Replication studies are extremely rare in education. This randomized controlled trial (RCT) is a scale-up replication of Fuchs et al., which in a sample of 139 found a statistically significant positive impact for Number Rockets, a small-group intervention for at-risk first graders that focused on building understanding of number operations. The study was relatively small scale (one site) and highly controlled. This replication was implemented at a much larger scale—in 76 schools in four urban districts; 994 at-risk students participated. Intervention students participated in approximately 30 hours of small-group work in addition to classroom instruction; control students received typical instruction and whatever assistance the teacher would normally provide. Intervention students showed significantly superior performance on a broad measure of mathematics proficiency.
AdamsG. L.EngelmannS. (1996). Research on direct instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems.
2.
AgodiniR.HarrisB. (2010). An experimental evaluation of four elementary school math curricula. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3(3), 199–253. doi:10.1080/19345741003770693
3.
AgodiniR.HarrisB.Atkins-BurnettS.HeavisideS.NovakT.MurphyR. (2009). Achievement effects of four early elementary school math curricula: Findings from first graders in 39 Schools (NCEE 2009-4052). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20094052/pdf/20094052.pdf
4.
BakerS.GerstenG.FlojoJ.KatzR.ChardD. J.ClarkeB. (2006). Preventing math difficulties in young children: Focus on effective screening of early number sense delays. (Report No. 0305). Eugene, OR: Pacific Institutes for Research.
5.
BakerS.GerstenR.LeeD. S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51–73. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1002308
6.
BinetA.SimonT. H. (1916). The development of intelligence in children. (KiteE. S., Trans.). Baltimore, MD: Williams and Wilkins Company. (Original work published 1905)
7.
BloomH. S.Richburg-HayesL.BlackA. R. (2007). Using covariates to improve precision for studies that randomize schools to evaluate educational interventions. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(1), 30–59. doi:10.3102/0162373707299550
BormanG. D.HewesG. M.OvermanL. T.BrownS. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73(2), 125–230. doi:10.3102/00346543073002125
10.
BormanG. D.SlavinR. E.CheungA. C.ChamberlainA. M.MaddenN. A.ChambersB. (2007). Final reading outcomes of the national randomized field trial of Success for All. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 701–731. doi:10.3102/0002831207306743
11.
BryantD. P.BryantB. R.GerstenR.ScammaccaN.FunkC.WinterA.. . . PoolC. (2008). The effects of Tier 2 intervention on the mathematics performance of first-grade students who are at risk for mathematics difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(2), 47–63. doi:10.2307/20528817
12.
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(1), 7–23.
13.
CampbellD. (1966). Pattern matching as an essential in distal knowing. In HammondK. (Ed.), The psychology of Egon Brunswik (pp. 81–106). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
14.
CampbellD. (1986). Science’s social system of validity-enhancing collective belief change and the problems of the social sciences. In FiskeD.ShwederR. (Eds.), Metatheory in social science (pp. 108–135). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
15.
CassM.CatesD.SmithM.JacksonC. (2003). Effects of manipulative instruction on solving area and perimeter problems by students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(2), 112–120. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00067
16.
ChardD. J.ClarkeB.BakerS.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
17.
ClarkeB.BakerS.ChardD.OtterstedtJ. (2006). Developing and validating measures of number sense to identify students at risk for mathematics disabilities (Technical Report 0307). Eugene, OR: Pacific Institutes for Research.
18.
ClarkeB.GerstenR.Newman-GoncharR. (2010). RtI in mathematics: Beginnings of a knowledge base. In GloverT.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention. Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 187–203). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
19.
CoburnC. (2003). Rethinking scale: Moving beyond numbers to deep and lasting change. Educational Researcher, 32(6), 3–12. doi:10.3102/0013189X032006003
20.
CronbachL. (1986). Social inquiry by and for earthlings. In FiskeD.ShwederR. (Eds.), Metatheory in social science (pp. 83–107). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
21.
DeckerL. E.WilkinsC.RolfhusE. L. (2009, September). Modeling overall and differential consent rates on HLM impact estimates. Poster session presented at the meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.
22.
DuncanG. J.DowsettC. J.ClaessensA.MagnusonK.HustonA. C.KlebanovP.. . . JapelC. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1428–1446. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428
23.
DuncanG. J.EngelM.ClaessensA.DowsettC. J. (2013). The value of replication for developmental science. Manuscript submitted for publication.
24.
DysonN. I.JordanN. C.GluttingJ. (2013). A number sense intervention for low-income kindergartners at risk for mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(2), 166–181. doi:10.1177/0022219411410233
25.
ElbaumB.VaughnS.Tejero HughesM.Watson MoodyS. (2000). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605–619. doi:10.1037//0022-0663.92.4.605
26.
FleckL. (1979). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
27.
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(3), 493–513. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.493
28.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2001). Principles for the prevention and intervention of mathematics difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 85–95. doi:10.1111/0938-8982.00010
29.
FuchsL.HamlettC.FuchsD. (1990). Curriculum-based math computation and concepts/applications. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University.
GearyD. C. (1993). Mathematical disabilities: Cognitive, neuropsychological, and genetic components. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 345–362. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.345
32.
GearyD. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(1), 4–15. doi:10.1177/00222194040370010201
33.
GerstenR.BeckmannS.ClarkeB.FoegenA.MarshL.StarJ. R.. . . ScottL. (2009). Assisting students struggling with Mathematics: Response to intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools (NCEE 2009-4060). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides/
34.
GerstenR.CarnineD. (1984). Direct instruction mathematics: A longitudinal evaluation of low-income elementary school students. The Elementary School Journal, 84(4), 395–407. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001366
35.
GerstenR.ChardD. (1999). Number sense: Rethinking mathematics instruction for students with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 33(1), 18–28. doi:10.1177/002246699903300102
36.
GerstenR.ChardD.JayanthiM.BakerS.MorphyP.FlojoJ. (2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1202–1242. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431
37.
GerstenR.ClarkeB.JordanN.Newman-GoncharR.HaymondK.WilkinsC. (2012). Universal screening in mathematics for the primary grades: Beginnings of a research base. Exceptional Children, 78(4), 423–445.
38.
GerstenR.WoodwardJ. (1990). Rethinking the regular education initiative: Focus on the classroom teacher. Remedial and Special Education, 11(3), 7–16. doi:10.1177/074193259001100305
39.
GinsburgH.BaroodyA. (2003). Test of Early Mathematics Ability–third edition. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
40.
GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.). (2010). The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
41.
GoodR. H.GrubaJ.KaminskiR. A. (2001). Best practices in using Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) in an outcomes-driven model. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 679–700). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
42.
HanichL.JordanN. (2004). Achievement-related beliefs of third-grade children with mathematics and reading difficulties. Journal of Educational Research, 97(5), 227–233. doi:10.3200/JOER.97.5.227-234
43.
Harcourt Assessment, Inc. (2004). Stanford Achievement Test Series, tenth edition. San Antonio, TX: Pearson Education Measurement, Inc.
44.
Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement. (1996). Stanford Early School Achievement Test–Fourth edition. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Educational Measurement.
45.
HitchcockJ.DiminoJ.KurkiA.WilkinsC.GerstenR. (2010). The impact of collaborative strategic reading on the reading comprehension of grade 5 students in linguistically diverse schools (NCEE 2011-4001). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southwest/pdf/REL_20114001.pdf
46.
Institute of Education Sciences & National Science Foundation. (2013). Common guidelines for education research and development: A report from the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education and the National Science Foundation. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, National Science Foundation. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/pdf/CommonGuidelines.pdf
47.
James-BurdumyS.DekeJ.GerstenR.Lugo-GilJ.Newman-GoncharR.DiminoJ.. . . LiuA. Y. H. (2012). Effectiveness of four supplemental reading comprehension interventions. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 5(4), 345–383. doi:10.1080/19345747.2012.698374
48.
James-BurdumyS.MansfieldW.DekeJ.CareyN.Lugo-GilJ.HersheyA.. . . FaddisB. (2009). Effectiveness of selected supplemental reading comprehension interventions: Impacts on a first cohort of fifth-grade students (NCEE 2009-4032). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20094032/pdf/20094032.pdf
49.
JenkinsJ. R.SchillerE.BlackorbyJ.ThayerS. K.TillyW. D. (2013). Responsiveness to intervention in reading: Architecture and practices. Learning Disability Quarterly, 36(1), 36–46. doi:10.1177/0731948712464963
50.
JitendraA. K. (2007). Solving math word problems: Teaching students with learning disabilities using schema-based instruction. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
51.
JordanN. C.KaplanD.LocuniakM. N.RamineniC. (2007). Predicting first-grade math achievement from developmental number sense trajectories. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(1), 36–46. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2007.00229.x
52.
JordanN. C.KaplanD.Nabors OláhL.LocuniakM. N. (2006). Number sense growth in kindergarten: A longitudinal investigation of children at risk for mathematics difficulties. Child Development, 77(1), 153–175. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00862.x
53.
KlingnerJ. K.BoardmanA. G.McMasterK. L. (2013). What does it take to scale up and sustain evidence-based practices?Exceptional Children, 79(2), 195–211.
54.
KroesbergenE. H.Van LuitJ. E. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 24(2), 97–114. doi:10.1177/07419325030240020501
55.
LachinJ. M. (2000). Statistical considerations in the Intent-to-Treat principle. Controlled Clinical Trials21(3), 167–189. doi:10.1016/S0197-2456(00)00046-5
56.
LeinhardtG.ZigmondN.CooleyW. W. (1981). Reading instruction and its effects. American Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 343–361. doi:10.3102/00028312018003343
57.
LemonsC. J.FuchsD.GilbertJ. K.FuchsL. S. (2014). Evidence-based practices in a changing world: Reconsidering the counterfactual in education research. Educational Researcher, 43(5), 242–252. doi:10.3102/0013189X14539189
58.
LewisC. C.PerryR. R. (2011, September). Should we be thinking in new ways about locally-led professional learning? Randomized trial of lesson study with mathematical resource kits. PowerPoint presentation at the conference for the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness (SREE), Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.lessonresearch.net/SREE2011final.ppt
59.
LittleR. J. A.RubinD. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: John Wiley.
60.
LocuniakM. N.JordanN. C. (2008). Using kindergarten number sense to predict calculation fluency in second grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41(5), 451–459. doi:10.1177/0022219408321126
61.
Mac IverM. A.KemperE. (2002). The impact of direct instruction on elementary students’ reading achievement in an urban school district. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 7(2), 197–220. doi:10.1207/S15327671ESPR0702_5
Microsoft. (2007). Microsoft Excel [Computer software]. Redmond, WA: Author.
64.
MorganP.FarkasG.WuQ. (2009). Five-year growth trajectories of kindergarten children with learning difficulties in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(4), 306–321. doi:10.1177/0022219408331037
65.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2006). Curriculum focal points for prekindergarten through grade 8 mathematics: A quest for coherence. Reston, VA: Author.
National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
69.
National Research Council. (2009). Mathematics learning in early childhood: Paths toward excellence and equity. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
70.
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.
71.
O’ConnorR. E.BocianK.Beebe-FrankenbergerM.LinklaterD. (2010). Responsiveness of students with language difficulties to early intervention in reading. Journal of Special Education, 43(4), 220–235. doi:10.1177/0022466908317789
72.
OkamotoY.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(1–2), 27–58.
73.
Open Science Collaboration. (2012). An open, large-scale, collaborative effort to estimate the reproducibility of psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 657–660. doi:10.1177/1745691612462588
74.
PashlerH.WagenmakersE. J. (2012). Editors’ introduction to the special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 528–530. doi:10.1177/1745691612465253
75.
Pearson Scott Foresman TERC. (2007). Investigations in number, data and space (grade 1). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
76.
PickeringS. J.GathercoleS. E. (2004). Distinctive working memory profiles in children with special educational needs. Educational Psychology, 24(3), 393–408. doi:10.1080/0144341042000211715
77.
PumaM. J.OlsenR. B.BellS. H.PriceC. (2009). What to do when data are missing in group randomized controlled trials (NCEE 2009-0049). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pdf/20090049.pdf
78.
RamirezJ.PastaD. J.YuenS.BillingsD. K.RameyD. R. (1991). Final report: Longitudinal study of structural immersion strategy, early-exit, and late-exit transitional bilingual education programs for language-minority children (Report to U.S. Department of Education). San Mateo, CA: Aquirre International.
79.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
80.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. SCongdonR. (2006). HLM 6.02 for Windows [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International, Inc.
81.
RaudenbushS. W.MartinezA.SpybrookJ. (2005). Strategies for improving precision in group-randomized experiments. New York, NY: William T. Grant Foundation.
82.
SattlerJ. M.HogeR. D. (2006). Assessment of children: Behavioral, social, and clinical foundations (5th ed.). La Mesa, CA: Jerome M. Sattler, Publisher, Inc.
83.
ShadishW. R.CookT. D.CampbellD. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin and Company.
84.
SmithT.CobbP.FarranD.CordrayD.MunterC. (2013). Evaluating math recovery: Assessing the causal impact of a diagnostic tutoring program on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 50(2), 397–428. doi:10.3102/0002831212469045
85.
SnowR. E. (1973). Theory construction for research on teaching. Second handbook of research teaching. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
86.
SpellmanB. A. (2012). Introduction to the special section on research practices. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7(6), 655–656. doi:10.1177/1745691612465075
87.
StallingsJ. (1975). A study of implementation in seven follow through educational models and how instructional processes relate to child outcomes. Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute.
88.
StanovichK. E. (2007). How to think straight about psychology. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
89.
StebbinsL. B.St. PierreR. G.ProperE. C.AndersonR. B.CervaT. R. (1977). Education as experimentation: A planned variation model, Vol. IV-A: An evaluation of follow through. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.
90.
SteinM.SilbertJ.CarnineD. (1997). Designing effective mathematics instruction: A direct instruction approach (3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
91.
SwansonH. L.Sachse-LeeC. (2001). Mathematical problem solving and working memory in children with learning disabilities: Both executive and phonological processes are important. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79(3), 294–321. doi:10.1006/jecp.2000.2587
92.
VanDerHeydenA. (2010). Determining early mathematical risk: Ideas for extending the research. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 196–202.
93.
VaughnS.FuchsL. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18(3), 137–146. doi:10.1111/1540-5826.00070
94.
VaughnS.WexlerJ.RobertsG.BarthA.CirinoP.RomainM.. . . DentonC. (2011). Effects of individualized and standardized interventions on middle school students with reading disabilities. Exceptional Children, 77(4), 391–407.
95.
VukovicR.FuchsL.GearyD.JordanN.GerstenR.SieglerR. (2014). Sources of individual differences in children’s understanding of fractions. Child Development, 85, 1461–1476.
96.
WechslerD. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children—fourth edition. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
97.
WoodcockR.McGrewK.MatherN. (2001). Woodcock-Johnson III. Itasca, IL: Riverside Publishing.
