Tournaki, Nelly (2003). Journal of Learning Disabilities, v36 n5 p449-58. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ676182
Reviewed: June 2019
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Single digit addition test |
Targeted Math Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Strategy vs. Comparison: Accuracy score;
|
96.16 |
68.66 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Single digit addition transfer test |
Targeted Math Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Strategy vs. Comparison: Accuracy score;
|
86.87 |
49.39 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Single digit addition test |
Targeted Math Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Strategy vs. Comparison: Latency score;
|
183.73 |
258.16 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Single digit addition transfer test |
Targeted Math Intervention vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Strategy vs. Comparison: Latency score;
|
381.16 |
469.30 |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 2% | |
| Black | 13% | |
| White | 75% |
| Hispanic | 10% |
The study took place in one school district in the New York metropolitan area. Students with learning disabilities were taught in self-contained classrooms.
There were 29 boys and 13 girls in the full analytic sample across the three conditions (69 and 31 percent, respectively).
Over the course of eight 15-minute sessions conducted on consecutive days, students received additional instruction beyond the regular math curriculum either through training in the minimum addend strategy. For the minimum addend strategy, children were presented with single-digit math addition problems of the form X + Y = ( ); they were trained to identify the larger addend and count on from that cardinal value the number of units specified by the smaller addend. At the start of each session, the strategy was demonstrated.
The comparison condition was business as usual with no additional instruction beyond the regular math curriculum. That curriculum, followed in all general and special education classrooms, was addressing story problems and multidigit calculations with a conventional textbook and variety of manipulatives at the time of the intervention.
The study does not describe any support for implementation.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube