Language–Focused Interventions on Math Performance for English Learners: A Selective Meta

Abstract

This meta–analysis synthesized research on math performance outcomes for English learners (EL) as a function of language–focused (math vocabulary) interventions. We included group and single–subject design studies with children from kindergarten to 8th grade (3,766 students for group, 30 for single–subject). Group studies yielded a mean Hedges’ g of 0.26 in favor of the interventions relative to the control conditions, whereas single–subject studies yielded a mean Percentage of Non–Overlapping Data of 81.01% and Phi coefficient of. 66 relative to baseline. Although group studies yielded small effect sizes (ESs), we found significant moderators for grade level, intervention focus, and length of intervention. Single–subject studies yielded higher ESs than group studies, and were considered generally effective, with a high ES. This finding was attributed to a direct focus on children with math difficulties and one–to–one instruction. The implications for practice and future research are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abedi

(2002). Standardized achievement tests and English language learners: Psychometrics issues. Educational Assessment, 8(3), 231–257. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326977EA0803_02

Alt

, Arizmendi

G. D.

, & Beal

C. R.

(2014). The relationship between mathematics and language: Academic implications for children with specific language impairment and English language learners. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 45(3), 220–233. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_LSHSS-13-0003

Alt

, Arizmendi

G. D.

, Beal

C. R.

, & Hurtado

J. S.

(2013). The effect of test translation on the performance of second grade English learners on the KeyMath–3. Psychology in the Schools, 50(1), 27–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21656

Baker

D. L.

, Richards–Tutor

, Sparks

, & Canges

(2018). Review of single subject research examining the effectiveness of interventions for at–risk English learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 33(2), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12160

Barbu

O. C.

, & Beal

C. R.

(2010). Effects of linguistic complexity and math difficulty on word problem solving by English learners. International Journal of Education, 2(2), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.5296/ije.v2i2.508

Branum–Martin

, Fletcher

J. M.

, & Stuebing

K. K.

(2013). Classification and identification of reading and math disabilities: The special case of comorbidity. Journal of learning disabilities, 46(6), 490–499.

Burns

M. K.

, Kanive

, & DeGrande

(2012). Effect of a computer–delivered math fact intervention as a supplemental intervention for math in third and fourth grades. Remedial and Special Education, 33(3), 184–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932510381652

Calderón

, Slavin

, & Sánchez

(2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The Future of Children, 103–127.Retrieved from www-jstor-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/stable/41229013

Castro–Olivo

S. M.

, Preciado

J. A.

, Sanford

A. K.

, & Perry

(2011). The academic and social–emotional needs of secondary Latino English learners: Implications for screening, identification, and instructional planning. Exceptionality, 19(3), 160–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2011.579846

10.

Cheung

A. C.

, & Slavin

R. E.

(2016). How methodological features affect effect sizes in education. Educational Researcher, 45(5), 283–292. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x16656615

11.

Cirillo

, Bruna

K. R.

, & Herbel–Eisenmann

(2010). Acquisition of mathematical language: Suggestions and activities for English language learners. Multicultural Perspectives, 12(1), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/15210961003641385

12.

Cirino

P. T.

, & Berch

D. B.

(2010). Introduction: Perspectives on math difficulty and disability in children. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(2), 61–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.10.007

13.

* Cho

, Yang

, & Mandracchia

(2015). Effects of M3 curriculum on mathematics and English proficiency achievement of mathematically promising English language learners. Journal of Advanced Academics, 26(2), 112–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202x15577205

14.

Chodura

, Kuhn

J. T.

, & Holling

(2015). Interventions for children with mathematical difficulties: A meta–analysis. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 223(2), 129. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000211

15.

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum

16.

* Crawford

(2013). Effects of an online mathematics curriculum for English language learners. Computers in the Schools, 30(3), 248–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.805665

17.

Cummins

(1979). Linguistic interdependence and the educational development of bilingual children. Review of Educational Research, 49(2), 222–251. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543049002222

18.

* Doabler

C. T.

, Clarke

, Kosty

D. B.

, Baker

S. K.

, Smolkowski

, & Fien

(2016). Effects of a core kindergarten mathematics curriculum on the mathematics achievement of Spanish–speaking English learners. School Psychology Review, 45(3), 343–361. https://doi.org/10.17105/SPR45-3.343-361

19.

* Doabler

C. T.

, Clarke

, Kosty

, Smolkowski

, Kurtz–Nelson

, Fien

, & Baker

S. K.

(2019). Building number sense among English learners: A multisite randomized controlled trial of a Tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47, 432–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.08.004

20.

Driver

M. K.

, & Powell

S. R.

(2017). Culturally and linguistically responsive schema intervention: Improving word problem solving for English language learners with mathematics difficulty. Learning Disability Quarterly, 40(1), 41–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948716646730

21.

Duncan

G. J.

, Dowsett

C. J.

, Claessens

, Magnuson

, Huston

A. C.

, Klebanov

, … Sexton

(2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1428. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428

22.

Evaluations, Eligibility Determinations, Individualized Education Programs, and Educational Placements, [34 CFR 300.304(c)(1)(ii)] [20 U.S.C. 1414(b)(3)(A)(ii)]

23.

* Foster

M. E.

, Anthony

J. L.

, Clements

D. H.

, Sarama

, & Williams

J. J.

(2018). Hispanic dual language learning kindergarten students’ response to a numeracy intervention: A randomized control trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 43, 83–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.01.009

24.

Freeman

, & Crawford

(2008). Creating a middle school mathematics curriculum for English–Language learners. Remedial and Special Education, 29(1), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932507309717

25.

Fuchs

L. S.

, Fuchs

, Hamlett

C. L.

, & Appleton

A. C.

(2002). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on the mathematical problem–solving performance of students with mathematics disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 90–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00036

26.

Geary

D. C.

, Hoard

M. K.

, Nugent

, & Bailey

D. H.

(2012). Mathematical cognition deficits in children with learning disabilities and persistent low achievement: A five–year prospective study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(1), 206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025398

27.

Geary

D. C.

(2013). Early foundations for mathematics learning and their relations to learning disabilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721412469398

28.

Gersten

, Chard

D. J.

, Jayanthi

, Baker

S. K.

, Morphy

, & Flojo

(2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta–analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1202–1242. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309334431

29.

Hemphill

F. C.

, & Vanneman

(2011). Achievement gaps: How Hispanic and White students in public schools perform in mathematics and reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. Statistical Analysis Report. NCES 2011–459. National Center for Education Statistics.

30.

Kadosh

R. C.

, Dowker

, Heine

, Kaufmann

, & Kucian

(2013). Interventions for improving numerical abilities: Present and future. Trends in Neuroscience and Education, 2(2), 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tine.2013.04.001

31.

* Kim

S. A.

, Wang

, & Michaels

C. A.

(2015). Using explicit CRA instruction to teach fraction word problem solving to low–performing Asian English learners. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 31(3), 253–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1030999

32.

* Kingsdorf

, & Krawec

(2016). Assessing a multi–component math intervention within a cognitive–behavioral framework on the word problem–solving responses of a diverse group of third graders. Cogent Education, 3(1), 1160638. http://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1160638

33.

Koponen

T. K.

, Sorvo

, Dowker

, Räikkönen

, Viholainen

, Aro

, & Aro

(2018). Does multi–component strategy training improve calculation fluency among poor performing elementary school children? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1187. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01187

34.

Martiniello

(2008). Language and the performance of English–language learners in math word problems. Harvard Educational Review, 78(2), 333–368. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.78.2.70783570r1111t32

35.

Mazzocco

M. M.

, Feigenson

, & Halberda

(2011). Impaired acuity of the approximate number system underlies mathematical learning disability (dyscalculia). Child Development, 82(4), 1224–1237. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01608.x

36.

Mazzocco

M. M.

, Myers

G. F.

, Lewis

K. E.

, Hanich

L. B.

, & Murphy

M. M.

(2013). Limited knowledge of fraction representations differentiates middle school students with mathematics learning disability (dyscalculia) versus low mathematics achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 115(2), 371–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.01.005

37.

Moschkovich

J. N.

(2015). Academic literacy in mathematics for English learners. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 40, 43–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2015.01.005

38.

Murphy

M. M.

, Mazzocco

M. M.

, Hanich

L. B.

, & Early

M. C.

(2007). Cognitive characteristics of children with mathematics learning disability (MLD) vary as a function of the cutoff criterion used to define MLD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40(5), 458–478. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400050901

39.

* Orosco

M. J.

(2014a). Word problem strategy for Latino English language learners at risk for math disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948713504206

40.

* Orosco

M. J.

(2014b). A math intervention for third grade Latino English language learners at risk for math disabilities. Exceptionality, 22(4), 205–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2013.865535

41.

* Orosco

M. J.

, & Abdulrahim

N. A.

(2018). Examining comprehension strategy instruction with English learners’ problem solving: Study findings and educator preparation implications. Teacher Education and Special Education, 41(3), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406418770787

42.

* Orosco

M. J.

, Swanson

H. L.

, O'Connor

, & Lussier

(2013). The effects of dynamic strategic math on English language learners’ word problem solving. The Journal of Special Education, 47(2), 96–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466911416248

43.

Parker

R. I.

, & Hagan–Burke

(2007). Useful effect size interpretations for single case research. Behavior Therapy, 38(1), 95–105. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.05.002

44.

Parker

R. I.

, Hagan–Burke

, & Vannest

(2007). Percentage of all non–overlapping data (PAND) an alternative to PND. The Journal of Special Education, 40(4), 194–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669070400040101

45.

Powell

S. R.

, Berry

K. A.

, & Tran

L. M.

(2020). Performance differences on a measure of mathematics vocabulary for English learners and non–English learners with and without mathematics difficulty. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 36(2), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2019.1677538

46.

Richards–Tutor

, Baker

D. L.

, Gersten

, Baker

S. K.

, & Smith

J. M.

(2016). The effectiveness of reading interventions for English learners: A research synthesis. Exceptional Children, 82(2), 144–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402915585483

47.

Roberts

N. S.

, & Truxaw

M. P.

(2013). For ELLs: Vocabulary beyond the definitions. Mathematics Teacher, 107(1), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.5951/mathteacher.107.1.0028

48.

Ron

(1999). Spanish–English language issues in the mathematics classroom. In. Ortiz–Franco

, Hernandez

N. G.

, and de la Cruz

(Eds.), Changing the faces of mathematics: Perspectives on Latinos (pp. 23–34). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

49.

Rosenthal

(1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638

50.

* Sanford

A. K.

, Pinkney

C. J.

, Brown

J. E.

, Elliott

C. G.

, Rotert

E. N.

, & Sennott

S. C.

(2019). Culturally and linguistically responsive mathematics instruction for English learners in multitiered support systems: PLUSS enhancements. Learning Disability Quarterly, 43(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948719836173

51.

Santiago

, & Brown

S. E.

(2004). What works for Latino students. Washington D.C.: Excelencia in Education, Inc. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED506049.pdf

52.

Scruggs

T. E.

, & Mastropieri

M. A.

(1998). Summarizing single–subject research: Issues and applications. Behavior modification, 22(3), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/01454455980223001

53.

Scruggs

T. E.

, Mastropieri

M. A.

, & Casto

(1987). The quantitative synthesis of single–subject research: Methodology and validation. Remedial and Special Education, 8(2), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258700800206

54.

Swanson

H. L.

, & Jerman

(2006). Math disabilities: A selective meta–analysis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076002249

55.

Swanson

H. L.

, Kong

J. E.

, Moran

A. S.

, & Orosco

M. J.

(2019). Paraphrasing interventions and problem–solving accuracy: Do Generative procedures help English language learners with math difficulties? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 34(2), 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/ldrp.12194

56.

U.S. Department of Education (2020). Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.

57.

VanDerHeyden

A. M.

, Broussard

, & Cooley

(2006). Further development of measures of early math performance for preschoolers. Journal of School Psychology, 44(6), 533–553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.07.003

58.

Veel

(1999). Language, knowledge and authority in school mathematics. In Christie

(Ed.), Pedagogy and the shaping of consciousness: Linguistic and social processes, pp. 185–216. London: Continuum.

59.

What Works Clearinghouse (2006). Technical details of WWC–conducted comparisons (9–12–2006). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, What Works Clearinghouse. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwc_version1_standards.pdf

60.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2014). WWC procedures and standards handbook (Version 3.0). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, What Works Clearinghouse. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwc_procedures_v3_0_standards_handbook.pdf

61.

Wolf

M. K.

, & Leon

(2009). An investigation of the language demands in content assessments for English language learners. Educational Assessment, 14(3–4), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/10627190903425883

62.

Xin

Y. P.

, Jitendra

A. K.

, & Deatline–Buchman

(2005). Effects of mathematical word problem–solving instruction on middle school students with learning problems. The Journal of Special Education, 39(3), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669050390030501

63.

Zheng

, Flynn

L. J.

, & Swanson

H. L.

(2013). Experimental intervention studies on word problem solving and math disabilities: A selective analysis of the literature. Learning Disability Quarterly, 36(2), 97–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948712444277

Language–Focused Interventions on Math Performance for English Learners: A Selective Meta–Analysis of the Literature

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References