Mastery Learning, Mathematics & Technology

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.