Comparing Paper and Tablet Modalities of Math Assessment for Multiplication and Addition

Aspiranti, Kathleen B.; Henze, Erin E. C.; Reynolds, Jennifer L.

doi:10.1080/2372966x.2020.1844548

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For both measures, average computer-based scores were lower than scores on the parallel paper/pencil measures. For the fact measure, average score on the paper/pencil probe was 30% higher, and for complex addition, it was 99% higher, similar in pattern and magnitude to previous studies (Aspiranti et al, 2021; Hensley et al, 2017). Results suggested that within-condition generalizability and dependability was strong.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…Although computer-based assessment has been in use in schools for some time, only a small number of studies have been conducted to directly examine computer-based versus paper/pencil administration of curriculum-based measurements (CBMs). Limited evidence to date suggests that paper/pencil assessment generally results in higher scores than assessment conducted via computer or other learning device and that gains attained in one format of instruction (e.g., computer-based) may not generalize to the other format (e.g., in-person; Aspiranti et al, 2021; Hensley et al, 2017). Hensley et al examined scores on identical measures of a fact skill (multiplication 0–12) with a large sample of students in Grades 3–5.…”

Section: Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reliability of Computer-Based CBMs Versus Paper/Pencil Administration for Fact and Complex Operations in Mathematics

VanDerHeyden¹,

Codding

Solomon

2022

Remedial and Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer-based curriculum-based measurement (CBM) is a relatively common practice, but surprisingly few studies have examined the reliability of computer-based CBM. This study sought to examine the reliability of CBM administered via paper/pencil versus the computer. Twenty-one of 25 students in two third-grade classes ( N = 21) participated in two generalizability studies. The primary facet of interest, format of assessment, was examined for two measures, a fact operation (fact family measure) and a more complex operation (multidigit addition). Researchers administered four alternate forms of each measure under both computer and paper/pencil conditions. Results indicated ideal reliability of measurement within all conditions and results were consistent across assessment formats for the fact operation. However, assessment format explained a large proportion of variance for the more complex skill (multidigit addition). Results indicate a need to consider the reliability of transitioning assessment from paper/pencil to computer-based response on a measure-by-measure basis.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Section: Prior Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability of Computer-Based CBMs Versus Paper/Pencil Administration for Fact and Complex Operations in Mathematics

VanDerHeyden¹,

Codding

Solomon

2022

Remedial and Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further, the students completed all assessments online, which may have negatively impacted data collection, particularly for the correct digits per minute on fluency probes. As noted, previous researchers documented students performed less well on computer-based assessments than paper-pencil assessments, which may have contributed to the lower rates of cdpm (Aspiranti et al, 2020; Hensley et al, 2017). Researchers may seek to replicate this study but focus on paper-pencil assessments.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Although the rates are considerably lower, suggesting the VRA instructional sequence is not designed to support fluency as measured on timed computational assessments, one must also consider students took these assessments online. Previous researchers found lower rates of mathematical fluency in elementary students when they solved multiplication or additional problems on a computer-based word document or a on a tablet with a stylus than with paper-and-pencil (Aspiranti et al, 2020; Hensley et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Exploring the Virtual-Representational-Abstract Instructional Sequence Across the Learning Stages for Struggling Students

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent years, virtual manipulatives have been explored and used as an alternative to concrete manipulatives in mathematics for students on their own and as part of manipulative-based instructional sequences. Researchers examining virtual manipulative-based instructional sequences tend to focus on students documented with disabilities, as opposed to students at-risk or struggling with mathematics, as well as students’ acquisition of the target skill, despite students experiencing learning in four stages: acquisition, fluency, maintenance, and generalization. This study explored the virtual-representational-abstract (VRA) instructional sequence across four stages of learning for three elementary students struggling in mathematics. In the single-case design study, researchers found a functional relationship between the VRA instructional sequence delivered online via explicit instruction and students’ computational accuracy in their targeted area of mathematics need. Researchers also found limited influence on fluency rate or generalization to word problem accuracy but that students did maintain.

show abstract

“…In addition to the five articles featured in this current issue of School Psychology Review, there were four articles featured in 2020 (Aspiranti et al, 2020;Song et al, 2020;Stifel et al, 2020;Wendel et al, 2020) and additional articles are available online (Anderson et al, 2021;Gregus et al, 2021;King et al, 2021;McIntyre et al, 2021;Ogg et al, 2021;Ye et al, 2021) (see Table 1). School Psychology Review will continue to feature contemporary scholarship focused on COVID-19 that further advances and informs the field of school psychology.…”

Section: Psychosocial and Mental Health Concerns And Special Topic Contributionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID-19 and School Psychology: Contemporary Research Advancing Practice, Science, and Policy

Song

Wang

Espelage

et al. 2021

School Psychology Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

the ongoing coVId-19 pandemic, which began in January 2020, has had numerous deleterious impacts on children, families, schools, and communities around the world and in the united States. Schools around the globe have implemented an array of instructional strategies, including in-person, remote/distance learning, and assorted hybrid configurations involving both. this second series of articles in this special topic section of School Psychology Review further informs innovations and adaptations in research, training, and practice relevant to the field of school psychology during the coVId-19 pandemic. this introductory article highlights the impacts on children, schools, and communities around the world, offers reflections on recent scholarship focused on the coVId-19 pandemic and school psychology, and also shares a synthesis from the next five articles featured in this second edition of the special topic section focused on adaptations and new directions for the field of school psychology.IMPACT STATEMENT the ongoing coVId-19 pandemic has had extensive implications on the fields of education and school psychology around the globe. recent scholarship informs innovations and adaptations further informing practice, graduate preparation, scholarship, and policies that help to advance the field of school psychology within and beyond the coVId-19 syndemic. contemporary research contributes important knowledge and guidance related to the impact on teacher's mental health and harm, coping, teaching, self-efficacy, compassion fatigue, and concerns, as well as the concerns and perspectives of parents, and also the measurement of increased stress reported by students.

show abstract

Comparing Paper and Tablet Modalities of Math Assessment for Multiplication and Addition

Cited by 14 publications

References 25 publications

Reliability of Computer-Based CBMs Versus Paper/Pencil Administration for Fact and Complex Operations in Mathematics

Reliability of Computer-Based CBMs Versus Paper/Pencil Administration for Fact and Complex Operations in Mathematics

Exploring the Virtual-Representational-Abstract Instructional Sequence Across the Learning Stages for Struggling Students

COVID-19 and School Psychology: Contemporary Research Advancing Practice, Science, and Policy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About