| Title: |
A Meta-Analysis of Single-Case Research Using Mathematics Manipulatives with Students at Risk or Identified with a Disability |
| Language: |
English |
| Authors: |
Peltier, Corey; Morin, Kristi L.; Bouck, Emily C.; Lingo, Mindy E.; Pulos, Joshua M.; Scheffler, Faye A.; Suk, Andrea; Mathews, Leslie A.; Sinclair, Tracy E.; Deardorff, Malarie E. |
| Source: |
Journal of Special Education. May 2020 54(1):3-15. |
| Availability: |
SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: |
Y |
| Page Count: |
13 |
| Publication Date: |
2020 |
| Sponsoring Agency: |
Institute of Education Sciences (ED) |
| Contract Number: |
R324B160038 |
| Document Type: |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research; Information Analyses |
| Education Level: |
Elementary Secondary Education; Early Childhood Education; Preschool Education |
| Descriptors: |
At Risk Students; Students with Disabilities; Manipulative Materials; Research Design; Educational Research; Mathematics Instruction; Instructional Effectiveness; Intervention; Age Differences; Research Methodology; Behavior Disorders; Emotional Disturbances; Mathematical Concepts; Preschool Education; Elementary Secondary Education |
| DOI: |
10.1177/0022466919844516 |
| ISSN: |
0022-4669 |
| Abstract: |
Manipulatives are widely considered an effective practice and have been recommended as an evidence-based practice for students identified with a learning disability when used within the concrete--representational--abstract instructional framework. The aim of the current study was to evaluate single-case experimental designs that implemented a mathematics intervention using manipulatives on the mathematical outcomes of students at risk or identified with a disability. A total of 53 studies were included in the review. The Tau-"U" effect size (ES) across studies ranged from 0.34 to 1.00, with an omnibus ES of 0.91 (CI[subscript 95] = [0.87, 0.95]). The between-case standardized mean difference for individual studies ranged from 0.03 to 18.58. Moderator analyses revealed that out of nine variables analyzed (i.e., study quality, design, age, interventionist, manipulative type, perceptual richness, math concept, dependent variable, and disability category), only disability category served as a moderator. Implications for research and practice are discussed. |
| Abstractor: |
As Provided |
| IES Funded: |
Yes |
| Entry Date: |
2020 |
| Accession Number: |
EJ1250220 |
| Database: |
ERIC |