ERIC Number: ED329430
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 1991
Young Children Learn Geometric Concepts Using Logo with a Screen Turtle and a Floor Turtle.
Weaver, Constance L.
This research was designed to investigate several primary questions in comparing the Logo floor turtle to the Logo screen turtle: (1) Do young children gain different geometric concepts from experiences with the floor turtle than they do with the screen turtle? (2) Do young children learn to use the four basic Logo commands more efficiently with the floor turtle than they do with the screen turtle? (3) Do young children prefer interacting with the floor turtle or the screen turtle? (4) Do the children who learn Logo gain more in perspective-taking ability than do the children who do not learn Logo? (5) Do the children who learn a single-key version of Logo in a geometry setting learn more geometry concepts than the children who did not learn Logo? This study included 17 4-year-old and 79 5-year-old children who were members of 5 classes in the suburbs of Buffalo, New York. A four (turtle, screen, paths, control) by four (four different teachers) design was used with planned contrasts for the kindergarten children. The preschool children were placed into either the floor turtle group or the screen turtle group. The initial lessons of Clements' and Battista's Logo Geometry Curriculum (1989) were used to teach Logo and elementary concepts of geometry related to path. The children in the experimental groups averaged two to three computer sessions per week for about 6 weeks. The results of the study were mixed. Significant differences in ability to use Logo were not found between groups, nor did the children show a clear-cut preference for one kind of turtle over another. The children's perspective-taking abilities did not change over the time of the study, and while geometry scores did improve, no significant differences between groups were found on the geometry tests. (Author/KR)
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
What Works Clearinghouse Reviewed: Meets Evidence Standards without Reservations
WWC Study Page: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/study/78012
IES Cited: ED544376