Building number sense among English learners: A multisite randomized controlled trial of a Tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention
Doabler, C. T., Clarke, B., Kosty, D., Smolkowski, K., Kurtz-Nelson, E., Fien, H., & Baker, S. K. (2019). Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47, 432-444. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0885200618300887.
-
examining281Students, gradeK
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2021
- Grant Competition (findings for ROOTS)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Stanford Early School Achievement Test (SESAT) |
ROOTS vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
6.90 |
435.60 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Assessing Student Proficiency in Early Number Sense (ASPENS) |
ROOTS vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
78.70 |
59.20 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Number Sense Brief (NSB) |
ROOTS vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
17.80 |
16.30 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Test of Early Mathematics Ability (TEMA) - 3 |
ROOTS vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
23.70 |
21.20 |
No |
-- | |
|
Oral Counting - Early Numeracy Curriculum-Based Measure |
ROOTS vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
40.90 |
35.90 |
No |
-- |
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.
-
100% English language learners -
Female: 51%
Male: 49% -
Rural, Suburban, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Massachusetts, Oregon
-
Race Asian 3% Black 4% Native American 1% Other or unknown 50% Pacific Islander 0% White 42% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 49% Not Hispanic or Latino 52%
Study Details
Setting
A total of 23 schools from four Oregon and two Massachusetts school districts participated in this study. Both Massachusetts districts were located in the metropolitan area of Boston. Three Oregon districts were located in rural and suburban areas of western Oregon, and one Oregon district was located in the metropolitan area of Portland. Participants were drawn from a total of 138 kindergarten classrooms.
Study sample
The study focused on students considered to be English language learners; thus, 100 percent of the sample were English learners. Students were 49 percent male with an average age of 5 years. Forty-two percent of students identified as White, 4 percent as Black, and 4 percent as Asian. The rest were unknown. Forty-nine percent of students were of Hispanic ethnicity, and 78 percent indicated that Spanish was their first language.
Intervention Group
ROOTS is a small-group, Tier 2 mathematics program. The program focuses on an explicit instructional framework and is aimed at promoting students' development of early number sense. The intervention is delivered in English and is a supplement to a student's core mathematics instruction. ROOTS contains 50 lessons focused on critical whole number concepts and skills identified in the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Lessons were provided by interventionists. Each lesson contained four to five mathematics activities with scripted guidelines for the interventionists. This study delivered the intervention in 20-minute small group sessions, 5 days per week for approximately 10 weeks. The intervention began midway through the Kindergarten year. Students in the intervention group also continued to receive their daily core mathematics instruction.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition included Core (Tier I) mathematics instruction, which was delivered in English. The comparison condition was documented through teacher surveys and direct observations. Teachers reported providing an average of 32 minutes of core instruction per day, using a variety of published mathematics curricula.
Support for implementation
Interventionists participated in two 5-hour professional development workshops that were delivered by project staff.
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).