study of seventh grade geometry posttest scores after using the GeoLeg manipulative tool

The purpose of this research was to identify if 1) there is a difference in student achievement between students who use the GeoLeg manipulative tool and students who use a traditional compass, protractor, and ruler on the same geometry unit; 2) there is a difference in student achievement between the genders between those who use the GeoLeg manipulative tool and those students who do not; and 3) there is a relationship between identified learning styles and student achievement on a geometry unit posttest after using the GeoLeg manipulative tool. There were 317 students in the study. The research found that students using the GeoLeg manipulative tool produced significantly better student performance on a posttest in this particular school setting. Although these results cannot be generalized to other school sites, it is plausible that these results could generalize to school sites whose demographics are similar. The research findings revealed that there was no statistically significant difference between male and female students within the treatment group. The significant finding is that the GeoLeg manipulative tool appears to work equally well with both genders. None of the learning styles, as identified by the Honey and Mumford Learning Styles Questionnaire, were correlated with student posttest score achievement on the tested geometry unit. In addition, there was no evidence to suggest that a student's learning style moderates the effectiveness of the use of the GeoLeg manipulative tool. There is no evidence to suggest that the effectiveness of the GeoLeg manipulative tool is any different depending upon the student's gender or learning style. The results of this research provide strong support for the use of the GeoLeg manipulative tool for improving student performance. Further research is needed to confirm these results in similar and different populations.