Effects of a Mathematics Cognitive Acceleration Program on Student Achievement and Motivation

  • Teukava Finau
  • David F. Treagust
  • Mihye Won
  • A. L. Chandrasegaran
Article

Abstract

This paper presents the effects of a cognitive acceleration program in mathematics classes on Tongan students’ achievements, motivation and self-regulation. Cognitive Acceleration in Mathematics Education (CAME) is a program developed at King’s College and implemented worldwide with the aim of improving students’ thinking skills, mathematics performance and attitudes. The first author adapted the program materials to Tongan educational context and provided support to participating teachers for 8 months. This study employed a quasi-experimental design with 219 Year 8 students as the experimental group and 119 Year 8 students as the comparison group. There were a significant differences in the mean scores between the pre-test and post-test of the three instruments that were employed in the study, indicating that learning mathematics under the CAME program had a positive effect on levels of students’ self-regulation, motivation and mathematics achievement. Students also reported changes to the ways they learn mathematics.

Keywords

Achievement Cognitive acceleration Lower secondary schools Mathematics learning Motivation Self-regulation 

Supplementary material

10763_2016_9763_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.1 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 2.08 mb)

References

  1. Adey, P. (1999). The science of thinking, and science for thinking: A description of cognitive acceleration through science education (CASE) (Innodata Monographs 2). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.Google Scholar
  2. Adey, P., Hewitt, G., Hewitt, J. & Laudau, N. (2004). The professional development of teachers: Practice and theory. Boston, MA: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  3. Adey, P., Robertson, A. & Venville, G. (2002). Effects of a cognitive acceleration programme on year I pupils. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(1), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Adey, P. & Shayer, M. (1993). An exploration of long-term far-transfer effects following an extended intervention program in the high school science curriculum. Cognition and Instruction, 11(1), 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Adey, P. & Shayer, M. (1994). Really raising standards: Cognitive intervention and academic achievement. London, United Kingdom: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Adey, P., Shayer, M. & Yates, C. (1989). Thinking science: The curriculum materials of the CASE project (1st ed.). London, United Kingdom: Nelson.Google Scholar
  7. Adey, P., Shayer, M. & Yates, C. (2001). Thinking science: The curriculum materials of the CASE project (3rd ed.). London, United Kingdom: Nelson.Google Scholar
  8. Adhami, M. & Shayer, M. (2007). Thinking maths: Cognitive acceleration in mathematics education (CAME). Oxford, United Kingdom: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
  9. Aunio, P., Hautamäki, J. & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2005). Mathematical thinking intervention programmes for preschool children with normal and low number sense. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20(2), 131–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Backwell, J. L. & Hamaker, T. (2003). Cognitive acceleration through technology education (CATE). Taunton, United Kingdom: Nigel Blagg Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
  14. Creswell, J. W. & Clark, V. (2008). Designing and conduction mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  15. Fasi, U. M. L. (1999). Bilingualism and learning mathematics in English as a second language in Tonga (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Reading, Berkshire, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  16. Frith, C. D. (2012). The role of metacognition in human social interactions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599), 2213–2223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hong, A. W. C. (2010). Applying cognitive conceptual approach in developing year 6 pupils’ problem solving skills in mathematics. Pertanika Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 18, 15–35.Google Scholar
  18. Kerridge, S. (2010). A study into the improvement in the mathematical academic attainment of low attainers in year 7 (11–12 year olds) when accelerated learning is used as a teaching pedagogy in the classroom (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
  19. Leo, E. L. & Galloway, D. (1996). Conceptual links between cognitive acceleration through science education and motivational style: A critique of Adey and Shayer. International Journal of Science Education, 18(1), 35–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Manu, S. (2005). Mathematical understanding and Tongan bilingual students’ language switching: Is there a relationship? (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.Google Scholar
  21. Maume, K. & Matthews, P. (2000). A study of cognitive accelerated learning in science. Irish Educational Studies, 19(1), 95–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McGregor, D. & Gunter, B. (2001). Changing pedagogy of secondary science teachers: The impact of a two-year professional development programme. An International Journal of Teachers’ Professional Development, 5(1), 59–74.Google Scholar
  23. Mega, C., Ronconi, L. & De Beni, R. (2014). What makes a good student? How emotions, self-regulated learning, and motivation contribute to academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(1), 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ministry of Education and Training. (2014). Report of the Ministry of Education and Training for 2013, Tonga. Tonga, Nukualofa: Ministry of Education and Training.Google Scholar
  25. Mok, I. & Johnson, D. (2000). Reasoning algebraically with IT: A cognitive perspective. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 12(3), 286–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  27. Olaoye, A. A. (2012). Cognitive acceleration in mathematics education lesson (CAMEL) in Nigeria. British Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(2), 77–86.Google Scholar
  28. Pekrun, R. (1992). The impact of emotions on learning and achievement: Towards a theory of cognitive/motivational mediators. Applied Psychology, 41(4), 359–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich & M. Zeider (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Pohiva, S. (2014). An outcomes-based assessment reporting approach for enhancement of teaching and learning in the Pacific islands. In R. Toumu’a (Ed.), Proceedings of the Vaka Pasifika Educational conference 2014 (pp. 125–135). Nukualofa, Tonga: University of the South Pacific.Google Scholar
  31. Shayer, M. (2003). Not just Piaget; not just Vygotsky, and certainly not Vygotsky as alternative to Piaget. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 465–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Shayer, M. & Adhami, M. (2007). Fostering cognitive development through the context of mathematics: Results of the CAME project. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64(3), 265–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shayer, M. & Adhami, M. (2010). Realizing the cognitive potential of children 5–7 with a mathematics focus: Post‐test and long‐term effects of a 2‐year intervention. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 363–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tatafu, M., Booth, E. & Wilson, M. (2000). Secondary school failure in Tonga: Implications for in service and pre service teacher development. Directions: Journal of Educational Studies, 19(1), 55–81.Google Scholar
  35. Uata, T. (2002). Comparative effectiveness of high schools in Tonga’s education system: A production function approach (Unpublished master thesis). California State University, CA, United States.Google Scholar
  36. Velayutham, S., Aldridge, J. & Fraser, B. (2011). Development and validation of an instrument to measure students’ motivation and self‐regulation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 33(15), 2159–2179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vivier, E. D. (2013). Opening schooling programmes for the Kingdom of Tonga: Report of a short-term consultancy. Vancouver, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning.Google Scholar
  38. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Wolters, C. A. (1999). The relation between high school students’ motivational regulation and their use of learning strategies, effort, and classroom performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 11(3), 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Zimmerman, B. J. & Schunk, D. H. (2012). Motivation: An essential dimension of self-regulated learning. Motivation and Self-regulated learning: Theory, research and applications (pp. 1–30). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teukava Finau
    • 1
  • David F. Treagust
    • 1
  • Mihye Won
    • 1
  • A. L. Chandrasegaran
    • 1
  1. 1.Science and Mathematics Education CentreCurtin UniversityPerthAustralia

Personalised recommendations