Strong and Weak Participants in Math - Research Paper Example

Factors which Differentiate between Strong and Weak Participants in Math Introduction The performance of most in mathematics is often poor as compared to other disciplines all across the country. However, a critical look at mathematics performance, in general, exposes a trend showing a significant disparity between students in terms of mathematics performance. Children are often born with varying physical and academic abilities and talents and this is a common feature of the human montage in the institutions of learning and among the communities. Usually, some learn at an intensity and speed that set them apart from some of their peers, and this varies in terms of different subjects they learn in school. Often, this is because they have the capacity to perform at an elevated level of success and possess exceptional learning techniques as compared to others of similar age. However, there are also those who are not able to cope up because of other social background issues and others because of lack of interest in pursuing educational success. The factors involved vary among children. However, there are some fundamental factors that usually come into play. Aim The objective of this paper is to analyze key research issues and findings to establish the main factors that differentiate between strong and weak performing participants in mathematics. Approach The study assumed a descriptive survey research design to establish the varying characteristics and attitudes between best and poor performing math participants among pupils in junior schools. That target population was fifty pupils and fifty teachers, and this was sampled by utilizing the stratified sampling approach to ensure all types of schools were proportionately included. The study was carried out through techniques such as interviews, questionnaires, and observation. Analysis The study was successful as fundamental factors and issues surrounding the question why there is a critical variance between people in terms of math performance were answered. The interviewees were quite corporative and interested in finding out the research findings in order to utilize them to make appropriate adjustments necessary to improve. Discussion From the findings of the research, it was evident that mathematics ought to be fundamentally viewed as a subject enhanced by three critical elements. According to Castello (1991: 16), “the elements are motivation, belief, and experience”. Obviously, these functions are not predetermined but can be developed over time from childhood to build the right attitudes among children so that they might stand a chance of flourishing. The idea is even more critical when dealing with children who have been identified at an early age to have special abilities allowing him to perform better in mathematics (OECD & PISA, 2015: 2). The discussion will start by looking at some of the fundamental factors that differentiate best performing participants with the poor ones. Usually, this group of participants often independently displays the capacity to expose arithmetical thinking and possess an eager responsiveness to quantitative information in their surrounding environment. Secondly, their thoughts are often logical and figurative with regards to quantitative and conceptual relationships. Thirdly, they often expose a responsive and attitude and greater affection towards mathematics and other related disciplines such as physics. Best math performers are likely to concentrate more during the discipline’s lesson in class as compared to the poor performers. In most cases, this is not as a result of lack of interest among the latter group (Feniger & Lefstein, 2014). However, it is often a product of the inability to comprehend the concepts being taught in a logical and sequential manner that usually leaves them lost on the way. Best performing students expose better concentration ability during these lessons because they tend to understand the concepts better, and this enhances their concentration capacities. Usually, they enjoy the learning process because they can communicate appropriately with the teacher and become fully part of the process. As a result, this group of students is never easily distracted and is able to focus on the sequential steps involved reaching a mathematical solution. In most cases, they also appear to enjoy with analytical situations or problems that require them to think deductively and sometimes inductively (Castello, 1991: 23). That is to say that, they are often fast at reacting to or participating in finding solutions in such instances. For instance, provide a mathematical solution involving summation or finding a product of arithmetical factors when someone is still struggling to find a calculator to assist. The situation is commonly witnessed between parents and their children who clearly are trying to show their parents their arithmetical abilities. Generally, this is an issue of interest in math that is fundamental to the development of a person in this discipline. When such an interest is witnessed in a child, it ought to be nurtured appropriately to assist him progress the necessary reverse reasoning ability in a supple yet logical manner. Lastly, another primary factor differentiating best participants in math is the ability to solve, communicate, and validate arithmetical concepts in an original, innovative and instinctive manner. The solutions can always be expressed verbally or on paper. On the other hand, weak performing participants in math usually expose slow pace and intensity in understanding mathematical concepts during their lessons. They often require close attention and more figurative approaches that require simpler and real life examples to comprehend these concepts (Feniger & Lefstein, 2014: 9). Their failure is often a product of poor learning systems and teachers who are less attentive to their special needs. Due to the insecurities involved, they are unable to express themselves appropriately, and this would lead them to drag behind. They usually expose low levels of awareness of quantitative data and are unable to express themselves logically with regards to spatial and conceptual situations (Castello, 1991: 29). Frequently, this kind of challenge impacts negatively on their ability to communicate validates confidently mathematical concepts in a fast paced learning environment. Thus, they are unable to participate and prefer to take a backseat and leave the learning process to their counterparts who can take part with minimal challenges and fast. The weak performing participants are also unable to observe, visualize and simplify quantitative data in an elaborate sequence manner, and this also slows them down. Conclusion It is evident that, there are critical and clear factors distinguishing strong and weak participants in math. In some cases, teachers have been blamed for these variations. Strong performers sometimes do not even require elaborate teachers and teaching methods to perform admirably as they can perform just as a result of their special capacities. In this kind of situations, other students who are unable to compete are always victimized. Essentially, it has to be noted that there are general fundamental factors that are witnessed in participants that significantly define the relevant variations. In most cases, these are inherent factors that cannot be changed completely. However, they can be assessed appropriately, and essential approaches and programs drafted and implemented to focus on enhancing their performances. For instance, different teaching techniques like a more personalized approach can be used when dealing with slower students. Thus, their progress can be adequately monitored, and their needs appropriately understood to be able to take necessary actions. References Castello, J. (1991). Teaching and Learning Mathematics. London: Routledge. Feniger, Y., & Lefstein, A. (2014). How not to reason with PISA data: an ironic investigation. Journal of Education Policy , 29 (6), 845-855. OECD, & 2012. (2015). What 15-year olds know and what they can do with what they know. OECD Press. Read More