A LABORATORY ACTIVITIES TEXTBOOK VERSUS TRADITIONAL GENERAL MATHEMATICS TEXTBOOKS FOR TEACHING COMPUTATIONAL SKILLS TO TENTH GRADE LOW ACHIEVERS

This study was designed to test the effectiveness of Geometry without Proofs, as compared with traditional general mathematics textbooks in teaching tenth grade low achievers computational skills.;Matched pairs of classes were selected in eight high schools. One class of each pair used Geometry without Proofs, while the other used a traditional general mathematics textbook.;The independent variables in this study were Geometry without Proofs and several traditional general mathematics textbooks. The dependent variables were the students' scores on the computation section of the Comprehensive Test of Basic Skills (CTBS), the Computation Test, the Attitude Test, and the Choose the Correct Operation Test. Different forms of these tests were given as pre- and posttests.;The three multivariate hypotheses were tested for statistical significance. The F tests from the MANOVAs are summarized as follows: (1) There were significant differences in the mean scores on the CTBS, the Computation Test, and the Choose the Correct Operation Test between students using Geometry without Proofs and students using traditional general mathematics textbooks. In all cases the experimental group was favored. (2) There were significant differences in the mean scores on the Attitude Test given in December between students using Geometry without Proofs and students using traditional general mathematics textbooks. The experimental group was favored. (3) There were no significant differences in the mean scores on the Attitude Test given in April between students using Geometry without Proofs and students using traditional general mathematics textbooks.;The findings of this study support the following conclusions: (1) Geometry without Proofs is more effective in teaching low achievers computational skills and how to choose the correct operation in solving problems than traditional general mathematics textbooks. (2) For approximately the first half of a school year, Geometry without Proofs is more effective than traditional general mathematics textbooks in enhancing the attitudes of tenth grade low achievers towards their mathematics classes. (3) There is no significant difference between the effects of Geometry without Proofs and traditional general mathematics textbooks on the attitudes of tenth grade low achievers toward their mathematics class after approximately one year of instruction.