Comparison of the effects of computer-based practice and conceptual understanding interventions on mathematics fact retention and generalization

Journal of Educational Research

Volumn 107, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 83-89

  Kanive, Rebecca ^a   Nelson, Peter M ^a   Burns, Matthew K ^a   Ysseldyke, James ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Conceptual understanding; Mathematics fact; Repetition

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897638401     PISSN: 00220671     EISSN: 19400675     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00220671.2012.759405     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Andersson, U. (2008).Mathematical competencies in children with different types of learning difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 48-66.
2. Axtell, P. K., McCallum, R. S., Bell, S. M., & Poncy, B. (2009). Developing math automaticity using a classwide fluency building procedure for middle school students: A preliminary study. Psychology in the Schools, 46, 526-538.
3. Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 51-73.
4. Baroody, A. J., & Ginsburg, H. P. (1986). The relationship between initial meaningful and mechanical knowledge of arithmetic. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case ofmathematics (pp. 75-112). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Burns, M. K. (2005). Using incremental rehearsal to practice multiplication facts with children identified as learning disabled in mathematics computation. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 237-249.
6. Burns, M. K. (2011).Matchingmath interventions to students' skill deficits. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 36, 210-218.
7. Burns, M. K., Codding, R. S., Boice, C. H., & Lukito, G. G. (2010). Metaanalysis of acquisition and fluency math interventions with instructional and frustration level skills: Evidence for a skill-by-treatment interaction. School Psychology Review, 39, 69-83.
8. Burns, M. K., Klingbeil, D. A., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2010). The effects of technology-enhanced formative evaluation on student performance on state accountability math tests. Psychology in the Schools, 47, 582-591.
9. Burns, M. K., VanDerHeyden, A. M., & Boice, C. H. (2008). Best practices in delivery intensive academic interventions. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 1151-1162). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
10. Codding, R. S., Archer, J. R.,&Connell, J. (2010).Asystematic replication and extension of using incremental rehearsal to improve multiplication skills: An investigation of generalization. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19, 93-105.
11. Codding, R. S., Shiyko, M., Russo, M., Birch, S., Fanning, E., & Jaspen, D. (2007). Comparing mathematics intervention: does initial level of fluency predict intervention effectiveness? Journal of School Psychology, 45, 603-617.
12. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Espin, C. A., Wallace, T., Foegen, A., Du, X., Ticha, R., Wayman, M. M., & Wiley, H. I. (2009). Seamless and flexible progress monitoring: Age and skill level extensions in math basic facts. Minneapolis, MN: Research Institute on Progress Monitoring.
14. Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Pelczar, M. P., & Shelley, B. E. (2010). Highlights from PISA 2009: Performance of U.S. 15-year old students in reading, mathematics, and science literacy in an international context. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
15. Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Enhancing mathematical problem solving for students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 39, 45-57.
16. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Powell, S. R., Seethaler, P. M., Capizzi, A. M., . . . Fletcher, J. M. (2006). The cognitive correlates of third-grade skill in arithmetic, algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 29-43.
17. Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd-Craven, J., Nugent, L., & Numtee, C. (2007). Cognitive mechanisms underlying achievement deficits in children with mathematical learning disability. Child Development, 78, 1343-1359.
18. Gersten, R., Jordan, N. C., & Flojo, J. R. (2005). Early identification and intervention for studentswithmathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 293-304.
19. Hanich, L. B., Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., & Dick, J. (2001). Performance across different areas of mathematical cognition in children with learning difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 615-626.
20. Haring,N.G.,&Eaton,M.D. (1978). Systematic instructional technology: An instructional hierarchy. In N. G. Haring, T. C. Lovitt, M. D. Eaton, and C. L.Hansen (Eds.), The fourth R: Research in the classroom (pp. 23-40). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
21. Hasselbring, T. S., Goin, L. I., & Bransford, J. D. (1988). Developing math automaticity in learning handicap children: The role of computerized drill and practice. Focus on Exceptional Children, 20, 1-7.
22. Hiebert, J., & Lefevre, P. (1986). Conceptual and procedural knowledge in mathematics: An introductory analysis. In J. Hiebert (Ed.), Conceptual and procedural knowledge: The case of mathematics (pp. 1-27). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Jimenez, J. E., Ortiz, M. D. R., Rodrigo, M., Hernandez-Valle, I., Ramirez, G., Estevez, A., . . . Trabaue, M. (2003). Do the effects of computerassisted practice differ for children with reading disabilities with and without IQ-achievement discrepancy? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 34-47.
24. Jitendra, A., DiPipi, C. M., & Perron-Jones, N. (2002). An exploratory student of schema-based word problem-solving instruction for middleschool studentswith learning disabilities:An emphasis on conceptual and procedural understanding. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 23-38.
25. Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., Chard, D. J., & Fien, H. (2008). Making connections in mathematics: Conceptual mathematics intervention for lowperforming students. Remedial and Special Education, 29, 33-45.
26. Kilpatrick, J., Swafford, J., & Finell, B. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
27. Krosenbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 97-114.
28. LeFevre, J., Bisanz, J., Daley, K., Buffone, L., Greenham, S., & Sadesky, G. (1996). Multiple routes to solution of single-digit multiplication problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 125, 284-306.
29. Miller, S. P., Butler, F.M., & Lee, K. (1998). Validated practices for teaching mathematics to students with learning disabilities: A review of literature. Focus on Exceptional Children, 31, 1-24.
30. Miller, S. P., & Hudson, P. J. (2007). Using evidence-based practices to build mathematics competence related to conceptual, procedural, and declarative knowledge. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 47-57.
31. National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). The nation's report card: Mathematics 2009. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
32. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
33. National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: Final report of the national math advisory panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).
34. Northwest Evaluation Association. (2000). Measures of academic progress. Portland, OR: Author.
35. Powell, S. R., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Cirino, P., & Fletcher, J. M. (2009). Effects of fact retrieval on third-grade students withmath difficulties with and without reading difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 24, 1-11.
36. Renaissance Learning. (2003). Math Facts in a Flash.Wisconsin Rapids,WI: Author.
37. Schneider, M., & Stern, E. (2010). The developmental relations between conceptual and procedural knowledge: A multimethod approach. Developmental Psychology, 46, 178-192.
38. Skinner, C. H., Pappas, D. N., and Davis, K. A. (2005). Enhancing academic engagement: Providing opportunities for responding and influencing students to choose to respond. Psychology in the Schools, 42, 389-403.
39. Van deWalle, J. A., Karp, K.,&Bay-Williams, J. M. (2010). Elementary and middle school mathematics: Teaching developmentally, student value edition (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
40. Van de Walle, J. A., & Lovin, L. H. (2006). Teaching student centered mathematics: Grades K-3. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
41. Ysseldyke , J. E., Thill, T., Pohl, J., & Bolt, D. (2005). Using Math Facts in a Flash to enhance computational fluency. Journal of Evidence Based Practices for Schools, 6, 59-89.