This study examined the effectiveness of a number sense program on kindergarten students’ number proficiency and responsiveness to treatment as a function of students’ risk for mathematics difficulties. The program targeted development of relationships among numbers (e.g., spatial, more and less). A total of 101 kindergarten students (not at risk: 22 control and 36 experimental; at risk: 18 and 25) from five classrooms in a high-poverty elementary school participated in the study. Using a quasi-experimental design, classrooms were randomly assigned to either the intervention (number sense instruction, NSI) or control condition. Results indicated significant differences favoring the treatment students on all measures of number sense (e.g., spatial relationships, more and less relationships, benchmarks of five and ten, nonverbal calculations) at posttest and on a 3-week retention test. Furthermore, the effects were not mediated by at-risk status, suggesting that NSI may benefit a wide range of students. Implications in terms of preventing early mathematical learning difficulties are discussed.
ArnoldD. H.FisherP. H.DoctoroffG. L.DobbsJ. (2002). Accelerating math development in Head Start classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 762–770.
2.
AunioP.HautamakiJ.Van LuitJ. E. H. (2005). Mathematical thinking intervention programmes for preschool children with normal and low number sense. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20, 131–146.
3.
BakerS.GerstenR.LeeD.S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. Elementary School Journal, 10, 51-73.
4.
BenjaminiY.HochbergY. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 57, 289–300.
5.
BerchD. B. (2005). Making sense of number sense: Implications for children with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 333–339.
6.
BerchD. B.MazzoccoM. M. M. (2007). Why is math so hard for some children? The nature and origins of mathematical learning difficulties and disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
7.
BowmanB. T.DonovanM. S.BurnsM. S. (Eds.). (2001). Eager to learn: Educating our preschoolers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
CaseR. (1998). Conceptual development in the child and in the field: A personal view of the Piagetian legacy. In ScholnickE.GelmanS. (Eds.), Conceptual representation: The Piagetian legacy (pp. 23–51). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
ChardD. J.BakerS.ClarkeB.JungjohannK.DavisK.SmolkowskiK. (2008). Preventing early mathematics difficulties: The feasibility of a rigorous kindergarten mathematics curriculum. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 11–20.
11.
ChardD. J.ClarkeB.BakerS.OtterstedtJ.BraunD.KatzR. (2005). Using measures of number sense to screen for difficulties in mathematics: Preliminary findings. Assessment Issues in Special Education, 30, 3–14.
12.
ChardD. J.Ketterlin-GellerL. R.JitendraA. K. (2008). Systems of instruction and assessment to improve mathematics achievement for students with disabilities: The potential and promise of RTI. In GrigorenkoE. L. (Ed.), Educating individuals with disabilities: IDEIA 2004 and beyond (pp. 227–248). New York, NY: Springer.
13.
ClarkeB.BakerS.SmolkowskiK.ChardD. J. (2008). An analysis of early numeracy curriculum-based measurement: Examining the role of growth in student outcomes. Remedial and Special Education, 29, 46–57.
14.
ClarkeB.SmolkowskiK.BakerS. K.HankF.DoablerC. T.ChardD. J. (2011). The impact of a comprehensive Tier I core kindergarten program on the achievement of students at risk in mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 111, 561–584.
15.
ChatterjiM. (2002). Models and methods for examining standards-based reforms and accountability initiatives: Have the tools of inquiry answered pressing questions on improving schools?Review of Educational Research, 72, 345–386.
16.
ClarkeB.ShinnM. R. (2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33, 234–248.
17.
ClementsD. H.SaramaJ. (2008). Experimental evaluation of the effects of a research-based preschool mathematics curriculum. American Education Research Journal, 45, 443–494.
18.
ClementsD. H.SaramaJ.SpitlerM. E.LangeA. A.WolfeC. B. (2011). Mathematics learned by young children in an intervention based on learning trajectories: A large-scale cluster randomized trial. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42, 127–166.
FaulknerV. N. (2009). The components of number sense: An instructional model for teachers. Personal Teaching Exceptional Children, 41, 24–30.
23.
FeigensonL.DehaeneS.SpelkeE. (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 307–314.
24.
FischerF. (1990). A part-part-whole curriculum for teaching numberin the kindergarten. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 207–215.
25.
FunkhouserC. (1995). Developing number sense and basic computational skills in students with special needs. School Science and Mathematics, 95, 236–239.
26.
GelmanR.GallistelC. R. (1978). The child’s understanding of number. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27.
GerstenR.ChardD. (1999). Number sense: Rethinking arithmetic instruction for students with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 33, 18–28.
28.
GerstenR.ChardD. J.JayanthiM.BakerS. K.MorphyP.FlojoJ. (2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1202–1242.
29.
GerstenR.ClarkeB. S.JordanN. C. (2007). Screening for mathematics difficulties in K–3 students. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
30.
GerstenR.JordanN. C.FlojoJ. R. (2005). Early identification and interventions for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 293–403.
31.
GinsburgH. P.PappasS. (2004). SES, ethnic, and gender difference in young children’s informal addition and subtraction: A clinical interview investigation. Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 171–192.
32.
GreenesC.GinsburgH. P.BalfanzR. (2004). Big ideas for little kids. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 159–166.
33.
GriffinS.CaseR. (1997). Re-thinking the primary school curriculum: An approach based on cognitive science. Issues in Education, 3, 1–49.
34.
GriffinS.CaseR.CapodilupoA. (1997). Teaching for understanding: The importance of central conceptual structures in the elementary mathematics curriculum. In McKeoughA.LupertI.MariniA. (Eds.), Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning (pp. 121–151). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35.
GriffinS.CaseR.SieglerR. (1994). Rightstart: Providing the central conceptual prerequisites for first formal learning of arithmetic to students at risk for school failure. In McGillyK. (Ed.), Classroom lessons integrating cognitive theory in classroom practice (pp. 24–29). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
Harcourt Brace & Company (2003). Stanford early school achievement test (10th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
37.
HattieJ.TimperleyH. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81–112.
38.
HudsonP.MillerS. P.ButlerF. (2006). Adapting and merging explicit instruction within reform based mathematics classrooms. American Secondary Education, 35, 19–32.
39.
JordanN. C.GluttingJ.RamineniC. (2008). A number sense assessment tool for identifying children at risk for mathematical difficulties. In DowkerA. (Ed.), Mathematical difficulties: Psychology and intervention (pp. 45−58). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
40.
JordanN. C.GluttingJ.RamineniC. (2010). The importance of number sense to mathematics achievement in first and third grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 82–88.
41.
JordanN. C.HuttenlocherJ.LevineS. C. (1994). Assessing early arithmetic abilities: Effects of verbal and nonverbal response types on the calculation performance of middle- and low-income children. Learning and Individual Differences, 6, 413–432.
42.
JordanN.C.KaplanD.RamineniC.LocuniakM. N. (2008). Development of number combination skill in the early school years: When do fingers help?Developmental Science, 11, 662–668. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00715.x
43.
JordanN. C.KaplanD.OlahL. N.LocuniakM. N. (2006). Number sense growth in kindergarten: A longitudinal investigation of children at risk for mathematics difficulties. Child Development, 77, 153–175.
44.
Kame’enuiE. J.CarnineD. W.DixonR. C.SimmonsD. C.CoyneM. D. (2002). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
45.
KaminskiR.CummingsK. D.Powell-SmithK. A.GoodR. H. (2008). Best practices in using Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills for formative assessment and evaluation. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best Practices in school psychology V (pp. 1181–1204). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
46.
KleinA.StarkeyP. (2004). Fostering preschool children’s mathematical knowledge: Findings from the Berkeley Math Readiness Project. In ClementsD. H.SaramaJ. (Eds.), Engaging young children in mathematics: Standards for early mathematics education (pp. 343–360). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
47.
KroesbergenE. H.Van LuitJ. E. H.MaasC. J. M. (2004). Effectiveness of explicit and constructivist mathematics instruction for low-achieving students in the Netherlands. Elementary School Journal, 104, 233–251.
48.
MarkovitsZ.SowderJ. (1988). Mental computation and number sense. In BehrM. J.LacampagneC. B.WheelerM. M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the tenth annual meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 58–64). DeKalb, IL: International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.
49.
MarkovitsZ.SowderJ. (1994). Developing number sense: An intervention study in grade 7. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25, 4–29.
50.
MazzoccoM. M. M.ThompsonR. E. (2005). Kindergarten predictors of math learning disability. Learning Disability Research and Practice, 20, 142–155.
51.
MullisI. V. S.MartinM. O.GonzalezE. J.GregoryK. D.GardenR. A.O’ConnorK. M.ChrostowskiS. J.SmithT. A. (2000). TIMSS 1999 international mathematics report. Boston, MA: Boston College, Lynch School of Education, International Study Center.
52.
National Council of Teachers for Mathematics. (2000). The curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
53.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
54.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics (KilpatrickJ.SwaffordJ.FindellB., Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NunnallyL. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
57.
OkamatoY.CaseR. (1996). Exploring the microstructure of children’s central conceptual structures in the domain of number. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 61, 27–59.
58.
SaramaJ.ClementsD. H.SwaminathanS. (2003). Development of mathematical concepts of two-dimensional space in grid environments: An exploratory study. Cognition and Instruction, 21, 285–324.
59.
SayeskiK. L.PaulsenK. J. (2010). Mathematics reform curricula and special education: Identifying intersections and implications for practice. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 13–21. doi:10.1177/1053451210369515
60.
ScheuermannA. M.DeshlerD. D.SchumakerJ. B. (2009). The effects of the explicit inquiry routine on the performance of students with learning disabilities on one-variable equations. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 103–120.
61.
SoodS.JitendraA. K. (2007). A comparative analysis of number sense instruction in reform-based and traditional mathematics. Journal of Special Education, 41, 145–157.
62.
SowderJ.SchappelleB. (1994). Number sense-making. Arithmetic Teacher, 41, 342–346.
63.
TarrJ. E.ReysR. E.ReysB. J.ChavezO. (2008). The impact of middle-grades mathematics curricula and the classroom learning environment on student achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 39, 247–280.
64.
Technical Education Research Center. (2008). Investigations in number, data, and space. Glenview, IL: Pearson, Scott Foresman.
65.
VandeWalleJ. A. (2007). Elementary and middle school mathematics (6th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
66.
VandeWalleJ. A.KarpK. S.Bay-WilliamsJ. A. (2010). Elementary and middle school mathematics (7th ed.). New York, NY: Longman.
67.
WitzelB. S.MercerC. D.MillerM. D. (2003). Teaching algebra to students with learning difficulties: An investigation of an explicit instruction model. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 121–131.
68.
YangD. C. (2002). Teaching and learning number sense. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 152–157.
69.
YangD. C. (2003). Teaching and learning number sense: An intervention study of fifth grade students in Taiwan. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 115–134.
70.
YangD. C. (2005). Number sense strategies used by sixth grade students in Taiwan. Educational Studies, 31, 317–334.
71.
YangD. C. (2006). Developing number sense through real-life situations in school of Taiwan. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13, 104–110.
72.
YangD. C.HsuC. J.HuangM. C. (2004). A study of teaching and learning number sense for sixth grade students in Taiwan. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 407–430.
73.
YangD. C.LiM. N. (2008). An investigation of 3rd grade Taiwanese students’ performance in number sense. Educational Studies, 34, 443–455.
74.
YangD. C.WuW. R. (2010). The study of number sense: Realistic activities integrated into third-grade math classes in Taiwan. Journal of Educational Research, 103, 379–392.
75.
Young-LoveridgeJ. M. (2004). Effects on early numeracy of a program using number books and games. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 82–98.
