The Key to Enhancing Students’ Mathematical Vocabulary Knowledge

Paul Riccomini*, Sharon Sanders**
* Associate Professor of Teacher Educatlon, EugeneT. Moore School of Education, ClemsonUniversity, Clemson.
** Program Manager for Clemson LIFE, ClemsonUniversify Clemson.
***Doctorol student at Clemsen University and aSpecial Education teacher, South Carolina.
Periodicity:June - August'2008
DOI : https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.4.1.627

Abstract

The importance of learning mathematical vocabulary is vital for the development of proficiency in mathematics. In an effort to improve students’ mathematical performance, educators must use research-validated instructional methods to teach important mathematical vocabulary. Mnemonic instruction is a set of evidenced-based strategies used to improve achievement and attitudes toward learning by helping students connect new information to prior knowledge. One especially effective mnemonic instructional approach is the keyword strategy. Using a keyword strategy, students connect familiar words with new vocabulary words and an illustration to help learn the new vocabulary word meanings. The purpose of this article is to describe the instructional procedures required to implement the keyword strategy to improve learning of essential mathematical vocabulary.

Keywords

Instructional Strategy,Scaffolded Instruction,Mathematics,Mathematical Vocabulary,Mnemonics,Keyword Strategy,Strategy Instruction.

How to Cite this Article?

Paul Riccomini Sharon Sanders (2008) The Key to Enhancing Students’ Mathematical Vocabulary Knowledge.i-manager’s Journal on School Educational Technology. 4(1),12-17. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.4.1.627

References

[1]. Adorns, T. L. (2003). Reading mathematics: More than words can say,TheReadlngTeacher. 56(8), 786- 795 .
[2]. Atkinson, R. C. (1975). Mnemotechnics in second- language learning. AmerlcanPsycho/oglst,30, 821-828,
[3]. 8oker, Simmons, & Kome'enui. ( I 997). Vocabulary acquisition: Research bases. In Simmons, D, C, & Kame'enui, E. J. (Eds,), What readlng research te/is us about ch/Idren with diverse learnlng needs.' Bases and bas/cs. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum~
[4]. Gorbe, D. G. (1985). Mathematics vocabulary and the culturally different student. Arithmetic Teacher. 33, 39-42.
[5]. Greenwood, S. C. (2002). Making words matter: Vocabulary study in the content areas. C/earing House, 75(5), 258-263,
[6]. Jones, C . J. (2001). CBAs that work: Assessing students' math content-reading levels. TEACH/NG Exceptionai Chiidren, 34{ I ), 24-28,
[7]. KovOle, K. A. & Forness, S. R. ( I 999).Efficacy of speclal educatlon and re/ated servlce. Washington, DC: American Association of MentalRetardation~
[8]~ Mostropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E~ (1991). Teaching Students Ways to Remember: Strategies for Learnlng Mnemonlcally~ Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
[9]. Mostropieri, M. A. & Scruggs, T. E. (2006).The /nc/uslve classroom.' Strategles for effectlve instructlon. Columbus, OH: Merrill Prentice Hall.
[ I 0]. Mostropieri, M. A., Scruggs, T. E. & FuIk, 8. J. M. ( I 990). Teaching abstract vocabulary with the keyword method: Effects on recall and comprehension, Journa/ of Learning DIsabI/ities, 23, 69-74.
[11]. Miller, D. L. (1993). Making the connection with language, ArithmeticTeacher, 40, 31 I -316,
[I 2]. Monroe, E. & Orme, M. R (2002). Developing mathematical vocabulary. Preventing Schoo\ Failure, 46(3), I 39-142.
[13]. National Reading Panel Report. (2000). Teach\ng chiidren to read.' An evidence-based assessment of the scientif\c research literature on reading and \ts implications for reading \nstruction, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
[I 4]. National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up.` Helping chiidren \earn mathemat\cs. In J. Kiipatrick, J. Swafford, & B. Findell (Eds.), Mathematics learning study committee, center for education, division of behavioral and social sciences, and education, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
[15]. Pashler, H., gain, R, Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M. , & et al. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student \earning (NCER 2007-2004). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from htfp://ncer.ed~gov.
[ I 6 ] . Balker, A. (2002). Spoken language and mathematics. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(I), 45-60,
[ I 7] . Rubenstein, R. , & Thompson, D . (200 2) . Understanding and supporting children's mathematical vocabulary development. Teaching Children Mathematics, 9(2), I 07- I I 2.
[ I 8]. Sanders, S. (2007). Embedded strategies in mathematics vocabulary instruction: A quasi- experimental studV~ D\sserfation Abstracts international, 68,11 (UMI No, 3290742).
[19]. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2000). The effectiveness of mnemonic instruction for students with learning and behavior problems: An update and research synthesis. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1O, 163-17.
[20]. Scrugges, T. E. , & Mastropieri, M. A. (2002). Teaching Tutorial: Mnemonic Instruction. Retrieved on June I 5, 2003 from http./` /TeachingLD.org. Division for Learning Disabilities of the Council for Exceptional Children,
[2 I ]. Wakefield, D. V. (2000). Math as asecond language~ The Educat\ona\Forum, 64, 272-279 .
[22]. Wilmon, 8. (1971). Reading in the content area: A new math terminology list for the primary grades, Elementary Eng\\sh, 1971, 48, 463-471 .
If you have access to this article please login to view the article or kindly login to purchase the article

Purchase Instant Access

Single Article

North Americas,UK,
Middle East,Europe
India Rest of world
USD EUR INR USD-ROW
Online 15 15

Options for accessing this content:
  • If you would like institutional access to this content, please recommend the title to your librarian.
    Library Recommendation Form
  • If you already have i-manager's user account: Login above and proceed to purchase the article.
  • New Users: Please register, then proceed to purchase the article.