The Interaction of Learning Disability Status and Student Demographic Characteristics on Mathematics Growth

Abstract

This study examined mathematics achievement growth of students without disabilities (SWoD) and students with learning disabilities (LD) and tested whether growth and LD status interacted with student demographic characteristics. Growth was estimated in a statewide sample of 79,554 students over Grades 3 to 7. The LD group was significantly lower in achievement in each grade and had less growth than the SWoD group. We also found that student demographic characteristics were significantly related to mathematics growth, but only three demographic characteristics were statistically significant as interactions. We found that LD-SWoD differences at Grade 3 were moderated by student sex, while Black race/ethnicity and free or reduced lunch (FRL) status moderated LD-SWoD differences at all grades. These results provide practitioners and policy makers with more specific information about which particular LD students show faster or slower growth in mathematics. Our results show that simply including predictors in a regression equation may produce different results than direct testing of interactions and achievement gaps may be larger for some LD subgroups of students than previously reported.

Keywords

interaction effects students with learning disabilities student demographic characteristics mathematics achievement growth

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Aiken

L. S.

West

S. G.

(1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Bloom

H. S.

Hill

C. J.

Black

A. R.

Lipsey

M. W.

(2008). Performance trajectories and performance gaps as achievement effect-size benchmarks for educational interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1, 289–328.

Bryant

D. P.

Kim

S. A.

Hartman

Bryant

B. R.

(2006). Standards-based mathematics instruction and teaching middle school students with mathematical disabilities. In Montague

Jitendra

A. K.

(Eds.), Teaching mathematics to middle school students with learning disabilities (pp. 7–28). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Cirino

P. T.

Fuchs

L. S.

Elias

J. T

Powell

S. R.

Schumacher

R. F.

(2015). Cognitive and mathematical profiles for different forms of learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 156–175.

Cohen

(1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.

Cohen

West

S. G.

Aiken

L. S.

(2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Lambert

Hamlett

(2012). The cognitive and academic profiles of reading and mathematics learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 79–95.

Coutinho

M. J.

Oswald

D. P.

Best

A. M.

(2002). The influence of sociodemographics and gender on the disproportionate identification of minority students as having learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 49–59.

Curran

P. J.

Bauer

D. J

Willoughby

M. T.

(2004). Testing main effects and interactions in hierarchical linear growth models. Psychological Methods, 9, 220–237.

10.

Desimone

Long

D. A.

(2010). Teacher effects and the achievement gap: Do teacher and teaching quality influence the achievement gap between Black and White and high-and low-SES students in the early grades. Teachers College Record, 112, 3024–3073.

11.

Eckes

Swando

(2009). Special education subgroups under NCLB: Issues to consider. Teachers College Record, 111, 2479–2504.

12.

Evans

G. W.

Whipple

S. S.

(2013). Cumulative risk and child development. Psychological Bulletin, 139, 1342–1396.

13.

Fryer

R. G.

Levitt

S. D.

(2004). Understanding the Black–White test score gap in the first two years of school. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86, 447–464.

14.

Fuchs

L. S.

Compton

D. L.

Fuchs

Paulsen

Bryant

J. D.

Hamlett

C. L.

(2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 493–513.

15.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Compton

D. L.

(2012). The early prevention of mathematics difficulty: Its power and limitations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 257–269.

16.

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, 206–223.

17.

Gersten

Beckman

Clarke

Foegen

Marsh

Star

J. R.

Witzel

(2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 200-4060). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

18.

Hardy

M. A.

(1993). Regression with dummy variables. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

19.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford.

20.

Hedges

L. V.

Nowell

(1999). Changes in the Black–White gap in achievement test scores. Sociology of Education, 72, 111–135.

21.

Hibel

Farkas

Morgan

P. L.

(2010). Who is placed into special education? Sociology of Education, 83, 312–332.

22.

A. D.

Reardon

S. F.

(2012). Estimating achievement gaps from test scores reported in ordinal “proficiency” categories. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 37, 489–517.

23.

Jaccard

Turrisi

(2003). Interaction effects in multiple regression (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

24.

Jordan

N. C.

Kaplan

Hanich

L. B.

(2002). Achievement growth in children with learning difficulties in mathematics: Findings of a two-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 586–597.

25.

Jordan

N. C.

Levine

S. C.

(2009). Socioeconomic variation, number competence, and mathematics learning difficulties in young children. Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 15, 60–68.

26.

Judge

Watson

S. M. R.

(2011). Longitudinal outcomes for mathematics achievement for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Educational Research, 104, 147–157.

27.

Lee

(2010). Tripartite growth trajectories of reading and mathematics achievement: Tracking national academic progress at primary, middle and high school levels. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 800–832.

28.

Lee

V. E.

Burkam

D. T.

(2002). Inequality at the starting gate. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

29.

Lyon

G. R.

Fletcher

J. M.

Shaywitz

S. E.

Shaywitz

B. A.

Torgesen

J. K.

Wood

F. B.

. . .Olson

(2001). Rethinking learning disabilities. In Finn

C. E.

Rotherham

A. J.

Hokanson

C. R.

(Eds.), Rethinking special education for a new century (pp. 259–287). Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation & Progressive Policy Institute.

30.

McCoach

B. D.

O’Connell

A. A.

Reis

S. M.

Levitt

H. A.

(2006). Growing readers: A hierarchical linear model of children’s reading growth during the first 2 years of school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 14–28.

31.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

Hibel

(2008). Matthew effects for whom? Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 187–198.

32.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

Hillemeier

M. M.

Maczuga

(2012). Are minority children disproportionately represented in early intervention and early childhood special education? Educational Researcher, 41, 339–351.

33.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

Hillemeier

M. M.

Mattison

Maczuga

Cook

(2015). Minorities are disproportionately underrepresented in special education longitudinal evidence across five disability conditions. Educational Researcher, 44, 278–292.

34.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

Maczuga

(2015). Which instructional practices most help first-grade students with and without mathematics difficulties? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 37, 184–205.

35.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

(2009). Five-year growth trajectories of kindergarten children with learning difficulties in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 306–321.

36.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

(2011). Kindergarten children’s growth trajectories in reading and mathematics: Who falls increasingly behind? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 472–488.

37.

National Early Literacy Panel. (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute of Literacy.

38.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, § 115 Stat. 1425 (2002).

39.

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. (2006). The North Carolina Mathematics Tests: Technical report. Raleigh: Author. Retrieved from http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/accountability/testing/mathtechmanual.pdf

40.

Parrila

Aunola

Leskinen

Nurmi

J.-E.

Kirby

J. R.

(2005). Development of individual differences in reading: Results from longitudinal studies in English and Finnish. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 299–319.

41.

Pedhazur

E. J.

(1997). Multiple regression in behavioral research. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace.

42.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Bryk

A. S.

Cheong

Y. F.

Congdon

R. T.

du Toit

(2011). HLM 7: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

43.

Reardon

S. F.

Galindo

(2009). The Hispanic–White achievement gap in math and reading in the elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 853–891.

44.

Reardon

S. F.

Greenberg

E. H.

Kalogrides

Shores

K. A.

Valentino

R. A.

(2013). Left behind? The effect of No Child Left Behind on academic achievement gaps. Stanford, CA: Center for Education Policy Analysis.

45.

Shifrer

Muller

Callahan

(2011). Disproportionality and learning disabilities: Parsing apart race, socioeconomic status, and language. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44, 246–257.

46.

Shin

Davison

M. L.

Long

J. D.

Chan

C.-K.

Heistad

(2013). Exploring gains in reading and mathematics achievement among regular and exceptional students using growth curve modeling. Learning and Individual Differences, 23, 92–100.

47.

Siegler

R. S.

(2009). Improving the numerical understanding of children from low-income families. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 118–124.

48.

Stevens

J. J.

Schulte

A. C.

Elliott

S. N.

Nese

J. F. T.

Tindal

(2015). Mathematics achievement growth of students with and without disabilities on a statewide achievement test. Journal of School Psychology, 53, 45–62.

49.

Sullivan

A. L.

Bal

(2013). Disproportionality in special education: Effects of individual and school variables on disability risk. Exceptional Children, 79, 475–494.

50.

Swanson

H. L.

Jerman

Zheng

(2009). Math disabilities and reading disabilities: Can they be separated? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27, 175–196.

51.

Tate

W. F.

(1997). Race-ethnicity, SES, gender, and language proficiency trends in mathematics achievement: An update. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 652–679.

52.

Thissen

Orlando

(2001). Item response theory for items scored in two categories. In Thissen

Wainer

(Eds.), Test scoring (pp. 73–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

53.

U.S. Department of Education. (2014). 36th annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/osep/index.html

54.

Vukovic

R. K.

Fuchs

L. S.

Geary

D. C.

Jordan

N. C.

Gersten

Siegler

R. S.

(2014). Sources of individual differences in children’s understanding of fractions. Child Development, 85, 1461–1476.

55.

Watson

S. M. R.

Gable

R. A.

(2013). Unraveling the complex nature of mathematics learning disability: Implications for research and practice. Learning Disability Quarterly, 36, 178–187.

56.

Wei

Lenz

K. B.

Blackorby

(2013). Math growth trajectories of students with disabilities: Disability category, gender, racial, and socioeconomic status differences from ages 7 to 17. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 154–165.