Running head: ARTICLE REVIEW 3 1

Early Childhood Math: Make It Manipulative!

Dr. Jeffrey Spanogle

Sarah Paramita

Universitas Pelita Harapan

Running head: ARTICLE REVIEW 3 2

Early Childhood Math: Make It Manipulative!

Summary:

The article mainly talks about how early childhood teachers realize that Math should

be taught in a more realistic way by using manipulative, but there are certain stereotypes that

hinder the teacher to teach Math with manipulative. The hindrances that the writer talks about

her article are the perspective that manipulative is too costly, not as convenient as the

worksheet, more useful, and it provides an academic environment (p. 16-17).

First, teachers believe that manipulative is costly. For sure there is a quality and thus

there is a high prize. But creative teachers would look at this problem with a different

perspective by finding a way to create a useful manipulative with affordable materials.

Second, there are several teachers who still believe that giving worksheet is more

convenient that letting the students have a manipulative experience (p.22). In fact, it is a

longer process to check the worksheet, grade it, and at last return it back to the students.

Third, there is a saying from few teachers that worksheet is more useful, both to check

the students understanding and also to involve the parents in assisting the students when they

answer it. However, not all parents would have enough time to check it with their children.

The possibility to have a private teacher to check is also big enough in this case. Thus, the

worksheet is not necessary would be a method to involve the parents to check on students

performance.

Fourth, many still believe that worksheet provides an academic environment. Having

the students focus themselves on finishing the work sheet does not mean that they are all

learning from it. An academic could happen not just during the worksheet time, but it could

also happen when the students use the manipulative.

Consequently, the writer tries to encourage the readers, especially the lower level

primary teachers to consider manipulative as the major option in teaching Math because the

students engage more with it by using their creative minds, hands, and feet.
Running head: ARTICLE REVIEW 3 3

Evaluation:

As the writer opens the article with an opinion about the students in the lower primary

level that they love to move, employ many senses, arrange things, try thing out firsthand,

and experiment with a manipulate materials (p. 16), reminded me of my cooperating teacher

who poured out her creativity to create numerous Math games and manipulative. She does

research, compares, and contrasts which Math manipulative or games that she should have in

the classroom. When it is not possible to purchase, she then tries to create it all by herself. I

admire on how she sees possibilities in making Math easier to be understood by the students.

Having the same mind with the writer who believes that there should be a revolution

teaching Math, I agree with almost all her points. I strongly believe that the students should

be able to see the relationship of solving problems in Math with the real life problem and that

it is fun to learn Math. It is not a time for the worksheet to dominate as the formative

assessment. As Gods image-bearer, I believe that I could be a creative teacher who would

come up with several ways in creating manipulative for Math lesson. Having said this, I

would not only develop myself by being creative but I also model the students in how they

should act as Gods masterpiece. I disciple them with a discipline that Math and any other

lessons can be a fun learning if we are all willing to use our creative minds and hands that

God has given.

On the other hand, in regards to the curriculum, the creative teachers are still bound

with a formality that they have to follow. I am assuming that the creative teachers do not have

a total freedom in providing manipulative experience (p.22) because of the curriculum and

certain schools procedure that they have to follow. It contradicts with an opinion that says

that It is educators choices to let the students have manipulative experiences or workbook

curricula (p.22). Thus, it is not always the teachers own decision to have the manipulative

or traditional worksheet in Math lesson but rather it is also the schools decision.

In conclusion, by adjusting our teaching procedures with the curriculum, we could

provide manipulative as the major method in teaching Math.

Running head: ARTICLE REVIEW 3 4

Reference

Stone, J. (1987). Early Childhood Math: Make It Manipulative! Young Children, 42(6), 16-

23. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/42726529