Purposeful Practice Opportunities: How Guided and Independent Practice Informs Number Sense Development

Abstract

Although practice is essential for academic development, questions remain regarding how much and what kinds of practice best support early learners. To examine the role of practice in developing mathematical proficiency, we analyzed rates of guided and independent practice opportunities provided in a kindergarten mathematics intervention for 880 students with mathematics difficulties (MD) across 255 groups. Results indicate that (a) students’ initial skills levels did not predict rates of practice opportunities provided, (b) rates of practice were not associated with student performance changes, (c) effects were not moderated by initial skills, and (d) no optimal ratio of guided to independent practice, or guided practice to academic feedback, emerged. Findings suggest that while providing deliberate, purposeful practice is crucial, effectiveness does not depend on fixed thresholds. Instead, teachers should scaffold practice opportunities based on student need, adjusting supported and independent practice within high-quality instruction. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

Keywords

mathematics intervention explicit instruction kindergarten guided and independent practice academic feedback learning difficulties

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Archer

Hughes

C. A.

(2012). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. Guilford Press.

Baldwin

S. A.

Bauer

D. J.

Stice

Rohde

(2011). Evaluating models for partially clustered designs. Psychological Methods, 16(2), 149–165. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023464

Berch

D. B.

(2005). Making sense of number sense: Implications for children with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(4), 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380040901

Campitelli

Gobet

(2011). Deliberate practice: Necessary but not sufficient. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(5), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411421922

Carnine

(1997). Instructional design in mathematics for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilitie, 30(2), 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949703000201

Carpenter

S. K.

Pan

S. C.

Butler

A. C.

(2022). The science of effective learning with spacing and retrieval practice. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 496–511. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-022-00089-1

Clarke

Doabler

C. T.

Baker

S. K.

Smolkowski

(2012). Project ROOTS: A randomized control trial of a tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. U.S. Department of Education; Institute of Education Sciences, National Center on Special Education Research, Goal 3 Efficacy Trial.

Clarke

Doabler

C. T.

Smolkowski

Kurtz-Nelson

Baker

Fien

Kosty

(2016). Testing the immediate and long-term efficacy of a tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9(4), 607–634. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2015.1116034

Clarke

Doabler

C. T.

Smolkowski

Turtura

Kosty

Fien

Baker

(2020). Examining the efficacy of a kindergarten mathematics intervention by group size and initial skill: Implications for practice and policy. Elementary School Journal, 121(1), 125–153. https://doi.org/10.1086/710041

10.

Clarke

Gersten

R. M.

Dimino

Rolfhus

(2011). Assessing student proficiency of number sense (ASPENS). Sopris Learning, Cambium Learning Group.

11.

Clarke

Shinn

M. R.

(2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33(2), 234–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/02796015.2004.12086245

12.

Clements

D. H.

Agodini

Harris

(2013). Instructional practices and student math achievement: Correlations from a study of math curricula (NCEE Evaluation Brief No. 2013-4020). National Center for Educational Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences.

13.

Doabler

C. T.

Baker

S. K.

Kosty

D. B.

Smolkowski

Clarke

Miller

S. J.

Fien

(2015). Examining the association between explicit mathematics instruction and student mathematics achievement. Elementary School Journal, 115(3), 303–333. https://doi.org/10.1086/679969

14.

Doabler

C. T.

Clarke

(2012). ROOTS assessment of early numeracy skills [Unpublished measure]. University of Oregon, Center on Teaching and Learning.

15.

Doabler

C. T.

Clarke

Kosty

Smolkowski

Kurtz-Nelson

Baker

(2019). Building number sense among English learners: A multisite randomized controlled trial of a tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47, 432–444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.08.004

16.

Doabler

C. T.

Clarke

Kosty

Smolkowski

Liu

Baker

S. K.

(2021). Measuring the quantity and quality of explicit instructional interactions in an empirically validated tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. Learning Disability Quarterly, 44(1), 50–62. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948719884921

17.

Doabler

C. T.

Clarke

Kosty

D. B.

Kurtz-Nelson

Smolkowski

Baker

S. K.

(2016). Testing the efficacy of a tier 2 mathematics intervention: A conceptual replication study. Exceptional Children, 83(1), 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402916660084

18.

Doabler

C. T.

Stoolmiller

Kennedy

Nelson

N. J.

Clarke

Gearin

Smolkowski

Baker

S. K.

(2019). Do components of explicit instruction explain the differential effectiveness of a core mathematics program for students with mathematics difficulties? A mediated moderation analysis. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 44(3), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508418758364

19.

Dougherty

B. J.

Flores

Louis

Sophian

Zbiek

R. M.

(2010). Developing an essential understanding of numbers and numeration for teaching mathematics in pre-K–2. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

20.

Engelmann

Carnine

(1982). Theory of instruction: Principles and applications (rev. ed.). ADI Press.

21.

Ericsson

K. A.

Krampe

R. T.

Tesch-Römer

(1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-295x.100.3.363

22.

Ericsson

K. A.

Roring

R. W.

Nandagopal

(2007). Giftedness and evidence for reproducibly superior performance: An account based on the expert performance framework. High Ability Studies, 18(1), 3–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130701350593

23.

Filderman

M. J.

Toste

J. R.

Didion

Peng

Clemens

N. H.

(2018). Data-based decision making in Reading interventions: A synthesis and meta-analysis of the effects for struggling readers. The Journal of Special Education, 52(3), 174–187. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466918790001

24.

Fitts

P. M.

Posner

M. I.

(1967). Human performance. Brooks/Cole.

25.

Fornoff

(2025, May 22). Cliburn competition kicks off in Fort Worth with 28 pianists, after two drop out. KERA News. https://www.keranews.org/arts-culture/2025-05-21/2025-van-cliburn-competition-kicks-off-in-fort-worth-after-2-pianists-drop-out

26.

Fuchs

L. S.

Fuchs

Compton

D. L.

(2012). The early prevention of mathematics difficulty: Its power and limitations. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45(3), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442167

27.

Fuchs

L. S.

Newman-Gonchar

Schumacher

Dougherty

Bucka

Karp

K. S.

Woodward

Clarke

Jordan

N. C.

Gersten

Jayanthi

Keating

Morgan

(2021). Assisting students struggling with mathematics : Intervention in the elementary grades (WWC 2021006). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE), Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://whatworks.ed.gov/

28.

Geary

D. C.

(2011). Cognitive predictors of achievement growth in mathematics: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 47(6), 1539–1552. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025510

29.

Gersten

Beckmann

Clarke

Foegen

Marsh

Star

J. R.

Witzel

(2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009-4060). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED504995

30.

Gersten

Chard

(1999). Number sense: Rethinking arithmetic instruction for students with mathematical disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 33(1), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699903300102

31.

Gersten

R. M.

Baker

S. K.

Haager

Graves

A. W.

(2005). Exploring the role of teacher quality in predicting Reading outcomes for first-grade English learners: An observational study. Remedial and Special Education, 26(4), 197–214. https://doi.org/10.1177/07419325050260040201

32.

Ginsburg

H. P.

Baroody

A. J.

(2003). Test of early mathematics ability – third edition (TEMA-3). ProEd.

33.

Hattie

Yates

(2014). Visible learning and the science of how we learn. Routledge.

34.

Helsen

W. F.

Starkes

J. L.

Hodges

N. J.

(1998). Team sports and the theory of deliberate practice. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 20(1), 12–34. https://doi.org/10.1123/jsep.20.1.12

35.

Hughes

C. A.

Riccomini

P. J.

(2019). Purposeful independent practice procedures: An introduction to the special issue. Teaching Exceptional Children, 51(6), 405–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059919850067

36.

Jordan

N. C.

Glutting

Ramineni

(2008). A number sense assessment tool for identifying children at risk for mathematical difficulties. In Dowker

(Ed.), Mathematical difficulties: Psychology and intervention (pp. 45–57). Academic Press.

37.

Kilpatrick

Swafford

Findell

(2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Mathematics Learning Study Committee.

38.

LaBerge

Samuels

S. J.

(1974). Towards a theory of automatic information processing in Reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2

39.

Landis

J. R.

Koch

G. G.

(1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310

40.

Lehmann

A. C.

Ericsson

K. A.

(1997). Research on expert performance and deliberate practice: Implications for the education of amateur musicians and music students. Psychomusicology: A Journal of Research in Music Cognition, 16(1-2), 40–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0094068

41.

Logan

G. D.

(1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95(4), 492–527. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.95.4.492

42.

Mielicki

M. K.

Wiley

(2022). Exploring the necessary conditions for observing interleaved practice benefits in math learning. Learning and Instruction, 80, 101583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2022.101583

43.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

Hillemeier

M. M.

Maczuga

(2016). Science achievement gaps begin very early, persist, and are largely explained by modifiable factors. Educational Researcher, 45(1), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16633182

44.

Morgan

P. L.

Farkas

(2009). Five-year growth trajectories of kindergarten children with learning difficulties in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(4), 306–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408331037

45.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common core standards for mathematics. http://www.corestandards.org/Math

46.

Paumgarten

N. H.

(2017, November 27). Confidence game: The intense discipline of a skiing prodigy. The New Yorker, 36–45.

47.

Pearson

P. D.

Gallagher

M. C.

(1983). The instruction of Reading comprehension. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8(3), 317–344. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476x(83)90019-x

48.

Pellegrino

J. W.

Goldman

S. R.

(1987). Information processing and elementary mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948702000105

49.

Peng

Namkung

Barnes

Sun

(2016). A meta-analysis of mathematics and working memory: Moderating effects of working memory domain, types of mathematics skill, and sample characteristics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(4), 455–473. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000079

50.

Perfetti

C. A.

(1985). Reading ability. Oxford University Press.

51.

Pianta

R. C.

Hamre

B. K.

(2009). Conceptualization, measurement, and improvement of classroom processes: Standardized observation can leverage capacity. Educational Researcher, 38(2), 109–119. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09332374

52.

Prawat

R. S.

(1989). Promoting access to knowledge, strategy, and disposition in students: A research synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543059001001

53.

Rosenshine

(2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. American Educator, 12–20.

54.

Rosnow

R. L.

Rosenthal

(2003). Effect sizes for experimenting psychologists. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57(3), 221–237. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087427

55.

SAS Institute. (2016). Base SAS® 9.4 procedures guide (6th ed.). SAS Institute, Inc., Product Documentation. http://support.sas.com/documentation/index.html

56.

Schafer

J. L.

Graham

J. W.

(2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7(2), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.2.147

57.

Smolkowski

Gunn

(2012). Reliability and validity of the classroom observations of student-teacher interactions (COSTI) for kindergarten Reading instruction. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27(2), 316–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.09.004

58.

Snijders

T. A. B.

Bosker

R. J.

(2012). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.

59.

Snyder

Reid

Stoolmiller

Howe

Brown

Dagne

Cross

(2006). The role of behavioral observation in measurement systems for randomized prevention trials. Prevention Science, 7, 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-005-0020-3

60.

Vaughn

Gersten

Dimino

Taylor

M. J.

Newman-Gonchar

Krowka

Kieffer

M. J.

McKeown

Reed

Sanchez

St Martin

Wexler

Morgan

Yañez

Jayanthi

(2022). Providing reading interventions for students in grades 4-9 (WWC 2022007). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.