Processing mathematics tasks: The nature and role of visual and non-visual reasoning in digital and non-digital environments

Australian Research Council Discovery Grant

Tom Lowrie (Chief Investigator)

This project identified the differences between the delivery of mathematics assessment in non-digital (pencil-and-paper) and digital (computer-based) modes to primary school students in Australia and Singapore.

Our research methodology included a Mathematics Processing Instrument activity, interviews, and a treatment program containing activities recognised to enhance visuospatial skills and awareness. Specifically, we examined how students solve graphic and non-graphic tasks in different modes and determine the nature and influence of spatial reasoning on student performance and mathematics processing.

This comparative study across cultures provided insights into the theoretical developments in cognition and learning, assessment design, teacher practice, and assessment for learning using digital modes.

Objectives

  1. Compare and contrast the performance of students from diverse cultural settings when solving graphic and non-graphic tasks in both non-digital and digital forms.
  2. Identify and describe the visual and non-visual processes students employ when solving tasks presented in both non-digital and digital forms.
  3. Determine the nature and influence of visuospatial reasoning on student performance and mathematics processing.
  4. Compare student performance and processing of mathematics tasks across different representations (non-digital and digital forms).

Methods

Students in Grades 4 though 6 participated in one or more of the following activities:

  • Mathematics Processing Instrument (MPI) activity in either pencil-and-paper or digital form.
  • Cognitive ability tests and questionnaire.
  • Intervention program containing activities recognised to enhance spatial skills and awareness.

Outcomes

This project delivered several ground-breaking outcomes:

  1. Results highlighted the importance of spatial processes for solving different types of mathematics tasks
  2. Exploration of cross-cultural differences in mathematical problem-solving
  3. Systematic examination of the differences between paper and pencil and digital testing. While composite scores were equivalent, the two modes produced distinct affordances for different types of tasks
  4. Development of a contextualised measure of spatial reasoning for middle school students
  5. The first classroom-based spatial intervention led by teachers to produce improvements in spatial reasoning and mathematics performance

Select project publications

Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Ramful, A. (2017). Visuospatial training improves elementary students’ mathematics performance. British Journal of Education Psychology, 87, 170-186.

Ramful, A., Lowrie T., & Logan, T. (2017). Measurement of spatial ability: Construction and validation of the spatial reasoning instrument for middle school students. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 35(7), 709-727.

Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Ramful, A. (2016). Cross cultural comparison of grade 6 students’ performance and strategy use on graphic and non-graphic tasks. Learning and Individual Differences, 52, 97-108. 

Logan, T. (2015). The influence of test mode and visuospatial ability on mathematics assessment performance. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 27(4), 423–441.

Lowrie, T., Ramful, A., Logan, T., & Ho, S.Y. (2014). Do students solve graphic tasks with spatial demands differently in digital form? In J. Anderson, M. Cavanagh & A. Prescott (Eds.), Curriculum in focus: Research guided practice (Proceedings of the 37th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, pp.429-436). Sydney: MERGA.