Supporting Student-to-student Mathematical Discourse With Conversation Mats
Abstract
This study examined the impact of conversation mats (Appendix A) on student-to-student mathematical discourse, specifically focusing on challenging interactions, among elementary students in Grades 3, 4, and 5. Despite research highlighting the importance of mathematical discourse, many classrooms struggle to foster meaningful student-to-student mathematical discussions. Using a quasi-experimental design, the study compared discourse patterns between students using conversation mats (experimental group) and those who did not (control group) across six elementary classrooms. The research drew upon social constructivist theory and the Nine Levels of Mathematical Discourse framework, particularly Level 5: Challenging (Weaver et al., 2005).
Data collection occurred over six weeks using the Oregon Mathematics Leadership Institute (OMLI) Classroom Observation Protocol (Appendix B) to analyze both quantitative and qualitative aspects of mathematical discourse. Results revealed important differences between groups. The experimental group demonstrated significant growth in challenging statements (from 0.6 to 2.8 mean statements per session) while the control group declined (from 0.6 to 0.4). Statistical analysis confirmed significance (p = 0.0012). Qualitative analysis showed the experimental group progressing from procedural explanations to sophisticated mathematical arguments incorporating questioning, alternative perspectives, and reasoned justification. The findings suggest conversation mats can effectively scaffold challenging mathematical discourse, especially among older elementary students. This research has implications for classroom practice, professional development, and the broader goal of fostering mathematical argumentation skills in elementary education.