This study examined the efficacy of a Tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention program, ROOTS, focused on developing whole number understanding for students at risk in mathematics. A total of 29 classrooms were randomly assigned to treatment (ROOTS) or control (standard district practices) conditions. Measures of mathematics achievement were collected at pretest and posttest. Treatment and control students did not differ on mathematics assessments at pretest. Gain scores of at-risk intervention students were significantly greater than those of control peers, and the gains of at-risk treatment students were greater than the gains of peers not at risk, effectively reducing the achievement gap. Implications for Tier 2 mathematics instruction in a response to intervention (RtI) model are discussed.
AgodiniR.HarrisB.Atkins-BurnettS.HeavisideS.NovakT.MurphyR. (2009). Achievement effects of four early elementary school math curricula: Findings from first graders in 39 schools (Rep. No. NCEE 2009-4052). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
2.
BakerS.GerstenR.LeeD.-S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51–73.
3.
BakerS.FienH.BakerD. (2010). Robust reading instruction in the early grades: Conceptual and practical issues in the integration and evaluation of tier 1 and tier 2 instructional supports. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(9), 1–20.
4.
BerchD. B. (2005). Making sense of number sense: Implications for children with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 333–339. doi:10.1177/00222194050380040901
5.
BodovskiK.FarkasG. (2007). Mathematics growth in early elementary school: The roles of beginning knowledge, student engagement, and instruction. Elementary School Journal, 108, 115–130. doi:10.1086/525550
6.
BryantD. P.BryantB. R.RobertsG.VaughnS.PfannenstielK. H.PorterfieldJ.GerstenR. (2011). Early numeracy intervention program for first-grade students with mathematics difficulties. Exceptional Children, 78, 7–23.
7.
BurnsM. K.VanderheydenA. (2006). Response to intervention to assess learning disabilities: Introduction to the special series. Assessment for Effective Instructions, 32, 3–5. doi:10.1177/15345084060320010201
8.
CarnineD.SilbertJ.Kame’enuiE.TarverS. (2004). Direct instruction reading (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
9.
ChardD. J.BakerS. K.ClarkeB.JungjohannK.DavisK.SmolkowskiK. (2008). Preventing early mathematics difficulties: The feasibility of a rigorous kindergarten curriculum. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(1), 11–20.
10.
ChardD. J.ClarkeB.BakerS. K.OtterstedtJ.BraunD.KatzR. (2005). Using measures of number sense to screen for difficulties in mathematics: Preliminary findings. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 30(2), 3–14, doi:10.1177/073724770503000202
11.
ClarkeB.BakerS. K.ChardD. J. (2008). Best practices in mathematics assessment and intervention with elementary students. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed., pp. 453–464). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
12.
ClarkeB.ShinnM. R. (2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33(2), 234–248.
13.
ClarkeB.SmolkowskiK.BakerS. K.FienH.DoablerC. T.ChardD. J. (2011). The impact of a comprehensive tier 1 core kindergarten program on the achievement of students at-risk in mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 111, 561–584.
14.
ClementsD. H.SaramaJ. (2007). Effects of a preschool mathematics curriculum: Summative research on the Building Blocks project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 136–163. doi:10.2307/30034954
15.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
CoyneM. D.Kame’enuiE. J.CarnineD. W. (2011). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
18.
CribbieR. A.JamiesonJ. (2000). Structural equation models and the regression bias for measuring correlates of change. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 893–907. doi:10.1177/00131640021970970
19.
DavisK.JungjohannK. (2009). Early learning in mathematics: Level K (Unpublished curriculum). Eugene: University of Oregon, College of Education, Center on Teaching and Learning.
20.
DehaeneS. (1997). The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
21.
DoablerC. T.BakerS. K.KostyD. B.SmolkowskiK.ClarkeB.MillerS. J.FienH. (in press). Examining the association between explicit mathematics instruction and student mathematics achievement. Elementary School Journal.
22.
DoughertyB. J.FloresA.LouisE.SophianS. (2010). Developing essential understanding number and numeration for teaching mathematics in prekindergarten–grade 2 (Essential understanding series). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
23.
DuncanG. J.DowsettC. J.ClaessensA.MagnusonK.HustonA. C.KlebanovP. . . . JapelC. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1428–1446. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428
24.
DuncanG. J.EngelM.ClaessensA.DowsettC. J. (2013). The value of replication for developmental science. Manuscript submitted for publication.
25.
DysonN. I.JordanN. C.GluttingJ. (2013). A number sense intervention for low-income kindergartners at risk for mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 166–181. doi:10.1177/0022219411410233
26.
FixsenD.NaoomS.BlaseK.FriedmanR.WallaceF. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature (FMHI Pub. No. 231). Tampa: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, National Implementation Research Network.
27.
FuchsD.MockD.MorganP. L.YoungC. L. (2003), Responsiveness-to-intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157–171. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00072
28.
FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.PaulsenK.BryantJ. D.HamlettC. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 493–513. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.493
29.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L. (2012). The early prevention of mathematics difficulty: Its power and limitations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 257–269.
30.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ZumetaR. O. (2008). A curricular-sampling approach to progress monitoring. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 33, 225–233. doi:10.1177/1534508407313484
31.
FuchsL. S.VaughnS. (2012). Responsiveness to intervention: A decade later. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 195–203.
32.
GearyD. C. (1993). Mathematical disabilities: Cognitive, neuropsychological, and genetic components. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 345–362. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.345
33.
GearyD. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 4–15. doi:10.1177/00222194040370010201
34.
GerstenR. M.BeckmannS.ClarkeB.FoegenA.MarchL.StarJ. R.WitzelB. (2009). Assisting struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RTI) for elementary and middle schools (Practice Guide Report No. NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
35.
GerstenR.ChardD. (1999). Number sense: Rethinking arithmetic instruction for students with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 33, 18–28. doi:10.1177/002246699903300102
36.
GerstenR. M.ChardD.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. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431
37.
GriffinS. (2004). Building number sense with Number Worlds: A mathematics program for young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19, 173–180.
38.
GriffinS.CaseR.SieglerR. S. (1994). Rightstart: Providing the central conceptual prerequisites for first learning of arithmetic to students at risk for school failure. In McGillyK. (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 24–49). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39.
HaasM. (2005). Teaching methods for secondary algebra: A meta-analysis of findings. NASSP Bulletin, 89(642), 24–46. doi:10.1177/019263650508964204
40.
HanichL. B.JordanN. C.KaplanD.DickJ. (2001). Performance across different areas of mathematical cognition in children with learning difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 615–627. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.615
41.
HannanP. J.MurrayD. M. (1996). Gauss or Bernoulli? A Monte Carlo comparison of the performance of the linear mixed model and the logistic mixed model analyses in simulated community trials with a dichotomous outcome variable at the individual level. Evaluation Review, 20, 338–352.
42.
HedgesL. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 107–128. doi:10.3102/10769986006002107
43.
HoxJ. J. (2002). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44.
JordanN.KaplanD.HanichL. (2002). Achievement growth in children with learning difficulties in mathematics: Findings of a two-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 586–597. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.94.3.586
45.
JordanN. C.KaplanD.LocuniakM. N.RamineniC. (2007). Predicting first grade math achievement from developmental number sense trajectories. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 22, 36–46. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00229.x
46.
Kame’enuiE. J.SimmonsD. C. (1999). The architecture of instruction: Towards successful inclusion of students with disabilities Adapting curricular materials for the inclusive classroom (Vol. 1). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
47.
KleinA.StarkeyP.ClementsD.SaramaJ.IyerR. (2008). Effects of a pre-kindergarten mathematics intervention: A randomized experiment. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1, 155–178. doi:10.1080/19345740802114533
48.
KovaleskiJ. F.BlackL. (2010). Multi-tier service delivery. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 23–56). New York, NY: Guilford.
49.
KroesbergenE. H.Van LuitJ. E. H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs: A meta-analysis. Remedial & Special Education, 24, 97–114. doi:10.1177/07419325030240020501
50.
LagoR. M.DiPernaJ. C. (2010). Number sense in kindergarten: A factor-analytic study of the construct. School Psychology Review, 39, 164–180.
51.
LandisJ. R.KochG. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33, 159–174.
52.
LittleR. J. A.RubinD. B. (2002). Statistical analysis with missing data (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.
53.
LocuniakM. N.JordanN. C. (2008). Using kindergarten number sense to predict calculation fluency in second grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 451–459.
54.
MorganP. L.FarkasG.WuQ. (2009). Five-year growth trajectories of kindergarten children with learning difficulties in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 306–321. doi:10.1177/0022219408331037
55.
MurrayD. M. (1998). Design and analysis of group-randomized trials. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
56.
MurrayD. M.HannanP. J.PalsS. P.McCowenR. G.BakerW. L.BlitsteinJ. L. (2006). A comparison of permutation and mixed-model regression methods for the analysis of simulated data in the context of a group-randomized trial. Statistics in Medicine, 25, 375–388. doi:10.1002/sim.2233
57.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011a). Common core of data: Public elementary/secondary school universe survey 2009–10 (Version 1a) [Data file and documentation]. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/pubschuniv.asp
58.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011b). NAEP 2011 mathematics: Report card for the nation and the states. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics: A quest for coherence. Retrieved from http://www.nctm.org/standards/focalpoints.aspx?id=282
61.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X08329195
62.
National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: Mathematics Learning Study Committee.
63.
National Research Council. (2009). Mathematics learning in early childhood: Paths toward excellence and equity. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
64.
National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
65.
Nelson-WalkerN.FienH.SmithJ.BakerS.SmolkowskiK.KostyD. (2012, February). Systemic intervention in early reading: Impacts for students and teachers. Paper presented at the National Association of School Psychologists annual conference, Philadelphia, PA.
66.
Newman-GoncharR.ClarkeB.GerstenR. (2009). A summary of nine key studies: Multi-tier intervention and response to interventions for students struggling in mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
67.
OlsonJ. F.MartinM. O.MullisI. V. S. (2008). TIMSS 2007 technical report. Chestnut Hill, MA: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement.
68.
PRO-ED. (2007). Test of Early Mathematics Ability (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: Author.
69.
RosenthalR.RosnowR. L. (2008). Essentials of behavioral research: Methods and data analysis (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
SchaferJ. L.GrahamJ. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147
72.
SchmidtW.HouangR.CoganL. (2002). A coherent curriculum: The case of mathematics. American Educator, 26(2), 1–18.
73.
ShinnM. R. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York, NY: Guilford.
74.
SimmonsD. C.Kame’enuiE. J.HarnB.CoyneM. D.StoolmillerM.SantoroL. E.. . . KaufmanN. K. (2007). Attributes of effective and efficient kindergarten reading intervention: An examination of instructional time and design specificity. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 331–347. doi:10.1177/00222194070400040401
75.
StarkeyP.KleinA. (2008). Sociocultural influences on young children’s mathematical knowledge. In SarachoO. N.SpodekB. (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on mathematics in early childhood education (pp. 253–276). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
76.
van BelleG. (2008). Statistical rules of thumb (2nd ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley.
77.
WarrenS. F.FeyM. E.YoderP. J. (2007). Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 70–77. doi:10.1002/mrdd.20139
78.
What Works Clearinghouse. (2011). What Works Clearinghouse: Procedures and standards handbook (Version 2.1). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
79.
WuH. (2005). Must content dictate pedagogy in mathematics education. Unpublished manuscript.
