Project M 3 : Mentoring Mathematical Minds—A Research-Based Curriculum for Talented Elementary Students

Abstract

To date, there has been very little research-based mathematics curriculum for talented elementary students. Yet the gifted education and mathematics literature suggest support for curriculum that is both enriched and accelerated with a focus on developing conceptual understanding and mathematical thinking. Project M³: Mentoring Mathematical Minds is a 5-year Javits research grant project designed to create curriculum units with these essential elements for talented elementary students. These units combine exemplary teaching practices of gifted education with the content and process standards promoted by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. The content at each level is at least one to two grade levels above the regular curriculum and includes number and operations, algebra, geometry and measurement, and data analysis and probability. The focus of the pedagogy encourages students to act as practicing professionals by emphasizing verbal and written communication. Research was conducted on the implementation of 12 units in 11 different schools, 9 in Connecticut and 2 in Kentucky. The sample consisted of approximately 200 mathematically talented students entering third grade, most of whom remained in the project through fifth grade. Students in this study demonstrated a significant increase in understanding across all mathematical concepts in each unit from pre- to posttesting. Thus, Project M³ materials may help fill a curriculum void by providing appropriate accelerated and enriched units to meet the needs of mathematically talented elementary students.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Adelson

J. L.

Gavin

M. K.

(2006, Spring). What are your chances? Going beyond basics with Project M³ . Connecticut Association for the Gifted (CAG) Advocate Newsletter, 18–19.

Carroll

W. M.

Isaacs

(2003). Achievement of students using the University of Chicago school mathematics project's Everyday Mathematics . In Senk

S. L.

Thompson

D. R.

(Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 79–108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Carter

Beissinger

J. S.

Cirulis

Gartzman

Kelso

C. R.

Wagreich

(2003). Student learning and achievement with Math Trailblazers . In Senk

S. L.

Thompson

D. R.

(Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 45–78). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Casa

T. M.

Gavin

M. K.

(2006, Spring). A challenge in measurement: Searching for the Yeti. Teaching for High Potential, 7–8.

Casa

T. M.

Spinelli

A. M.

Gavin

M. K.

(2006). This about covers it! Strategies for finding area. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13, 168–173.

Cohen

(1965). Some statistical issues in psychological research. In Wolman

B. B.

(Ed.), Handbook of clinical psychology (pp. 95–121). New York: Academic Press.

Chapin

S. H.

O'Connor

Anderson

N. C.

(2003). Classroom discussions: Using math talk to help students learn. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.

Gavin

M. K.

Casa

T. M.

Adelson

J. L.

(2006). Mentoring mathematical minds: An innovative program to develop math talent. Understanding Our Gifted 9(1), 3–6.

Gavin

M. K.

Chapin

Dailey

Sheffield

(2006). Unraveling the mystery of the MoLi Stone: Place value and numeration. Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt.

10.

Hadamard

(1954). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Mineola, NY: Dover.

11.

Krutetskii

V. A.

(1976). The psychology of mathematical abilities in school-children ( Teller

, Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1968)

12.

Miller

Mills

(1995). The Appalachia Model Mathematics Program for gifted students. Roeper Review, 18, 138–141.

13.

Mokros

(2003). Learning to reason numerically: The impact of Investigations. In Senk

S. L.

Thompson

D. R.

(Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 109–132). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

14.

Moore

N. D.

Wood

S. S.

(1988). Mathematics in elementary school: Mathematics with a gifted difference. Roeper Review, 10, 231–234.

15.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1980). An agenda for action: Recommendations for school mathematics of the 1980s. Reston, VA: Author.

16.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.

17.

Pelletier

Shore

B. M.

(2003). The gifted learner, the novice, and the expert: Sharpening emerging views of giftedness. In Ambrose

D. C.

Cohen

Tannenbaum

A. J.

(Eds.), Creative intelligence: Toward theoretic integration (pp. 237–281). New York: Hampton Press.

18.

Perie

Grigg

W. S.

Dion

G. S.

(2005). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2005. Retrieved March 23, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2005/2006453.pdf

19.

Pimm

(1987). Speaking mathematically: Communication in mathematics classrooms. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

20.

Polya

(1954). Mathematics and plausible reasoning. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

21.

Putnam

R. T.

(2003). Commentary on four elementary mathematics curricula. In Senk

S. L.

Thompson

D. R.

(Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula: What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 161–178). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

22.

Renzulli

J. S.

(1977). The Enrichment Triad Model: A guide for developing defensible programs for the gifted and talented. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

23.

Robinson

Shore

B. M.

Enersen

D. L.

(2007). Best practices in gifted education: An evidence-based guide. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

24.

Robinson

Stanley

T. D.

(1989). Teaching to talent: Evaluating an enriched accelerated mathematics program. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 12, 253–267.

25.

Sheffield

L. J.

(1994). The development of gifted and talented mathematics students and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Standards (Research Monograph No. 9404). Storrs: National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented, University of Connecticut.

26.

Sheffield

L. J.

(1999). Serving the needs of the mathematically promising. In Sheffield

L. J.

(Ed.), Developing mathematically promising students (pp. 43–55). Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

27.

Sheffield

Bennett

Berriozabál

DeArmond

Wertheimer

(1995, December). Report of the task force on the mathematically promising. NCTM News Bulletin (32).

28.

Sowell

E. J.

(1993). Programs for mathematically gifted students: A review of empirical research. Gifted Child Quarterly, 37, 124–129.

29.

Sriraman

(2004). Gifted ninth graders'notion of proof: Investigating parallels in approaches of mathematically gifted students and professional mathematicians. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27, 267–292.

30.

Stanley

J. C.

Lupkowski

A. E.

Assouline

S. G.

(1990). Eight considerations for mathematically gifted youth. Gifted Child Today, 13 (2), 2–4.

31.

Tieso

C. L.

(2003). Ability grouping is not just tracking anymore [Electronic version]. Roeper Review, 26, 29–36.

32.

Tomlinson

C. A.

(1995). Deciding to differentiate instruction in middle school: One school's journey. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 77–87.

33.

Tomlinson

Kaplan

Renzulli

Purcell

Leppien

Burns

(2002). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop high potential and challenge high-ability learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

34.

Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. (2004). TIMSS 2003 Results. Retrieved March 23, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/Results03.asp

35.

Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study. (2000). TIMSS 1999 Results. Retrieved March 23, 2005, from http://nces.ed.gov/timss/Results.asp

36.

Wheatley

G. H.

(1983). A mathematics curriculum for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 27, 77–80.