Mathematics Learned by Young Children in An Intervention Based on Learning Trajectories: A Large-Scale Cluster Randomized Trial [Building Blocks vs. business as usual (Where Bright Futures Begin or Opening the World of Learning)]
Clements, Douglas H.; Sarama, Julie; Spitler, Mary Elaine; Lange, Alissa A.; Wolfe, Christopher B. (2011). Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, v42 n2 p127-166 Mar 2011. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ918252
-
examining1,305Students, gradePK
Building Blocks™ Intervention Report - Preparing Young Children for School
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2023
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Building Blocks™.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Research-Based Early Mathematics Assessment (REMA) |
Building Blocks™ vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample ;
|
52.40 |
44.01 |
Yes |
|
|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
14% English language learners -
Female: 51%
Male: 49% -
Urban
-
Race Asian 4% Black 53% Native American 2% Other or unknown 22% White 19% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 22% Other or unknown 78% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 85% No FRPL 15%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in two urban public school districts and 106 pre-kindergarten classrooms. The classrooms were located in 42 schools in low-resource communities.
Study sample
Approximately 51% of the students were female, 85% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, and 14% were English learners. 53% of the children were African American, 19% were White, 4% were Asian, 2% were American Indian, and 22% did not report race. 22% were Hispanic or Latino and 78% did not report ethnicity.
Intervention Group
The Building Blocks curriculum was implemented in the second year of the study, after teachers received professional development and encouraged to incorporate elements of the curriculum in the first year. The Building Blocks approach develops mathematics from children's experiences and interests; they are guided to extend from everyday activities such as block building and puzzles. Building Blocks helps teachers understand children's developmental progressions (learning trajectories) and connects these progressions to instructional tasks. Topics covered by the Building Blocks curriculum include communicating, reasoning, representing, problem solving, number and shape composition, and patterning.
Comparison Group
Both districts focused more on mathematics during the study period, and both implemented new programs. One district implemented Where Bright Futures Begin, with a mathematics component that had specific number learning and measurement goals. Topics including counting, recognizing numbers and shapes, measurement, patterning, and graphing. Mathematics materials included concept cards, counters, and cubes, and mathematics was primarily taught during small group time. The second district implemented Opening the World of Learning, with topics such as number concepts, one-to-one correspondence, geometry, and measurement. Teachers were provided professional development in approximately six sessions over 2 years. Three teachers in the comparison condition mentioned combining curriculums with DLM Early Childhood Express, of which the mathematics component was an earlier version of the Building Blocks curriculum. There was also the possibility of spillover in the first district, with the district holding summer training sessions for teachers (some of whom were in the comparison condition) on the Building Blocks curriculum.
Support for implementation
Teachers in the Building Blocks condition received 8 days of professional development in the first year and an additional 5 days of professional development in the second year. Professional development included viewing, analyzing, and discussing video enactments of instructional tasks. During professional development sessions, teachers practiced interpreting children's thinking and choosing appropriate instructional tasks for the class. In addition, teachers had mentors who observed and supported implementation, visiting classrooms about twice per month. Intervention teachers were evaluated on the fidelity of their implementation of the Building Blocks. However, it is not clear whether any follow-up with teachers occurred on the basis of the evaluations.
Additional Sources
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
-
Dumas, D., McNeish, D., Sarama, J., & Clements, D. (2019). Preschool Mathematics Intervention Can Significantly Improve Student Learning Trajectories Through Elementary School. AERA Open, 5(4), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419879446.
-
Sarama, Julie; Lange, Alissa A.; Clements, Douglas H.; Wolfe, Christopher B. (2012). The Impacts of an Early Mathematics Curriculum on Oral Language and Literacy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, v27 n3 p489-502 3rd Qtr.
-
Watts, Tyler W.; Duncan, Greg J.; Clements, Douglas H.; Sarama, Julie. (2018). What Is the Long-Run Impact of Learning Mathematics during Preschool?. Child Development, v89 n2 p539-555.
-
Schenke, Katerina; Nguyen, Tutrang; Watts, Tyler W.; Sarama, Julie; Clements, Douglas H. (2017). Differential Effects of the Classroom on African American and Non-African American's Mathematics Achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, v109 n6 p794-811.
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2021
- Practice Guide (findings for Technology-enhanced, Research-based, Instruction, Assessment, and professional Development (TRIAD))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Research-based Elementary Math Assessment |
Technology-enhanced, Research-based, Instruction, Assessment, and professional Development (TRIAD) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample ;
|
51.36 |
44.01 |
Yes |
|
|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
14% English language learners -
Female: 51%
Male: 49% -
Urban
-
Race Asian 4% Black 53% Native American 2% Other or unknown 1% White 19% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 22% Not Hispanic or Latino 78%
Study Details
Setting
The study takes place in two urban public school districts, 42 schools (26 treatment schools and 16 control schools), and 106 classes (72 treatment classes and 34 control classes).
Study sample
The sample is predominately African-American (53%), with 22% Hispanic, 19% non-Hispanic White, and 4% Asian/Pacific Islander children. About 49% of the sample is male and 51% is female. The average percent of students eligible for free/reduced lunch in the sample schools is 85%, and the average percentage of students of Limited English Proficiency is 14%.
Intervention Group
The Building Blocks curriculum was implemented in Year 2 of the study. The Building Blocks approach develops mathematics from children's experiences and interests; they are guided to extend from everyday activities such as block building and puzzles. Building Blocks explicates learning trajectories to help teachers understand children's developmental progressions and connect these progressions to instructional tasks. Topics covered by the Building Blocks curriculum include communicating, reasoning, representing, problem solving, number and shape composition, and patterning. Teachers received 8 days of professional development in Year 1, and an additional 5 days of professional development in Year 2. Professional development included viewing, analyzing, and discussing video enactments of instructional tasks. Teachers also discussed and practiced interpreting children's thinking and selecting appropriate instructional tasks for the class. In addition, teachers had mentors who observed and supported implementation, visiting classrooms about twice per month. Treatment teachers were evaluated on the fidelity of their implementation of the Building Blocks, though it is not clear whether any follow-up with teachers occurred on the basis of the evaluations.
Comparison Group
Both districts focused more on mathematics during the study period, and both implemented new programs. One district implemented Where Bright Futures Begin, with a mathematics component that had specific number learning and measurement goals. Topics including counting, recognizing numbers and shapes, measurement, patterning, and graphing. Mathematics materials included concept cards, counters, and cubes, and mathematics was primarily taught during small group time. Teachers were provided professional development on Where Bright Futures Begin three times, but the emphasis was on literacy. The second district implemented Opening the World of Learning, with topics such as number concepts, one-to-one correspondence, geometry, and measurement. Teachers were provided professional development in approximately six sessions over two years. Three teachers in the control condition mentioned combining curriculums with DLM Early Childhood Express; the mathematics component was an earlier version of the Building Blocks curriculum, so there was potentially some contamination.
Support for implementation
Teachers received 8 days of professional development in Year 1, and an additional 5 days of professional development in Year 2. Professional development included viewing, analyzing, and discussing video enactments of instructional tasks. Teachers also discussed and practiced interpreting children's thinking and selecting appropriate instructional tasks for the class. In addition, teachers had mentors who observed and supported implementation, visiting classrooms about twice per month. Treatment teachers were evaluated on the fidelity of their implementation of the Building Blocks, though it is not clear whether any follow-up with teachers occurred on the basis of the evaluations.
Teaching Math to Young Children
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2013
Teaching Math to Young Children Practice Guide- Randomized controlled trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Female: 51%
Male: 49% -
Urban
-
Race Asian 4% Black 53% Native American 2% White 19% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 22% Not Hispanic or Latino 78%
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).