Instructional Manipulatives

Overview

Instructional manipulatives are physical and virtual objects/mechanisms designed to help reinforce learning material. A student rotating a globe to increase their understanding of where the Northern hemisphere meets the Southern hemisphere at the equator is an example of a physical manipulator. Interactions with manipulators involve relations between the mind, body, and environment. Thus, an embedded embodied perspective on manipulatives is of interest to cognitive scientists, as this approach could help them discover new ways to enhance knowledge acquisition and transfer of learners.

Evidence

Embedded There seems to be for and against arguments about the value of extrinsic motivation based on rewards or punishments. Martinez (2010) points out extrinsic rewards are possible factors that lead to the decline of intrinsic motivation (which, based on Martinez, refers to the willingness to do something out of one’s own sake) in academic settings. On the other hand, research has also shown that if the person is extrinsically motivated by the external regulations of an activity (such as a reward), he/she may start discovering the intrinsic properties of the activity, and gradually shifting toward being intrinsically motivated, given that the external regulation is not too controlling (Ryan, Deci, 2000).

Design Implications

In an example, Marteniz (2010) explains that test scores and course grades could overwhelm the student because of the reactions from parents, teachers, and peers, which may become a hindrance to the students’ interest in studying. As a counter example, Marteniz (2010) states that rewards that make the student extrinsically motivated generate beliefs about personal competence that were not there before. This may set the path for a development of intrinsic motivation later in the students’ journey of study. Relating to this, many extrinsic motivators can be seen in gaming. Examples like failing a level, losing a life, high score rewards, star rewards upon clearing a level, daily log in rewards etc. are all kinds of external regulations to keep the player extrinsically motivated (Vriend, 2017). Whether the player enjoys the game itself or the rewards are questionable. In the game Angry Birds, the player is rewarded 1-3 stars based on his performance on clearing a level, the star is a reward to keep the player extrinsically motivated, because he/she may replay the level again to collect all 3 stars, but may not be intrinsically motivated about replaying the level itself (Star | Angry Birds Wiki | Fandom, n.d.).

Challenges

Taking a critical stance of extrinsic motivation, there seems to be an argument from both positive and negative points of views. From an educational perspective, a student may be extrinsically motivated to study because of the rewards, which may or may not result in a decent grade. However with the extrinsic rewards that serve as extrinsic motivators, there can potentially be no need to address to the student’s intrinsic motives to learning, since the behavior of study can be justified by the extrinsic motivation through rewards (Martinez, 2010). With this in mind, perhaps the debate is to know when to apply extrinsic motivators and assess whether students may develop an intrinsic interest toward the learning subject through their original extrinsic motivation. On the other hand, if behaviors can be controlled by evoking extrinsic motivation, is there any need to dive into the intrinsic motives of the learner? Applying this idea to a gaming perspective, as long as the rewards are enough to keep the player extrinsically motivated, does it still matter how the game should be designed to evoke intrinsic motivation?

References

• Martinez M. E. (2010). Learning and cognition : the design of the mind. (pp. 153–188) Merrill. http://books.google.com/books?id=wqFWAAAAYAAJ

• Richard M. Ryan, Edward L. Deci (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. In Contemporary Educational Psychology (25) 1 (pp.54-67). doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X99910202

• Star | Angry Birds Wiki | Fandom. (n.d.). Angry Birds Wiki. https://angrybirds.fandom.com/wiki/Star

• Vriend, S. (2017, August 4). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Game Developer. https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/intrinsic-and-extrinsic-motivation

Return to [Main Page] | [Top Page]

Overview: Instructional manipulatives are physical and virtual objects/mechanisms designed to help reinforce learning material. A student rotating a globe to increase their understanding of where the Northern hemisphere meets the Southern hemisphere at the equator is an example of a physical manipulator. Interactions with manipulators involve relations between the mind, body, and environment. Thus, an embedded embodied perspective on manipulatives is of interest to cognitive scientists, as this approach could help them discover new ways to enhance knowledge acquisition and transfer of learners. Evidence: Embedded ____________________________________ In one of a number of studies conducted by Manches et al.(2010) to test whether qualitative differences in manipulation led to problem solving studies in children, children ages 5-7 were tasked to solve a partitioning problem. Groups were first asked to solve a problem with no materials. Afterwards, the children were asked to solve additional problems with either paper and pen, or with blocks. Results showed that participants who used the blocks came up with significantly more creative solutions than children in the paper and no material conditions. One conclusion was that in the context of blocks, two hands allowed participants to be able to move multiple blocks at a time, while keeping track of their locations via haptic sensation. Embodied ____________________________________ A study by Hatano et al; 1997; Hatano & Osawa 1983, done to test transfer through the internalization of sensorimotor information, found that advanced abacus users, are able to utilize strong arithmetic abilities including mental calculation even without an abacus, by manipulating a mental projection of an abacus. Transfer tests showed that expert abacus users performed better when manipulating a mental projection of an abacus over a physical one. Design Implications: Pouw, et al. (2014) suggest upon reflection of Diane (2010) where participants that used blocks as manipulators to understand powers of 10 had failure of transfer when tested in the absence of the manipulators, “Design of manipulatives should at times allow for self-discovery rather than pre-constrained problem solving when transfer of learning is the goal.” Pouw, et al. (2014) continue to propose that embedded learning might be able to flourish when it is learner centered, instead of it being primarily integrated into the environment. Challenges: Challenges to the beneficial prospects of instructional manipulatives are voiced by researchers in Uttal et al. 1997; McNeil & Jarvin 2007; Sarama and Clements 2009; Kaminski et al. These critiques come from claims that manipulatives which focus on the concrete to the symbolic can lower transfer of learning because of perceptual and interactive richness,and that perceptual and interactive richness can inflict a high cognitive load on learners, which can lessen learning outcomes. References: