Coding Protocol: A Meta-Analysis of Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measurement

The purpose of this document is to provide readers with the coding protocol that authors used to code 21 studies that met inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis. The focus of the meta-analysis was to determine the average correlations between four common early numeracy curriculum-based measure measurement (CBM) tools (i.e., oral counting, quantity discrimination, missing number, and numeral identification) and mathematics achievement criterion measures. We also identified moderating factors of the relationship between CBM and the criterion measures. Studies were included if they focused on at least one of the four common early numeracy CBM, and included correlations for students in preschool, kindergarten, or first grade. We coded 21 studies published between 2004 and 2021, including 19 peer-reviewed journal articles and two doctoral dissertations. Across studies, we coded variables such as basic study information, participant demographics, general CBM information (e.g., administration time of year, publisher), criterion measure information (e.g., state test, norm-referenced achievement measure, time of year), administration lag time between the CBM and criterion measure, and the correlation

How Early Mathematics Interventions Support Mathematics Vocabulary Learning: A Content Analysis

While there is a strong research base that supports intervening early in mathematics, research investigating the importance of mathematics vocabulary is still emerging. Practitioners and researchers may benefit from understanding how mathematics interventions support mathematics vocabulary acquisition, particularly for students who struggle with learning mathematics. Thus, the purpose of this study was to conduct a mathematics vocabulary content analysis across seven kindergarten and first-grade mathematics interventions. Across the intervention lessons, we recorded suggested teacher and student actions related to mathematics vocabulary instruction. The results indicated the most common instructional strategies used to teach mathematics vocabulary include: providing students with the opportunity to apply the meaning of the vocabulary term (94.7%), using representations (66.4%), and asking students to respond to teacher prompts using the term (44.7%). Overall, 29.7% of lessons clearly defined vocabulary terms, and 5.8% of lesson objectives addressed teaching the definition of the term. We discuss implications for researchers and practitioners to supplement interventions with opportunities for students to learn, practise, and apply mathematics vocabulary

The Effects of an Explicit Instruction Intervention in a Special Education Classroom

Students need to have a proficient understanding of foundational mathematics concepts in order to master more advanced skills as schooling becomes more complex at the middle school, high school, and college level. Archer and Hughes (2011) established connections between high academic achievement, group collaboration, and explicit instruction. Research conducted in special education for students with learning disabilities suggests that explicit instruction that provides students with opportunities to engage with critical content, active teacher monitoring, and fosters positive learning environments increase progress towards academic goals. To further explore the connection between explicit instruction and achievement, I conducted a study to investigate the effect of explicit instruction in computation and word problems on student achievement. This study involved two students in the Boise School District receiving special education services in mathematics. The participants received four weeks of intervention in math computation, word problems and order of operations. The intervention was delivered twice per week for 30-minutes each session. Before, during, and after the intervention, students were given a fifth-grade mathematics progress monitoring test to measure the effect of the intervention. The results of the study reflect student growth during the intervention as a result of additional support in mathematics

Coding Protocol: A Meta-Analysis of MCOMP and MCAP Curriculum-Based Measurement

The purpose of this document is to provide readers with the coding protocol that authors used to code 26 studies that met inclusion criteria for a meta-analysis. The focus of the meta-analysis was to determine the average correlations between MCOMP and MCAP curriculum-based measurement (CBM) and mathematics achievement criterion measures, as well as to determine the moderating factors of this relationship. Studies focused on grades 2 through 8 MCOMP, MCAP, and mathematics achievement. We coded 26 studies published between 2005 and 2021, including 15 peer-reviewed journal articles and 11 doctoral dissertations. Across studies, we coded variables such as basic study information, participant demographics, general CBM information (e.g., administration time of year, publisher), criterion measure information (e.g., state test, norm-referenced achievement measure, time of year), administration lag time between the CBM and criterion measure, and the correlation

Curriculum-Based Measures in Mathematics: An Updated Review of the Literature

The purpose of this document is to provide readers with the coding protocol that authors used to code 96 studies that focused on Stages 1, 2, and/or 3 of curriculum-based measurement in mathematics (CBM-M) research. Stage 1 refers to evidence for using CBM at one point in time (i.e., static scores), such as for screening for difficulty. Stage 2 refers to evidence for using CBM repeatedly overtime, such as for progress monitoring. Stage 3 focuses on the instructional utility of CBM (i.e., instructional decisions to increase student achievement). The purpose of the systematic review was to update the Foegen et al., (2007) literature review on CBM-M. We evaluated 96 studies published since 2006 that included more than 540,000 participants. Nearly all studies (k = 83) reported results related to Stage 1, fewer studies reported results related to Stage 2 (k = 39) and Stage 3 (k = 4). The results of the systematic review report findings related to reliability, criterion validity, diagnostic accuracy, growth rates, and instructional utility of CBM-M

A Systematic Review of Treatment Acceptability in Mathematics Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities

Treatment acceptability is an aspect of social validity that refers to participants’ beliefs and perceptions about the intervention, such as the helpfulness of the strategies or the interventions’ efficacy to improve performance. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of treatment acceptability measures administered during mathematics interventions for students with learning disabilities (LD). We sought to identify the characteristics of the measures and the treatment acceptability outcomes. To be included in this review, studies had to (a) focus on testing the effectiveness of a mathematics intervention, (b) include preschool through 12th grade students who were diagnosed with LD, (c) administer student or teacher measures of treatment acceptability, and (d) employ a single case or group design. This systematic review included 23 studies (22 included student measures, 8 included teacher measures). The majority of studies that reported information about treatment acceptability were single case design (91%), used interview-based measures (47%) and reported qualitative results (90%). Fewer studies used measures that allowed for researchers to provide quantitative results (20%) of treatment acceptability. The results of this systematic review indicated students’ and teachers’ perceptions about mathematics interventions for students with LD were overwhelmingly positive. We discuss implications of our findings in relation to improving the efficacy of mathematics interventions for students with LD

A Systematic Review of Research Syntheses for Students with Mathematics Learning Disabilities and Difficulties

The purpose of this document is to provide readers with the coding protocol that authors used to code 36 research syntheses (including meta-analyses, evidence-based reviews, and quantitative systematic reviews) focused on mathematics interventions for students with learning disabilities (LD), mathematics learning disabilities (MLD), and mathematics difficulties (MD). The purpose of the systematic review of mathematics intervention syntheses was to identify patterns and gaps in content areas, instructional strategies, effect sizes, and definitions of LD, MLD, and MD. We searched the literature for research syntheses published between 2000 and 2020 and used rigorous inclusion criteria in our literature review process. We evaluated 36 syntheses that included 836 studies with 32,495 participants. We coded each synthesis for variables across seven categories including: publication codes (authors, year, journal), inclusion and exclusion criteria, content area focus, instructional strategy focus, sample size, methodological information, and results. The mean interrater reliability across all codes using this coding protocol was 90.3%. Although each synthesis stated a focus on LD, MLD, or MD, very few students with LD or MLD were included, and authors’ operational definitions of disability and risk varied. Syntheses predominantly focused on word problem solving, fractions, computer- assisted learning, and schema-based instruction. Syntheses reported wide variation in effectiveness, content areas, and instructional strategies. Finally, our results indicate the majority of syntheses report achievement outcomes, but very few syntheses report on other outcomes (e.g., social validity, strategy use). We discuss how the results of this comprehensive review can guide researchers in expanding the knowledge base on mathematics interventions. The systematic review that results from this coding process is accepted for publication and in press at Learning Disabilities Research and Practice

Predicting Third-Grade Mathematics Achievement: A Longitudinal Investigation of the Role of Early Numeracy Skills

Despite the vast research on the early predictors of mathematics achievement, little research has investigated the predictors of various domains of mathematics (e.g., geometry, statistics). The purpose of the present study was to examine the predictive relationship between first-grade early numeracy and computation skills and third-grade mathematics achievement as measured by a state test. Further, we explored the relations between these measures for students who were Below Proficient and Proficient. Findings suggest that proficiency level matters when examining the relation between mathematics skills. Also, there are different patterns of significant predictors depending on the domain of later mathematics achievement and whether or not reading achievement was considered. Findings are discussed in the context of mathematics learning for students with mathematics difficulty

Data Management Plan for Investigating Early Mathematics Learning Opportunities for Children with Disabilities in the Home Learning Environment

Data Management Plan for 2021 NSF Faculty Early Career Development Program (CAREER) Program Proposa

Data Management Plan for Investigating Effective Methods that Adults Use to Improve Children\u27s Math Achievement in Informal Learning Environments: A Meta Analysis

Data Management Plan for 2018 NSF Education & Human Resources (EHR) EHR Core Research (ECR) Program Proposa