A preliminary investigation of the relationship between fluency and application for multiplication

Journal of Behavioral Education

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 73-87

  Lin, Fan Yu ^a   Kubina Jr , Richard M ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Application; Component and composite performance; Fluency

Indexed keywords

EID: 17144422849     PISSN: 10530819     EISSN: 15733513     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10864-005-2703-z     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Barrett, B. (1979). Communitization and the measured message of normal behavior. In R. York & E. Edgar (Eds.), Teaching the Severely Handicapped (Vol. 4, pp. 301-318). Columbus, OH: Special Press.
2. Berens, K., Boyce, T. E., Berens, N. M., Doney, J. K., & Kenzer, A. L. (2003). A technology for evaluation relations between response frequency and academic performance outcomes. Journal of Precision teaching and Celeration, 19(1), 20-34.
3. Carnine, C. W., Silbert, J., Kameenui, E. J., & Tarver, S. G. (2004). Direct instruction reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Merrill.
4. Binder, C. (1996). Behavioral fluency: Evolution of a new paradigm. The Behavior Analyst, 19, 163-197.
5. Bucklin, B. R., Dickinson, A. M., & Brethower, D. M. (2000). A comparison of the effects of fluency training and accuracy training on application and retention. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 13(3), 140-163.
6. Carnine, D. (1980). Preteaching versus concurrent teaching of the component skills of a multiplication algorithm. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 11, 375-378.
7. Christenson, S. L., Ysseldyke, J. E., & Thurlow, M. L. (1989). Critical instructional factors for students with mild handicaps: An integrative review. Remedial and Special Education, 10(5), 21-31.
8. Eaton, M. D. (1978). Data decisions and evaluation. In N. G. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, & C. L. Hansen (Eds.), The forth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 167-190). Columbus, Oh: Merrill.
9. Evans, S. S., & Evans, W. H. (1985). Frequencies that ensure skill competency. Journal of Precision Teaching, 6(2), 25-30.
10. Evans, S. S., Mercer, C. D., & Evans, W. H. (1983). The relationship of frequency to subsequent skill acquisition. Journal of Precision Teaching, 4(2), 28-34.
11. Hanushek, E. A., & Kimko, D. (2000). Schooling, labor-force quality, and the growth of nations. American Economic Review, 90(5), 1184-1208.
12. Haughton, E. C. (1980). Practicing practices: Learning by activity. Journal of Precision Teaching, 1 (3), 3-20.
13. Johnson, K. R. (1996). Morningside mathematics fluency: Math facts (3rd ed.). Seattle, WA: Morningside Press.
14. Johnson, K. R., & Layng, T. J. (1992). Breaking the structuralist barrier: Literacy and numeracy with fluency. American Psychologist, 47(11), 1475-1490.
15. Johnson, K. R., & Layng, T. V. J. (1994). The Morningside model of generative instruction. In R. Gardner, D. Sainato, J. Cooper, T. Heron, W. Heward, J. Eshleman, & T. Grossi (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 173-197). Belmont, CA: Brooks-Cole.
16. Kamii, C., & Joseph, L. (1988). Teaching place value and double-column addition. Arithmetic Teacher, 35(6), 48-52.
17. Koorland, M. A., Keel, M. C., & Ueberhorst, P. (1990). Setting aims for precision learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22(3), 64-66.
18. Kubina, R. M., Young, A. E., & Kilwein, M. (2004). Examining an effect of fluency: Application of oral word segmentation and letters sounds for spelling. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 13(1), 17-23.
19. Kubina, R. M., & Lin, F. (2003). [College student performance in multi-digit multiplication]. Unpublished raw data.
20. Kubina, R. M., & Morrison, R. (2000). Fluency education. Behavior and Social Issues, 10, 83-99.
21. Lorenz, J, H. (1982). On some psychological aspects of mathematics achievement assessment and classroom interaction. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 13(1), 1-19.
22. Lovitt, T. C. (1978). Arithmetic. In N. G. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, & C. L. Hansen (Eds.), The forth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 127-166). Columbus, Oh: Merrill.
23. McDowell, C., & Keenan, M. (2001). Cumulative dysfluency: Still evident in our classrooms, despite what we know. Journal of Precision Teaching and Celeration, 17(2), 1-6.
24. McDowell, C., & Keenan, M. (2002). Comparison of two teaching structures examining the effects of component fluency on the performance of related skills. Journal of Precision Teaching and Celeration, 18(2), 16-29.
25. McDowell, C., Keenan, M., & Kerr, K. P. (2002). Comparing levels of dysfluency among students with mild learning difficulties and typical students. Journal of Precision Teaching and Celeration, 18(2), 37-48.
26. McDowell, C., McIntyre, C., Bones, R., & Keenan, M. (2002). Teaching component skills to improve golf swing. Journal of Precision Teaching and Celeration, 18(2), 61-66.
27. Mercer, C. D., Campbell, K. U., Miller, M. D., Mercer, K. D., & Lane, H. B. (2000). Reading fluency intervention for middle schools with specific learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities: Research & Practice, 15(4), 179-189.
28. Mercer, C. D., & Mercer, A. R. (2001). Teaching students with learning problems (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall/Merrill.
29. Mercer, C. D., Mercer, A. R., & Evans, S. (1982). The use of frequency in establishing instructional aims. Journal of Precision Teaching, 3(3), 57-63.
30. McIntyre, S. B., Test, D. W., Cooke, N. L., & Beattie, J. (1991). Using count-bys to increase multiplication facts fluency. Learning Disability Quarterly, 14(2), 82-88.
31. National Center for Education Statistics (2000). National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) Mathematics 2000 major reports. Retrieved January 29, 2003, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/mathematics/results/index. asp
32. New York City Board of Education (2000a). Impact of teacher certification on reading and mathematics performance in elementary and middle schools in New York City. Flash research report #2. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED451315).
33. New York City Board of Education (2000b). Analyses of performance of extended-time and non-extended time SURR school. Flash research report #1. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED451314).
34. Pennsylvania Department of Education (2004). Data file documentation: Pennsylvania system of school assessment-school and district report cards. Retrieved March 30, 2004, from http://www.paprofiles.org/pa0102/datafiles/ datafiledocumentation.htm
35. Rhymer, K. N., Skinner, C. H., Henington, C., D'Reaux, R. A., & Sims S. (1998). Effects of explicit timing on mathematics problem completion rates in African-American third-grade elementary students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(4), 673-677.
36. Rosenshine, B., & Stevens, R. (1986). Teaching functions. In M. C. Wittrock, (Ed.) The handbook of research on teaching (pp. 376-391). New York: Macmillan.
37. Shapiro, E. S. (1996). Academic skills problems: Direct assessment and intervention (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
38. Smith, D. D. (1981). Teaching the learning disabled. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
39. Smyth, P., & Keenan, M. (2002). Compound performance: The role of free and controlled operant components. Journal of Precision Teaching and Celeration, 18(2), 3-15.
40. Stein, M., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D. (1997). Designing effect mathematics instruction: A direct instruction approach (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
41. Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) (1999). TIMSS 1999 International Mathematics Report. Retrieved February 10, 2003 from http://isc.bc.edu/timss1999i/math_achievement_report.html
42. US Department of Education (2003). No child left behind. Retrieved May 16, 2003, from http://www.nclb.gov/index.html
43. Van de Walle, J. A. (1990). Elementary school mathematics: Teaching developmentally. White Plains, NY: Longman.
44. Van Houten, R., & Thompson, C. (1976). The effects of explicit timing on math performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 9, 227-230.
45. Wood, S., Burke, L., Kunzelmann, H., & Koenig, C. (1978). Functional criteria in basic math skill proficiency. Journal of Special Education Technology, 2(2), 29-36.
46. Wu, H. (1999). Basic skills versus conceptual understanding: A bogus dichotomy in mathematics education. American Educator, 23(3), 14-19, 50-52.
47. Zhang, Y., & Zhang, L. (2002). Modeling school and district effects in the math achievement of Delaware students measured by DSTP: A preliminary application of hierarchal linear modeling in accountability study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED468962).
48. Zaner-Bloser. (1999). Handwriting with continuous-stroke alphabet. Columbus, OH: Zaner-Bloser.