Scholarlink

<p>As learning losses have been documented in the post-pandemic era, identifying effective and efficient evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for students with academic skills deficits is more critical than ever. The current study used an adapted alternating treatment design to compare two versions of a math fact fluency EBI with five elementary and middle school students with emotional and behavioral disabilities. The traditional taped problems intervention (TPI) was compared to a virtual taped problems intervention (VTPI) on students’ multiplication fact fluency, measured by digits correct per minute (DCM). A no-treatment control (NTC) condition was included to increase the experimental control of the design. Visual analysis revealed that four of the five participants made greater fluency gains in at least one of the intervention conditions compared with the NTC condition. Further comparisons of the slopes of each participant’s growth between intervention conditions revealed that two participants had higher DCM improvement in VTPI than TPI (Andy and Darius). For Brittany, the participant with the highest math fact fluency, although performance slope was steepest in VTPI, visual analysis revealed similarly increasing trends across all conditions, including NTC. Alternatively, for Elijah, the student with the lowest fluency, slopes were similar between TPI and VTPI conditions, indicating similar DCM gains in response to both interventions. The fifth participant, Caleb’s performance varied widely in the intervention conditions, limiting the utility of slope in making interpretations regarding treatment effects. Finally, participants overall assigned higher acceptability ratings to VTPI than to traditional TPI. Discussion focuses on practical implications of the findings, limitations of the study, as well as future research directions.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparing Versions of the Taped Problems Math Fact Fluency Intervention: A Single Case Design

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月20日

查看全文
  • Cortney L. Chelecki,
  • Elizabeth McCallum,
  • Ara J. Schmitt,
  • Kristen E. Mahony-Atallah,
  • Elisabeth A. Ashmore

摘要

As learning losses have been documented in the post-pandemic era, identifying effective and efficient evidence-based interventions (EBIs) for students with academic skills deficits is more critical than ever. The current study used an adapted alternating treatment design to compare two versions of a math fact fluency EBI with five elementary and middle school students with emotional and behavioral disabilities. The traditional taped problems intervention (TPI) was compared to a virtual taped problems intervention (VTPI) on students’ multiplication fact fluency, measured by digits correct per minute (DCM). A no-treatment control (NTC) condition was included to increase the experimental control of the design. Visual analysis revealed that four of the five participants made greater fluency gains in at least one of the intervention conditions compared with the NTC condition. Further comparisons of the slopes of each participant’s growth between intervention conditions revealed that two participants had higher DCM improvement in VTPI than TPI (Andy and Darius). For Brittany, the participant with the highest math fact fluency, although performance slope was steepest in VTPI, visual analysis revealed similarly increasing trends across all conditions, including NTC. Alternatively, for Elijah, the student with the lowest fluency, slopes were similar between TPI and VTPI conditions, indicating similar DCM gains in response to both interventions. The fifth participant, Caleb’s performance varied widely in the intervention conditions, limiting the utility of slope in making interpretations regarding treatment effects. Finally, participants overall assigned higher acceptability ratings to VTPI than to traditional TPI. Discussion focuses on practical implications of the findings, limitations of the study, as well as future research directions.