Preliminary Evaluation of a Tier 2 Mathematics Intervention for First-Grade Students: Using a Theory of Change to Guide Formative Evaluation ActivitiesFootnote

The research reported in this article was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R324A090341 to the Center on Teaching and Learning at the University of Oregon. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

References

• ArcherA. L.HughesC. A. (2010). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• BakerS.GerstenR.LeeD. S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 51–73.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BerchD. B. (2005). Making sense of number sense: Implications for children with mathematical disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 333–339. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380040901
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BransfordJ.DonovanM. S. (2005). Scientific inquiry and how people learn. In DonovanM. S.BransfordJ. (Eds.), How students learn: Mathematics, and science in the classroom (pp. 397–420). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• BrownA. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of Learning Sciences, 2, 141–178.
   Google Scholar
• BryantD. P.BryantB. R.GerstenR.ScammaccaN.ChavezM. (2008). Mathematics intervention for first and second grade students with mathematics difficulties: The effects of tier 2 intervention delivered as booster lessons. Remedial and Special Education, 29, 20–32.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BryantD. P.BryantB. R.GerstenR. M.ScammaccaN. N.FunkC.WinterA.PoolC. (2008). The effects of tier 2 intervention on the mathematics performance of first-grade students who are at risk for mathematics difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 47–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BryantD. P.BryantB. R.RobertsG.VaughnS.PfannenstielK. H.PorterfieldJ.GerstenR. (2011). Early numeracy intervention program for first-grade students with mathematics difficulties. Exceptional Children, 78, 7–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ClarkeB.BakerS. K.ChardD. J. (2008). Best practices in mathematics assessment and intervention with elementary students. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (Vol. V, pp. 453–464). Bethesda, MD: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• ClarkeB.ShinnM. R. (2004). A preliminary investigation into the identification and development of early mathematics curriculum-based measurement. School Psychology Review, 33(2), 234–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ClarkeB.SmolkowskiK.BakerS. K.FienH.DoablerC. T.ChardD. J. (2011). The impact of a comprehensive tier 1 core kindergarten program on the achievement of students at-risk in mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 111, 561–584.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ClementsD. H. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for “research-based curricula.” Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 35–70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CobbP.ConfreyJ.diSessaA.LehrerR.SchaubleL. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9–13.
   Google Scholar
• Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common core standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from Common Core State Standards Initiative: Preparing America's Students for College & Career website: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_ELA%20Standards.pdf
   Google Scholar
• CoyneM. D.Kame'enuiE. J.CarnineD. W. (2011). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• DoablerC.Nelson-WalkerN. (2009). Ratings of classroom management and instructional support. Unpublished observation instrument, Center on Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.
   Google Scholar
• DoablerC. T.BakerS. K.KostyD.SmolkowskiK.ClarkeB.MillerS. J.FienH. (2013). Examining the association between explicit mathematics instruction and student mathematics achievement. Manuscript submitted for publication.
   Google Scholar
• DoablerC. T.Nelson-WalkerN.KostyD.FienH.BakerS. K.SmolkowskiK.ClarkeB. ( in press). Examining teachers' use of evidence-based practices during core mathematics instruction. Assessment for Effective Intervention.
   Google Scholar
• DysonN. I.JordanN. C.GluttingJ. (2013). A number sense intervention for low-income kindergartners at risk for mathematics difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(2), 166–181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FeingoldA. (2009). Effect sizes for growth-modeling analysis for controlled clinical trials in the same metric as for classical analysis. Psychological Methods, 14, 43–53.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FuchsL. S.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.PaulsenK.BryantJ. D.HamlettC. L. (2005). The prevention, identification, and cognitive determinants of math difficulty. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 493–513.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L. (2013). Intervention effects for students with comorbid forms of learning disability: Understanding the needs of nonresponders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 534–548.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ZumetaR. O. (2008). Response to intervention: A strategy for the prevention and identification of learning disabilities. In GrigorenkoE. L. (Ed.), Educating individuals with disabilities: IDEIA 2004 and beyond (pp. 115–135). New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• FuchsL. S.GearyD. C.ComptonD. L.FuchsD.HamlettC. L.BryantJ. D. (2010). The contributions of numerosity and domain-general abilities to school readiness. Child Development, 81, 1520–1533.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GearyD. C. (2004). Mathematics and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 4–15.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GerstenR.ChardD. (1999). Number sense: Rethinking arithmetic instruction for students with mathematical disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 33, 18–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GerstenR. M.BeckmannS.ClarkeB.FoegenA.MarchL.StarJ. R.WitzelB. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to intervention (RTI) for elementary and middle schools (Practice Guide Report No. NCEE 2009–4060). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
   Google Scholar
• GinsburgH. P.BaroodyA. J. (2003). Test of early mathematics ability (3rd ed.). Austin, TX: ProEd.
   Google Scholar
• GloverT. A.DiPernaJ. C. (2007). Service delivery for response to intervention: Core components and directions for future research. School Psychology Review, 36, 526–540.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GoodR. H.GrubaJ.KaminskiR. A. (2002). Best practices in using Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) in an outcomes-driven model. In ThomasA.GrimesJ. (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology IV (pp. 679–700). Washington, DC: National Association of School Psychologists.
   Google Scholar
• HanichL. B.JordanN. C.KaplanD.DickJ. (2001). Performance across different areas of mathematical cognition in children with learning difficulties. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 615–627.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harcourt Educational Measurement. (2002). Stanford Achievement Test [SAT-10]. San Antonio, TX: author.
   Google Scholar
• Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, P.L. 108–446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq (2004).
   Google Scholar
• JuelC. (1988). Learning to read and write: A longitudinal study of 54 children from first through fourth grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 437–447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MaL. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers' understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
   Google Scholar
• MacKinnonD. P.LueckenL. J. (2008). How and for whom? Mediation and moderation in health psychology. Health Psychology: Official Journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association, 27, S99–S100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MilgramR. J.WuH. S. (2005). The key topics in a successful math curriculum. Retrieved June 24, 2013, from http://math.berkeley.edu/∼wu/
   Google Scholar
• MorganP. L.FarkasG.WuQ. (2009). Five-year growth trajectories of kindergarten children with learning difficulties in mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 306–321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (2006). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and implementation. Alexandria, VA: author.
   Google Scholar
• National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). NAEP 2013 mathematics: Report card for the nation and the states. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2013). 2013 NCTM legislative platform. Reston, VA: author.
   Google Scholar
• National Mathematics Advisory Panel. (2008). Foundations for success: The final report of the National Mathematics Advisory Panel. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2001). Adding it up: Helping children learn mathematics. Washington, DC: Mathematics Learning Study Committee.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2009). Mathematics learning in early childhood: Paths towards excellence and equity. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Science Board. (2008). Science and engineering indicators 2008 (NSB 08–01 [volume 1] and NSB 08–01A [volume 2]). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Newman-GoncharR.ClarkeB.GerstenR. (2009). A summary of nine key studies: Multi-tier intervention and response to interventions for students struggling in mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research, Center on Instruction.
   Google Scholar
• ObamaB. H. (2013, February 12). Obama's state of the union. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
   Google Scholar
• OkamotoY.CaseR. (1996). Exploring the microstructure of children's central conceptual structures in the domain of number. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 61, 27–59. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5834.1996.tb00536.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RolfhusE.GerstenR.ClarkeB.DeckerL.WilkinsC.DiminoJ. (2012). An evaluation of Number Rockets: A Tier 2 intervention for grade 1 students at risk for difficulties in mathematics (NCEE 2012–4007). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• RothmanA. J. (2013). Exploring connections between moderators and mediators: Commentary on subgroup analyses in intervention research. Prevention Science, 14, 189–192.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SchaferJ. L.GrahamJ. W. (2002). Missing data: Our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ShinnM. R. (1989). Curriculum-based measurement: Assessing special children. New York: The Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• SnijdersT.BoskerR. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• SoodS.JitendraA. (2013). An exploratory study of number sense program to develop kindergarten students number proficiency. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 328–346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• StarkeyP.KleinA. (2008). Sociocultural influences on young children's mathematical knowledge. In SarachoO. N.SpodekB (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on mathematics in early childhood education (pp. 253–276). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• VaughnS.FuchsL. (2003). Redefining learning disabilities as inadequate response to instruction: The promise and potential problems. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 137–146.
   Google Scholar
• VaughnS.WanzekJ.WoodruffA. L.Linan-ThompsonS. (2007). Prevention and early identification of students with reading disabilities. In HaagerD.KlingerJ.VaughnS. (Eds.), Evidence-based reading practices for response to intervention (pp. 11–27). Baltimore, MD: Paul H Brookes.
   Google Scholar
• WanzekJ.VaughnS. (2010). Research-based implications from extensive early reading interventions. In GloverT. A.VaughnS. (Eds.), The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice (pp. 113–142). New York: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• WarrenS. F.FeyM. E.YoderP. J. (2007). Differential treatment intensity research: A missing link to creating optimally effective communication interventions. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13, 70–77.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• What Works Clearinghouse. (2011). What Works Clearinghouse: Procedures and standards handbook (version 2.1). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• WitzelB. S.RiccominiP. J.SchneiderE. (2008). Implementing CRA with secondary students with learning disabilities in mathematics. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43, 270–276.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WoodcockR. M.JohnsonM. B. (1989). Woodcock-Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery–Revised. Allen, TX: DLM Teaching Resources.
   Google Scholar
• WuH. (1999). Basic skills versus conceptual understanding. American Educator, 23(3), 14–19.
   Google Scholar