Benjamin S. Bloom: Theory,
research and
implications. Paper presented at the nnual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association. Montreal, Canada.
Guskey, T.R. & Pigott, T.D.
(1988). Research on group-based mastery learning
programs: A
meta-analysis. The Journal of Educational
Research, 81(4), 197-216.
Slavin, R.E., Lake, C. & Groff,
C. (2009). Effective programs in middle and high school
mathematics: A
best-evidence synthesis. Review of
Educational Research, 79(2), 839-911.
Zimmerman, B.J. & Dibenedetto,
M. (2008). Mastery learning and assessment:
Implications for
students and teachers in an era of high-stakes testing. Psychology in the Schools, 45(3), 206-216.
