Embedding Self-Regulation Instruction within Fractions Intervention for Third Graders with Mathematics Difficulties
Wang, Amber Y.; Fuchs, Lynn S.; Fuchs, Douglas; Gilbert, Jennifer K.; Krowka, Sarah; Abramson, Rebecca (2019). Grantee Submission. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED595063
-
examining46Students, grade3
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2024
- Single Study Review (findings for Super Solvers)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed fraction knowledge assessment (Fraction Battery, 11 items on Ordering Fractions) |
Super Solvers vs. Business as usual |
1 Month |
Full sample;
|
5.61 |
1.57 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Researcher-developed fraction knowledge assessment (Fraction Battery, 16 items on Word Problems) |
Super Solvers vs. Business as usual |
1 Month |
Full sample;
|
7.35 |
3.76 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Researcher-developed fraction knowledge assessment (Fraction Battery, Single-Digit Multiplication) |
Super Solvers vs. Business as usual |
1 Month |
Full sample;
|
17.69 |
16.60 |
No |
-- | |
|
Researcher-developed fraction knowledge assessment (Fraction Battery, Error in Number Line Placement) |
Super Solvers vs. Business as usual |
1 Month |
Full sample;
|
0.25 |
0.26 |
No |
-- | |
|
Researcher-developed fraction knowledge assessment (18 NAEP items on general fraction knowledge) |
Super Solvers vs. Business as usual |
1 Month |
Full sample;
|
8.91 |
8.50 |
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.
-
11% English language learners -
Female: 52%
Male: 48% -
Urban
-
Race Asian 4% Black 48% Other or unknown 31% White 17% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 26% Not Hispanic or Latino 74% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 96% Other or unknown 4%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in six elementary schools in a large, urban school district.
Study sample
The researchers randomly assigned 24 students to the intervention group and 26 students to the comparison group. After attrition, a total of 46 students were included in the study. The 46 students were in 19 classrooms in grade 3. All students were identified as needing additional support in math based on a standardized screening. About half of the students were female; almost all (96%) were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, and 11% were English learners. Four percent had a specific learning disability, 2% had a developmental delay, and 4% had another school-identified disability. Approximately 48% were Black, 17% were White, 4% were Asian, and 31% did not report a specific race. Twenty-six percent were Hispanic or Latino.
Intervention Group
Super Solvers is a supplemental math program designed to support students who need help with fraction problems. The intervention included four activities: Problem Quest, Fraction Action, Math Blast, and Power Practice. Problem Quest includes multiplication and fraction word problems; Fraction Action includes comparing, ordering, and placing fractions on a 0-1 number line to assess students’ fraction magnitude understanding; Math Blast includes fluency-building activities for comparing fractions and multiplication; and Power Practice involves students practicing fraction skills independently. Students assigned to the intervention received the Super Solvers intervention three times per week, 35 minutes per session, for 13 weeks. Tutors delivered the intervention to small groups of two to four students. Tutors introduced the problems, provided examples, and demonstrated thinking aloud each step using direct language. As the intervention progressed, the tutor-led examples were replaced with student applications of the fraction skills through guided and independent practice. Students received Super Solvers in place of some usual math instruction or in place of other instructional time. The authors reported that students in the Super Solvers intervention condition received a similar total amount of math instruction, including the time during which they received Super Solvers, as those in the comparison condition.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group received business-as-usual grade 3 mathematics instruction without a supplemental program. The study authors reported that students in the comparison condition received a similar total amount of math instruction as those in the Super Solvers intervention condition.
Support for implementation
Six tutors implemented the intervention. Tutors met biweekly during which they received training for upcoming sessions, solved problems encountered during prior sessions, and received feedback.
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: November 2024
- Single Study Review (findings for Super Solvers)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Does not meet WWC standards because it is a randomized controlled trial with high attrition, and the analytic intervention and comparison groups do not satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
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
Study sample characteristics were not reported.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).