We identified child-level predictors of responsiveness to 2 types of mathematics intervention (calculation and word problem) among second-grade children with mathematics difficulty. Participants were 250 children in 107 classrooms in 23 schools pretested on mathematics and general cognitive measures and posttested on mathematics measures. We randomly assigned classrooms to calculation intervention, word-problem intervention, or business-as-usual control. Intervention lasted 17 weeks. Path analyses indicated that scores on working memory and language comprehension assessments moderated responsiveness to calculation intervention. No moderators were identified for responsiveness to word-problem intervention. Across both intervention groups and the control group, attentive behavior predicted both outcomes. Initial calculation skill predicted the calculation outcome, and initial language comprehension predicted word-problem outcomes. These results indicate that screening for calculation intervention should include a focus on working memory, language comprehension, attentive behavior, and calculations. Screening for word-problem intervention should focus on attentive behavior and word problems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
2.
BarrettP. (2007). Structural equation modeling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 815–824. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
3.
BauerD. J.CurranP. J. (2005). Probing interactions in fixed and multilevel regression: Inferential and graphical techniques. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 40, 373–400. doi:10.1207/s15327906mbr4003_5
4.
Branum-MartinL.FletcherJ. M.StuebingK. K. (2012). Classification and identification of reading and math disabilities: The special case of comorbidity. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 490–499. doi:10.1177/0022219412468767
5.
CirinoP. T.FuchsL. S.EliasJ. T.PowellS. R.SchumacherR. F. (2015). Cognitive and mathematical profiles for different forms of learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 156–175. doi:10.1177/0022219413494239
6.
ConnollyA. J. (1998). KeyMath-Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance.
7.
CookB. G.CookS. C. (2013). Unraveling evidence-based practices in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 47, 71–82. doi:10.1177/0022466911420877
8.
CumminsD. D.KintschW.ReusserK.WeimerR. (1988). The role of understanding in solving word problems. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 405–438. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(88)90011-4
9.
Every Student Succeeds Act of2015, Pub. L. No. 114-95.
10.
FuchsD.ComptonD. L.FuchsL. S.BryantJ.DavisG. N. (2008). Making “secondary intervention” work in a three-tier responsiveness-to-intervention mode: Findings from the first-grade longitudinal reading study of the National Research Center of Learning Disabilities. Reading and Writing, 21, 413–436. doi:10.1007/s11145-007-9083-9
11.
FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.PowellS. R.SchumacherR. F.HamlettC. L.. . . VukovicR. K. (2012). Contributions of domain-general cognitive resources and difference forms of arithmetic development to pre-algebraic knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 48, 1315–1326. doi:10.1037/a0027475
12.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L.PowellS. R.SeethalerP. M.CapizziA. M.. . . FletcherJ. M. (2006). The cognitive correlates of third-grade skill in arithmetic, algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 29–43. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.29
13.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.CraddockC.HollenbeckK. N.HamlettC. L.SchatschneiderC. (2008). Effects of small-group tutoring with and without validated classroom instruction on at-risk students’ math problem solving: Are two tiers of prevention better than one?Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 491–509. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.3.491
14.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.StuebingK.FletcherJ. M.HamlettC. L.LambertW. E. (2008). Problem-solving and computation skills: Are they shared or distinct aspects of mathematical cognition?Journal of Educational Psychology, 100, 30–47. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.30
15.
FuchsL. S.GearyD. C.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.BryantJ. V. (2010). The contributions of numerosity and domain-general abilities to school readiness. Child Development, 81, 1520–1533. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01489.x
16.
FuchsL. S.GearyD. C.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.SchatschneiderC.HamlettC. L.. . . ChangasP. (2013). Effects of first-grade number knowledge tutoring with contrasting forms of practice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 58–77. doi:10.1037/a0030127
17.
FuchsL. S.GearyD. C.FuchsD.ComptonD. L.HamlettC. L. (2014). Sources of individual differences in emerging competence with numeration understanding versus multidigit calculation skill. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 482–498.
18.
FuchsL. S.HamlettC. L.PowellS. R. (2003). Second-Grade Calculations Battery. Available from L. S. Fuchs, 228 Peabody, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37203.
FuchsL. S.PowellS. R.CirinoP. T.SchumacherR. F.MarrinS.HamlettC. L.. . . ChangasP. C. (2014). Does calculation or word-problem instruction provide a stronger route to pre-algebraic knowledge?Journal of Educational Psychology, 106, 990–1006.
21.
FuchsL. S.SterbaS. K.FuchsD.MaloneA. (2016). Does evidence-based fractions intervention address the needs of very low-performing students?Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9, 662–677. doi:10.1080/19345747.2015.1123336
22.
FuchsL. S.ZumetaR. O.SchumacherR. F.PowellS. R.SeethalerP. M.HamlettC. L.FuchsD. (2010). The effects of schema-broadening instruction on second graders’ word-problem performance and their ability to represent word problems with algebraic equations: A randomized control study. The Elementary School Journal, 110, 440–463.
23.
GearyD. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 4–15. doi:10.1177/00222194040370010201
24.
GearyD. C. (2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1539–1552. doi:10.1037/a0025510
25.
GearyD. C.HoardM. K.Byrd-CravenJ.NugentL.NumteeC. (2007). Cognitive mechanisms underlying achievement deficits in children with mathematical learning disability. Child Development, 78, 1343–1359. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01069.x
26.
GearyD. C.WidamanK. F. (1992). Numerical cognition: On the convergence of componential and psychometric models. Intelligence, 16, 47–80. doi:10.1016/0160-2896(92)90025-M
27.
GroenG.ResnickL. (1977). Can pre-school children invent addition algorithms?Journal of Educational Psychology, 69, 645–652. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.69.6.645
28.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford.
29.
HayesA. F.MatthesJ. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 924–936. doi:10.3758?BRM.41.3.924
30.
HooverH. D.HieronymousA. N.DunbarS. B.FrisbieD. A. (1993). Iowa Test of Basic Skills, Form K. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
31.
JordanN. C.HanichL. B. (2000). Mathematical thinking in second-grade children with different forms of LD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33, 567–578.
32.
KintschW.GreenoJ. G. (1985). Under-standing and solving word arithmetic problems. Psychological Review, 92, 109–129. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.92.1.109
33.
KlineR. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
34.
LembkeE. S.GarmanC.DenoS. L.SteckerP. M. (2010). One elementary school’s implementation of response to intervention (RTI). Reading and Writing Quarterly, 26, 361–373. doi:10.1080/10573569.2010.500266
35.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2014). Principles to action. Reston, VA: Author.
36.
PickeringS.GathercoleS. (2001). Working Memory Test Battery for Children. London, England: Psychological Corporation.
37.
PowellS. R.FuchsL. S.CirinoP. T.FuchsD.ComptonD. L.ChangasP. E. (2015). Effects of a multi-level support system on calculation, word-problem, and pre-algebraic learning among at-risk learners. Exceptional Children, 81, 443–470. doi:10.1177/0014402914563702
38.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891. doi:10.3758/brm.40.3.879
39.
RaghubarK. P.BarnesM. A.HechtS. A. (2010). Working memory and mathematics: A review of developmental, individual difference, and cognitive approaches. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 110–122. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.10.005
40.
RileyM. S.GreenoJ. G. (1988). Developmental analysis of understanding language about quantities and of solving problems. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 49–101. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0501_2
41.
SieglerR. S.BoothJ. L. (2004). Development of numerical estimation in young children. Child Development, 75, 428–444. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00684.x
42.
SieglerR. S.OpferJ. E. (2003). The development of numerical estimation: Evidence for multiple representations of numerical quantity. Psychological Science, 14, 237–243.
43.
SwansonH. L. (2011). Working memory, attention, and mathematical problem solving: A longitudinal study of elementary school children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 821–837. doi:10.1037/a0025114
44.
SwansonJ.SchuckS.MannM.CarlsonC.HartmanM.SergeantJ.. . . McClearyR. (n.d.). Categorical and dimensional definitions and evaluations of symptoms of ADHD: The SNAP and SWAN Ratings Scales. Retrieved from http://www.adhd.net
45.
VukovicR. K.FuchsL. S.GearyD. C.JordanN. C.GerstenR.SieglerR. S. (2014). Sources of individual differences in children’s understanding of fractions. Child Development, 85, 1461–1476. doi:10.1111/cdev.12218
46.
WechslerD. (1999). Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI). San Antonio, TX: Pearson Education.
47.
WillcuttE. G.PetrillS. A.WuS.BoadaR.DefriesJ. C.OlsonR. K.PenningtonB. F. (2013). Comorbidity between reading disability and math disability: Concurrent psychopathology, functional impairment, and neuropsychological functioning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 500–516. doi:10.1177/0022219413477476
48.
WiseJ. C.PaeH. K.WolfeC. B.SevcikR.MorrisR. D.LovettM.WolfM. (2008). Phonological awareness and rapid naming skills of children with reading disabilities and children with disabilities who are at risk for mathematics difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 23, 125–136. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2008.00270.x
49.
WoodcockR. W. (1997). Woodcock Diagnostic Reading Battery. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
50.
WoodcockR. W.McGrewK. S.MatherN. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III tests of cognitive ability. Itasca, IL: Riverside.
51.
ZhengX.SwansonH. L.MarcoulidesG. A. (2011). Working memory components as predictors of children’s mathematical word problem solving. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110, 481–498. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2011.06.001
