Automatization and Basic Fact Performance of Normal and Learning Disabled Children

Abstract

The relationship between automatization ability, as measured by the Rapid Automatic Naming Test (RAN), and proficiency in arithmetic basic fact computation was investigated. Subjects included 120 learning disabled and 120 nondisabled children between 8 and 13 years of age; 60 subjects in each group were designated as either younger or older. Significant correlations were obtained between RAN performance and basic fact proficiency for both the learning disabled and nondisabled groups. In addition, learning disabled subjects were found to be less proficient in basic fact computation and slower on RAN than their nondisabled peers at both younger and older age levels. Correlations were substantial enough to further inquire whether LD youngsters' lack of proficient basic fact skills may be due, in part at least, to weak automatization. The construct of automatization, or automaticity, has applicability to academic skills beyond those previously investigated.

Numerical and Arithmetical Cognition: Patterns of Functions and Deficits in Children at Risk for a Mathematical Disability

“…The MD/RD and MD children, as groups, committed more memory-retrieval errors and more counting procedure errors than did the RD and academically normal children, in keeping with previous studies of low-achieving children of this age (Garnett & Fleischner, 1983;Geary, 1990;. Although the MD/RD children committed more procedural errors and more memoryretrieval errors and showed less min counting than did their MD peers, as was found by Jordan and Montani (1997), none of these differences were statistically significant.…”

“…In fact, disrupted memory-based processes are consistently found with comparisons of MD children and academically normal children (Barrouillet et al, 1997;Garnett & Fleischner, 1983;. When they retrieve arithmetic facts from long-term memory, MD children commit many more errors and often show error and reaction time (RT) patterns that differ from those found with younger, academically normal children.…”

“…Indeed, models of normal arithmetical development have been successfully used to guide the study of MD children, and have revealed at least two sources of MD. These include disrupted memory-retrieval processesdifficulties retrieving basic arithmetic facts from long-term memory-and the error-prone use of developmentally immature problem-solving procedures (Ackerman & Dykman, 1995;Barrouillet, Fayol, & Lathulière, 1997;Bull & Johnston, 1997;Bull, Johnston, & Roy, 1999;Garnett, & Fleischner, 1983;Geary, Brown, & Samaranayake, 1991;Geary, Widaman, Little, & Cormier, 1987;Jordan, Levine, & Huttenlocher, 1995;Jordan & Montani, 1997;Ostad, 1997;Räsänen & Ahonen, 1995;Rourke, 1993;Russell, & Ginsburg, 1984;Svenson & Broquist, 1975).…”

Numerical and Arithmetical Cognition: A Longitudinal Study of Process and Concept Deficits in Children with Learning Disability

“…As a group, MD/RD, and to a lesser degree MD, children commit more procedural errors and use developmentally immature procedures more frequently than do their normal peers. Many children with MD/RD or MD do not show the shift from procedural-based problem solving to memory-based problem solving that is typically found with normal children (Garnett & Fleischner, 1983;Jordan & Montani, 1997;Ostad, 1997), suggesting difficulties in storing or accessing arithmetic facts in or from long-term memory. The nature of this retrieval deficit is, however, currently debated.…”

Strategy choices in simple and complex addition: Contributions of working memory and counting knowledge for children with mathematical disability

“…Yet, with the exception of some aspects of competencies in the domains of number and arithmetic, little is known about the phenotypic expression of this form of LD or the underlying brain and cognitive deficits (Geary, 1993;Geary & Hoard, 2001, in press). Even in the comparatively well studied domain of arithmetic, most of the research has focused on how young children with MD solve simple problems (e.g., 4 + 5; Garnett & Fleischner, 1983;Geary, 1990;Jordan & Montani, 1997), and less commonly on the cognitive mechanisms that may underlie these performance characteristics (Bull & Johnston, 1997;Geary, Bow-Thomas, & Yao, 1992). The goals of this study were to fill some of these knowledge gaps.…”