A comparison of class‐wide taped problems and cover, copy, and compare for enhancing mathematics fluency

Abstract

An adapted alternating treatments design was used to compare the effects of class‐wide applications of Taped Problems (TP) and Cover, Copy, and Compare (CCC) procedures designed to enhance subtraction fact fluency in an intact third‐grade classroom. During the TP procedure, a tape provided an auditory prompt (i.e., the problem), followed by a 2‐second delay and then the correct answer. Students attempted to supply the correct answer before the answer was provided by the tape. During the CCC procedure, students would cover a math‐fact family triangle, attempt to write one of two possible problems and answer, write the reciprocal fact and answer, and evaluate their responses. Results show that TP caused greater increases in subtraction fact fluency than CCC or a control condition. Discussion focuses on preventing student math deficits, issues regarding alternating treatments designs, and future directions for research. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

A Comparison of Taped-Problem Interventions to Increase Math Fact Fluency: Does the Length of Time Delay Affect Student Learning Rates?

“…The results of this investigation enhance the TP research by corroborating previous investigations that showed a constant 2-s delay results in increased outcomes (Poncy et al, 2012) and demonstrating that using a nodelay procedure is effective as well. However, it is important to note that all students in the present study could accurately complete the targeted problems and that the effect of reducing, or eliminating, a wait time to respond may have a different outcome when attempting to promote accurate responding.…”

“…Previous TP interventions demonstrated that varying time delays (McCallum et al, 2006;Miller, Skinner, Gibby, Galyon, & Meadows-Allen, 2011) and constant time delays (Poncy et al, 2007;Poncy et al, 2012) can be effective, but researchers had yet to examine and compare the relative effectiveness of different time delay procedures. In the present study, when analyzing the data by session both no delay and 2-s delay conditions resulted in improvements in math fact automaticity in a second-grade general education class.…”

“…An aspect of TP that can be differentiated is the time delay between the cue (i.e., read problem) and the feedback (i.e., read answer). Time delays can be constant or progressive (i.e., varied) across multiple response trials, with both methods being used with TP procedures resulting in fluency increases (McCallum, Skinner, Turner, & Saecker, 2006;Poncy et al, 2007;Poncy, Skinner, & McCallum, 2012). However, studies have yet to be conducted comparing differentiated iterations of TP to identify the most efficient procedures (e.g., which time delay method) that are most effective with TP.…”

Bir Öğrenciye Temel Bölme İşlemlerinde Akıcılık Kazandırmada Dinleyerek İşlem Yapma Uygulamalarının Etkililiği

“…Based on the research results of this and other studies, it can be concluded that the TP interventions help students perform math facts fast enough that they do not need to use finger counting strategies. It was also concluded that TP interventions are efficient in the development of fluency in basic math skills in other studies which has different number and characteristics of participants and whose intervention forms were designed in different conditions (Aspiranti et al, 2011;Cressey and Ezbicki, 2017;McCallum et al, 2006;Miller et al, 2011;Mong and Mong, 2010;Poncy et al, 2012;Uysal, 2017;Windingsstad et al, 2009). Then, TP can be considered as a method that can be applied to all students as a group or individually in different educational settings.…”

Precision of Single-Skill Math CBM Time-Series Data: The Effect of Probe Stratification and Set Size

“…However, the issue of measurement precision extends to the use of such probes within a research context and to progress monitoring as well. Numerous repeated-measures group- and single-subject design studies have evaluated remedial strategies to improve accuracy and fluency in whole-number operations and have used SSM-CBM as a primary or sole outcome measure (e.g., Codding et al, 2007; Hawkins et al, 2009; Poncy et al, 2012).…”