Date of Award:

5-2013

Document Type:

Thesis

Degree Name:

Educational Specialist (EdS)

Department:

Psychology

Committee Chair(s)

Donna Gilbertson

Committee

Donna Gilbertson

Committee

Gretchen Gimpel Peacock

Committee

Andrew Samaha

Abstract

Children who struggle with math fluency are typically not provided with the appropriate motivation and instruction for their needs in the regular education classroom. Because of their lack of math fluency skills, these children can be negatively affected throughout their education and can continually fall further behind their peers. It is clear that children who struggle with math fluency should be provided with interventions specific to their needs in order to thrive in a school environment. Thus, it is critical that school psychologists and researchers develop effective strategies for children who are struggling with math fluency in order to help them gain the necessary skills and speed to thrive at school. It is also important to support a child with a brief intervention to limit the amount of time the student misses ongoing classroom instruction.

Research on one approach called brief assessments has shown this approach to be effective in identifying interventions. In this study, the validity of a brief assessment that may be used identify two possibilities about the cause of the problem was examined: (1) a can’t do problem due to lack of skill ability or mastery or (2) a won’t do problem due to lack of motivation. Identifying the cause helps to select an intervention. A can’t do problem would require more intense instruction and practice and a won’t do problem requires an incentive for improved performance. Some children require both instruction and incentives.

Four general education third-grade students participated in a classwide 2-minute math probe that consisted of multiple third-grade math problems. All students were referred by teachers for math support, performed below the majority of their peers, and fell below a mastery criterion on the classwide assessment. The four students participated in a brief assessment to determine the cause of the problem. Students were given the math probe again but were told that if they increased their score on the classwide assessment, they would be allowed to pick a prize. Because all students increased their score by more than 30%, it was hypothesized that all students had a won’t do problem and would positively respond to an incentive intervention to learn single math skills. To validate this hypothesis, students were then given three different math sessions on three different skills until the student reached benchmark levels for two sessions: an assessment-only condition, an incentive 5-minute condition, and an instruction plus incentives 10-minute condition. All children reached a mastery criterion on three single math skills. Of the 12 skills assessed, incentives was an effective intervention for one target skill, instruction plus incentives was effective for five target skills, and the assessment-only was effective for six target skills. Growth on the assessment-only condition may potentially be due to practice effects, feedback, or motivation due to increased scores. Performance improved on the classwide multiple probe administered to all students at the end of the study; however, performance was retained for 2 to 4 weeks on half of the 12 target skills mastered during the study.

In sum, students responded differently to the interventions and each student responded differently to interventions across the three skills. The low response on the intervention with incentives only did not validate the won’t do hypothesis that was developed from the brief assessment results. Thus, although the multiple probe may be more efficient, the results suggested it was not effective selecting correct hypotheses across skills and this brief assessment may need to be administered for each skill.

Checksum

dcd3272ad97c9e7a7c8094f1270a5d23

Download

Share

COinS

Copyright for this work is retained by the student. If you have any questions regarding the inclusion of this work in the Digital Commons, please email us at .