Playing Linear Number Board Games--but Not Circular Ones--Improves Low-Income Preschoolers' Numerical Understanding [Linear board game vs. numerical activities]
Siegler, Robert S.; Ramani, Geetha B. (2009). Journal of Educational Psychology, v101 n3 p545-560. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ861180
-
examining59Students, gradePK
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2022
- Practice Guide (findings for Linear board game)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Numerical Magnitude Comparison |
Linear board game vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Linear board game vs numerical activities (comparison);
|
77.00 |
65.00 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Number line Estimation-Percent Absolute Error |
Linear board game vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Linear board game vs numerical activities (comparison);
|
21.00 |
25.00 |
No |
-- | |
|
Counting - percentage correct counting to 10 |
Linear board game vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Linear board game vs numerical activities (comparison);
|
93.00 |
86.00 |
No |
-- | |
|
Number Identification |
Linear board game vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Linear board game vs numerical activities (comparison);
|
7.30 |
6.80 |
No |
-- | |
|
Arithmethic - percent answered correctly |
Linear board game vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Linear board game vs numerical activities (comparison);
|
45.00 |
28.00 |
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.
-
Female: 56%
Male: 44% -
Race Black 34% Other or unknown 5% White 61%
Study Details
Setting
This study was conducted in seven Head Start classrooms and two childcare centers. All study sites served families with very low incomes.
Study sample
On average children were four years, eight months and ranged in age from four years to five years, five months. Among participants, 34 percent were African American, 61 percent were Caucasian, and five percent were Asian, Hispanic, biracial, or unknown. (The authors treated ‘Hispanic’ as a racial category).
Intervention Group
Children in the intervention condition worked one-on-one with a experimenter five times across a three week period. Each session lasted 15-20 minutes. During each session, the child and experimenter played The Great Race, a board game, that consists of 10 horizontally arranged, different colored squares of equal size, with the word ‘‘Start’’ at the left end and the word ‘‘End’’ at the right end. Each square contained one number, with the numerical magnitudes increasing from left to right. Children would use a spinner and move the tokens while saying the number spaces aloud as they moved the token.
Comparison Group
Children in the comparison condition worked one-on-one with a experimenter five times across a three week period. Each session lasted 15-20 minutes. During each session, the child and experimenter completed three tasks: number string counting, numeral identification, and object counting.
Support for implementation
The article states that all sessions were led by either the second author or a research assistant. No other information was provided regarding how these experimenters were trained.
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: 56%
Male: 44% -
Race Black 34% Other or unknown 5% White 61%
Developing Effective Fractions Instruction for Kindergarten Through 8th Grade
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2010
- 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: 56%
Male: 44% -
Race Black 34% Other or unknown 5% White 61%
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).