An Examination of the Effects of Mathematics Anxiety
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AN EXAMINATION OF THE EFFECTS OF MATHEMATICS ANXIETY, MODALITY, AND LEARNER-CONTROL ON TEACHER CANDIDATES IN MULTIMEDIA LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS by Elena Elizabeth Ward A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Education in conformity with the requirements for the degree Master of Education Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada September, 2008 Copyright © Elena Elizabeth Ward, 2008 ISBN: 978-0-494-42743-9 Abstract This study examined mathematics anxiety among elementary teacher candidates, and to what extent it interacted with the modality principle under various degrees of learner-control. The experiment involved a sample of 186 elementary teacher candidates learning from eight versions of a computer program on division with fractions. The eight versions varied in modality of presentation (diagrams with narration, or diagrams with written text), control of pacing (pacing was controlled by either the learner or the system), and control of sequence (sequence was controlled by either the learner or the system). A pre-test, post-test, demographic questionnaire, subjective measure of mental effort, and the Abbreviated Math Anxiety Survey were also administered. This study revealed that mathematics anxiety was significantly positively correlated with mental effort, and significantly negatively correlated with engagement, pre-test and post-test scores. Additionally, a modality x pacing interaction was observed for both high prior knowledge and low mathematics-anxious students. Under system-pacing, the modality effect was observed, and these students achieved higher far transfer scores when learning from the diagrams and narration modality condition. However, under learner-pacing, the modality effect reversed, and high prior knowledge and low mathematics-anxious students performed better on far transfer scores when learning from the diagrams and written text modality condition. Low prior knowledge, and highly mathematics-anxious students performed poorly in all treatment conditions. Additional interactions involving sequence-control, and a four-way interaction involving prior knowledge, modality, sequence-control, and pacing were also uncovered. The results from this study demonstrate that prior knowledge and mathematics anxiety have a complex relationship i with the effectiveness of the format of instruction, and the design of instructional materials needs to take into account these individual differences of mathematics anxiety and prior knowledge. ii Acknowledgments After two years experience with literature review, research design, testing, data gathering and analysis, and thesis drafting and review, it is more than clear to me that the final product owes much to the academic and operational support received from faculty, friends, and family. First and foremost, I’d like to thank my supervisors, Lynda Colgan and John Kirby. As my academic advisor and thesis supervisor, Lynda has been a source of guidance and support throughout the past two years. Her insight has enriched my understanding of mathematics education, and her enthusiasm and dedication have helped to make this process a truly positive experience. John, with his knowledge and expertise, has been an invaluable resource in the development of my quantitative research skills over the course of this program. He continually challenged me to dig deeper and learn more, and I greatly appreciated his willingness and availability to answer my questions as they arose. I’d like to thank Joan McDuff, who was there for me during the week of data collection, providing much needed support during this critical time for my thesis. I would like to extend my gratitude to Tim Goss (www.Northcode.com), who developed a desktop application enabling me to present alternate learning experiences for eight independent research groups. He built flexible modular software that managed audio and graphics content, pace of interaction and user control. Surpassing my expectations, Tim's support made the instructional material and data collection possible at the scale and complexity I envisioned. To my parents, their support and encouragement during the past two years has meant so much to me. From the long-distance chats that reassured me under times of iii stress, to their willingness to proofread countless papers (under very tight deadlines!), I appreciate everything they have done to make this all possible. A final thanks to Adrian, who has been my sounding board throughout this process, and has brought balance to my thesis-driven life. iv Table of Contents ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...............................................................................................iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. v LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... xi LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................ xii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION.................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ....................................................................... 3 COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY............................................................................................... 3 COGNITIVE THEORY OF MULTIMEDIA LEARNING ............................................................ 5 HOW COGNITIVE THEORIES EXPLAIN THE MODALITY PRINCIPLE.................................... 7 EVIDENTIAL SUPPORT FOR THE MODALITY PRINCIPLE IN INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN......... 8 The Modality Principle in Non-Interactive Learning Environments.......................... 8 The Modality Principle in Interactive Learning Environments................................ 12 INTERACTIVITY IN E-LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS .......................................................... 17 THE EFFECT OF INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES ON THE MODALITY PRINCIPLE .................... 18 Prior Knowledge and the Modality Principle........................................................... 18 Working Memory Capacity, Memory Strategy Skills, and the Modality Principle .. 20 CONTEXT OF THIS STUDY............................................................................................... 22 Mathematics Anxiety and the Modality Principle..................................................... 22 Mathematics anxiety and its cognitive consequences........................................... 23 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................. 23 v PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY................................................................................................ 24 CHAPTER 3: METHOD ............................................................................................... 27 PARTICIPANTS AND DESIGN ........................................................................................... 27 MATERIALS.................................................................................................................... 29 Pre-test...................................................................................................................... 29 Instructional Program .............................................................................................. 30 Measure of Mental Effort.......................................................................................... 35 Basic Concepts Review Sheets.................................................................................. 35 Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS)................................................................. 35 Demographic Questionnaire..................................................................................... 36 Post-test .................................................................................................................... 36 Retention and near transfer questions................................................................... 36 Far transfer questions............................................................................................ 37 PROCEDURE ................................................................................................................... 37 DATA PREPARATION ...................................................................................................... 38 Parsing Data Files.................................................................................................... 38 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ............................................................................................... 39 PARTICIPANT DATA ....................................................................................................... 39 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS............................................................................................... 40 Abbreviated Math Anxiety Scale (AMAS)................................................................. 40 Pre-test...................................................................................................................... 41 Engagement .............................................................................................................. 41 Perceived Difficulty of Instructional Program ......................................................... 42 vi Measure of Mental Effort.........................................................................................