ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Interventions to improve equational reasoning: replication and extension of the Cuisenaire-Gattegno curriculum effect.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to improve equational reasoning: replication and extension of the Cuisenaire-Gattegno curriculum effect.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The ability to reason about equations in a robust and fluent way requires both instrumental knowledge of symbolic forms, syntax, and operations, as well as relational knowledge of how such formalisms map to meaningful relationships captured within mental models. A recent systematic review of studies contrasting the Cuisenaire-Gattegno (Cui) curriculum approach vs. traditional rote schooling on equational reasoning has demonstrated the positive efficacy of pedagogies that focus on integrating these two forms of knowledge. Methods: Here we seek to replicate and extend the most efficacious of these studies (Brownell) by implementing the curriculum to a high degree of fidelity, as well as capturing longitudinal changes within learners via a novel tablet-based assessment of accuracy and fluency with equational reasoning. We examined arithmetic fluency as a function of relational reasoning to equate initial performance across diverse groups and to track changes over four growth assessment points. Results: Results showed that the intervention condition that stressed relational reasoning leads to advances in fluency for addition and subtraction with small numbers. We also showed that this intervention leads to changes in problem solving dispositions toward complex challenges, wherein students in the CUI intervention were more inclined to solve challenging problems relative to those in the control who gave up significantly earlier on multi-step problems. This shift in disposition was associated with higher accuracy on complex equational reasoning problems. A treatment by aptitude interaction emerged for both arithmetic equation reasoning and complex multi-step equational reasoning problems, both of which showed that the intervention had greatest impact for children with lower initial mathematical aptitude. Two years of intervention contrast revealed a large effect (d = 1) for improvements in equational reasoning for the experimental (CUI) group relative to control. Discussion: The strong replication and extension findings substantiate the importance of embedding these teaching aides within the theory grounded curricula that gave rise to them.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.