Does Word-Problem Performance Maintain? Follow-Up One Year After Implementation of a Word-Problem Intervention

Next-Generation Fraction Intervention and the Long-Term Advantage of Interleaved Instruction

“…On computation, a minor intervention focus, effects were small and not significant, g = 0.17 and 0.11. Thus, as expected from primary-grade whole-number intervention follow-up research (see Powell et al, 2021, for summary), effects decreased even within a limited follow-up time frame. In contrast to most primary-grade whole-number studies (see Powell et al, 2021), maintenance ESs within a similar time frame revealed practically important advantages favoring fraction intervention over control.…”

“…Thus, as expected from primary-grade whole-number intervention follow-up research (see Powell et al, 2021, for summary), effects decreased even within a limited follow-up time frame. In contrast to most primary-grade wholenumber studies (see Powell et al, 2021), maintenance ESs within a similar time frame revealed practically important advantages favoring fraction intervention over control. Research on the persistence of effects over a longer time frame and at grades 4 and 5 is needed.…”

“…Even so, the maintenance ESs revealed practically important advantages for intervention over control group students. A small follow-up literature on math interventions so far suggests that maintenance and follow-up ESs for intermediate-grade fraction interventions may be larger than for primary-grade whole-number interventions (see Powell et al, 2021 for summary), most likely due to larger intervention ESs at posttest. Even so, across the primary and intermediate grades and across whole and rational numbers, substantial decrements in ES raise concern.…”

Exploring academic and cognitive skills impacting retention and acquisition of word‐problem knowledge gained during or after intervention

“…Based on randomized controlled trials (RCT) that aim to determine the most effective ways to optimize students' academic outcomes, some researchers are able to conduct follow‐up testing to assess the persistence of intervention effects (e.g., Dyson et al, 2020; Powell et al, 2022). Yet, follow‐up testing of such significant intervention effects often fades over time, indicating the need for a deeper understanding of the key factors supporting such persistence (e.g., Bailey et al, 2020; Kang et al, 2019).…”

“…After an intervention ceases, students in intervention and control may experience differential rates of learning, and this may be based on the knowledge and skills gained during the intervention or after the intervention (Powell et al, 2022). Another reason for differential rates of learning post intervention may be key student‐level skills that impact their responsiveness to intervention, such as students' pre‐intervention academic knowledge (e.g., Fuchs et al, 2019; Powell et al, 2017).…”