Research has suggested that different strategies used when solving fraction problems are highly correlated with students’ problem-solving accuracy. This study (a) utilized latent profile modeling to classify students into three different strategic developmental levels in solving fraction comparison problems and (b) accordingly provided differentiated strategic training for students starting from two different strategic developmental levels. In Study 1 we assessed 49 middle school students’ performance on fraction comparison problems and categorized students into three clusters of strategic developmental clusters: a cross-multiplication cluster with the highest accuracy, a representation strategy cluster with medium accuracy, and a whole-number strategy cluster with the lowest accuracy. Based on the strategic developmental levels identified in Study 1, in Study 2 we selected three students from the whole-number strategy cluster and another three students from the representation strategy cluster and implemented a differentiated strategic training intervention within a multiple-baseline design. Results showed that both groups of students transitioned from less advanced to more advanced strategies and improved their problem-solving accuracy during the posttest, the maintenance test, and the generalization test.
AkaikeH. (1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716–723. doi:10.1109/TAC.1974.1100705
2.
AlibaliM. W.PhillipsK. M.FischerA. D. (2009). Learning new problem-solving strategies leads to changes in problem representation. Cognitive Development, 24, 89–101. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.12.005
3.
BehrM. J.WachsmuthI.PostT. R.LeshR. (1984). Order and equivalence of rational numbers: A clinical teaching experiment. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 5, 323–341.
4.
BottgeB.ButlerM.ChooS.GassawayL. (2013, April). Detecting error patterns and improving fraction computation. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the Council for Exceptional Children, San Antonio, TX.
5.
BottgeB. A.HeinrichsM.MehtaZ. D.HungY. (2002). Weighing the benefits of anchored math instruction for students with disabilities in general education classes. Journal of Special Education, 35, 186–200. doi:10.1177/002246690203500401
6.
BottgeB. A.RuedaE.GrantT. S.StephensA. C.LaroqueP. T. (2010). Anchoring problem-solving and computation instruction in context-rich learning environments. Exceptional Children, 76, 417–437.
7.
BriganceA. H. (1999). Brigance Diagnostic Comprehensive Inventory of Basic Skills–Revised. North Billerica, MA: Curriculum Associates.
8.
ButlerF. M.MillerS. P.CrehanK.BabbittB.PierceT. (2003). Fraction instruction for students with mathematics disabilities: Comparing two teaching sequences. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 99–111. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00066
9.
CalhoonM. B.EmersonR. W.FloresM.HouchinsD. E. (2007). Computational fluency performance profile of high school students with mathematics disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 292–303. doi:10.1177/07419325070280050401
10.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2012). Common Core state standards for mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/
11.
DavisR. B.MaherC. A. (1997). How students think: the role of representations. In EnglishL. (Ed.), Mathematical reasoning: Analogies, metaphors, and images (pp. 93–115). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12.
de la TorreJ.DouglasJ. (2008). Model evaluation and multiple strategies in cognitive diagnosis: An analysis of fraction subtraction data. Psychometrika, 73, 595–624. doi:10.1007/s11336-008-9063-2
13.
FloresM. M.KaylorM. (2007). The effects of a direct instruction program on the fraction performance of middle school students at-risk for failure in mathematics. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34, 84–94.
14.
FuchsL. S.PowellS. R.SeethalerP. M.CirinoP. T.FletcherJ. M.FuchsD.HamlettC. L. (2010). The effects of strategic counting instruction, with and without deliberate practice, on number combinations skill among students with mathematics difficulties. Learning and Individual Differences, 20, 89–100. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2009.09.003
15.
FuchsL. S.PowellS. R.SeethalerP. M.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.CirinoP. T.FletcherJ. M. (2010). A framework for remediating number combination deficits. Exceptional Children, 76, 135–156.
FujimuraN. (2001). Facilitating children’s proportional reasoning: A model of reasoning processes and effects of intervention on strategy change. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 589–603. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.589.
18.
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. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431
19.
GerstenR.KellyB. (1992). Coaching secondary special education teachers in implementation of an innovative videodisc mathematics curriculum. Remedial and Special Education, 13(4), 40–51. doi:10.1177/074193259201300411
20.
GewertzC. (2010). Expert issues warning on formative-assessment uses: Comments aimed at two state consortia working on common tests. Education Week, 30(12), 6.
21.
HancockG.SamuelsenK. (2008). Advances in latent variable mixture models. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
22.
HechtS. A.CloseL.SantisiM. (2003). Sources of individual differences in fraction skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 86, 277–303. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2003.08.003
23.
HornerR. D.BaerD. M. (1978). Multi-probe technique: A variation of multiple baselines. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 11, 189–196. doi:10.1901/jaba.1978.11-189
24.
HuntJ. H.VasquezE. (in press). Effects of ratio strategies intervention on knowledge of ratio equivalence for students with learning disability. Journal of Special Education. doi:10.1177/0022466912474102
25.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq. (2004).
26.
JordanL.MillerD.MercerC. D. (1999). The effects of concrete to semiconcrete to abstract instruction in the acquisition and retention of fraction concepts and skills. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 9, 115–122.
27.
JordanN. C.HansenN.FuchsL. S.SieglerR. S.GerstenR.MicklosD. (2013). Developmental predictors of fraction concepts and procedures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116, 45–58. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.02.001
28.
JosephL. M.HunterA. D. (2001). Differential application of a cue card strategy for solving fraction problems: Exploring instructional utility of the cognitive assessment system. Child Study Journal, 31, 123–136.
29.
KellyB.GerstenR.CarnineD. (1990). Student error patterns as a function of curriculum design: Teaching fractions to remedial high school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 23–29. doi:10.1177/002221949002300108
LewisK. E. (2014, April). Math learning disabilities and fraction comparisons: Understanding errors. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Education Researcher Association, Philadelphia, PA.
32.
MaqsudM. (1998). Effects of metacognitive instruction on mathematics achievement an attitude towards mathematics. Educational Research, 40, 237–243. doi:10.1080/0013188980400210
33.
MazzoccoM. M.MyersG. F. (2003). Complexities in identifying and defining mathematics learning disability in the primary school-age years. Annals of Dyslexia, 53, 218–253. doi:10.1007/s11881-003-0011-7
34.
MazzoccoM. M.MyersG. F.LewisK. E.HanichL. B.MurphyM. 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, 371–387. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2013.01.005
35.
MisquittaR. (2011). A review of the literature: Fraction instruction for struggling learners in mathematics. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 26, 109–119. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00330.x
36.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2007). Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning. Washington, DC: Author.
37.
National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundation for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
38.
NiY.ZhouY. D. (2005). Teaching and learning fraction and rational numbers: The origins and implications of whole number bias. Educational Psychologist, 40, 27–52. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4001_3
39.
NitkoA. J.BrookhartS. M. (2011). Educational assessment of students (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.
40.
NylundK. L.AsparouhovT.MuthénB. O. (2007). Deciding on the number of classes in latent class analysis and growth mixture modeling: A Monte Carlo simulation study. Structural Equation Modeling, 14, 535–569. doi:10.1080/10705510701575396
41.
OgilvieC. A. (2009). Changes in students’ problem-solving strategies in a course that includes context-rich, multifaceted problems. Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research, 5, 020102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevSTPER.5.020102
42.
PerkinsV.CullinanD. (1985). Effects of direct instruction for fraction skills. Education and Treatment of Children, 8, 41–50.
43.
PiagetJ.InhelderB.SzeminskaA. (1960). The child’s conception of geometry. New York, NY: Basic Books.
44.
PitkethlyA.HuntingR. (1996). A review of recent research in the area of initial fraction concepts. Educational Studies of Mathematics, 30, 5–38. doi:10.1007/BF00163751
45.
ProvasnikS.KastbergD.FerraroD.LemanskiN.RoeyS.JenkinsF. (2012). Highlights from Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2011: Mathematics and science achievement of U.S. fourth- and eighth-grade students in an international context (NCES 2013-009). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
46.
RaudenbushS. W. (2005). How do we study “what happens next”?Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 602, 131–144.
47.
ScarlatoM. C.BurrW. A. (2002). Teaching fractions to middle school students. Journal of Direct Instruction, 2, 23–38.
48.
SchmeelkS. E. (2010). Tracing students’ growing understanding of rational numbers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Rutgers University, Graduate School of Education, New Brunswick, NJ.
49.
SchneiderM.SieglerR. S. (2010). Representations of the magnitudes of fractions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1227–1238. doi:10.1037/a0018170
50.
SiegelS.CastellanN.J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
51.
SieglerR. S. (1988). Individual differences in strategy choices: Good students, not-so-good students, and perfectionists. Child Development, 59, 833–851. doi:10.2307/1130252
52.
SieglerR. S. (2006). Microgenetic analyses of learning. In DamonW.LernerR. M. (Series Eds.), KuhnD.SieglerR. S. (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2. Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 464–510). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
53.
SieglerR.CarpenterT.FennellF.GearyD.LewisJ.OkamotoY.. . . WrayJ. (2010). Developing effective fractions instruction: A practice guide (NCEE 2010-009). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/
54.
SieglerR. S.DuncanG. I.Davis-KeanP. E.DuckworthK.ClaessensA.EngelM.. . . ChenM. (2012). Early predictors of high school mathematics achievement. Psychological Science, 23, 691–697. doi:10.1177/0956797612440101
55.
SieglerR. S.FazioL. K.BaileyD. H.ZhouX. (2013). Fractions: The new frontier for theories of numerical development. Trends in Cognitive Science, 17, 13-19. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.11.004
56.
SieglerR. S.PykeA. A. (2013). Developmental and individual differences in understanding fractions. Developmental Psychology, 49, 1994–2004. doi:10.1037/a0031200
57.
SieglerR. S.ShragerJ. (1984). Strategy choices in addition and subtraction: How do children know what to do? In SophianC. (Ed.), The origins of cognitive skills (pp. 229-293). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
58.
SieglerR. S.SvetinaM. (2006). What leads children to adopt new strategies? A microgenetic/cross sectional study of class inclusion. Child Development, 77, 997–1015. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00915.x
59.
SieglerR. S.ThompsonC. A.SchneiderM. (2011). An integrated theory of whole number and fraction development. Cognitive Psychology, 62, 273–296. doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2011.03.001
60.
SimonM. A.TzurR.HeinzK.KinzelM. (2004). Explicating a mechanism for conceptual learning: Elaborating the construct of reflective abstraction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35, 305–329. doi:10.2307/30034818
61.
SmithM. S.SteinM. K. (1998). Selecting and creating mathematical tasks: From research to practice. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 3, 344–350.
62.
SteenckenE. P.MaherC. A. (2003). Tracing fourth graders’ learning of fractions: Early episodes from a year-long teaching experiment. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 22, 113–132. doi:10.1016/S0732-3123(03)00017-8
63.
SteffeL. P.ThompsonP. W. (2000). Teaching experiment methodology: Underlying principles and essential elements. In KellyA. E.LeshR. A. (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 267–306). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
64.
TestD. W.EllisM. F. (2005). The effects of lap fractions on addition and subtraction of fractions with students with mild disabilities. Education and Treatment of Children, 28, 11–24.
65.
TzurR. (1999). An integrated study of children’s construction of improper fractions and the teacher’s role in promoting that learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 30, 390–416.
66.
TzurR.SimonM. A. (2004). Distinguishing two stages of mathematics conceptual learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2, 287–304. doi:10.1007/s10763-004-7479-4
67.
VamvakoussiX.VosniadouS. (2010). How many decimals are there between two fractions? Aspects of secondary school students’ understanding of rational numbers and their notation. Cognition and Instruction, 28, 181–209. doi:10.1080/07370001003676603
68.
VermuntJ. K.MagidsonJ. (2002). Latent class cluster analysis. In HagenaarsJ. A.McCutcheonA. L. (Eds.), Applied latent class analysis (pp. 89–106). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
69.
WitzelB.SmithS. W.BrownellM. T. (2001). How can I help students with learning disabilities in algebra?Intervention in School and Clinic, 37, 101–104.
70.
WoodwardJ.BaxterJ.RobinsonR. (1999). Rules and reasons: Decimal instruction for academically low achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 14, 15–24. doi:10.1207/sldrp1401_2
71.
ZhangD.XinY. P. (2012). A follow-up meta-analysis for word-problem-solving interventions for students with mathematics difficulties. Journal of Educational Research, 105, 303–318. doi:10.1080/00220671.2011.627397
72.
ZhangD.XinY.HarrisK.DingY. (2014). Improving multiplication strategic development in children with math difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37, 15–30. doi:10.1177/0731948713500146
73.
ZhangD.XinY. P.SiL. (2013). Transition from intuitive to advanced strategies in multiplicative reasoning for students with math disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 47, 50–64. doi:10.1177/0022466911399098
