Subitizing or counting as possible screening variables for learning disabilities in mathematics education or learning?

Desoete, Annemie; Ceulemans, Anneliesje; Roeyers, Herbert; Huylebroeck, Anne

doi:10.1016/j.edurev.2008.11.003

Cited by 44 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 115 publications

(109 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The test battery consisted of ten tasks that assessed reading, spelling, arithmetic and cognitive skills in school age children through the use of a web application. Based on relevant data [4], [7], [8], [9] we expected that children that were officially diagnosed as learning disabled will perform lower than typical developing children in all tasks that are included in "askisi" (Hypothesis 1). Additionally, we anticipated that learning disabled children will present larger latencies in all tasks included in "askisi" [10], [11] (Hypothesis 2).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The use of computers in the identification of children with learning difficulties is now well established in UK schools, with a number of different programs available [7], [8] [9], but there are no such screeners in Greece. The aim of the present pilot study was to examine the efficacy of a new web neurocognitive screening tool, the "askisi" that was developed to provide a brief screening measure for learning difficulties.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning difficulties screening web application

Zygouris

Vlachos

Dadaliaris

et al. 2015

2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Learning disabilities is a generic term that refers to a heterogeneous group of disorders. The aim of the present pilot study was to examine the efficacy of a new web neurocognitive screening tool, the "askisi" that was developed to provide a brief screening measure for learning difficulties. Participants were twenty children who had been initially identified with learning difficulties and a control group of twenty students' age-and sexmatched with the children with learning difficulties. Group members' ages range between 8 and 12 years old. The set of tasks which all children had to undergo included 10 test that examined children's rreading, spelling, arithmetic and cognitive skills. In our effort to enhance the aforementioned procedure we created a client-server web application that implements its core characteristics.The results indicated that children with learning difficulties had significantly less correct responses in eight of the ten tasks, of our web screening test, compared with the control group, suggesting that the difference between the two groups could be practically important. Although time latency of learning disabled children was larger than their typical developing schoolmates (see Table 2), this difference did not reach statistical significance in five of the nine tasks measured. Overall, these results of this pilot study revealed strong convergent and discriminant evidence for the eight tasks of the "askisi" screening measure, suggesting that this web application may provide a useful method to screen for learning difficulties in both research studies and clinical settings.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning difficulties screening web application

Zygouris

Vlachos

Dadaliaris

et al. 2015

2015 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although NC and object enumeration are often included in screening tests designed to identify math learning difficulties in children (Butterworth, 2005a(Butterworth, , 2005bChard et al, 2005;Desoete, Ceulemans, Roeyers, & Huylebroeck, 2009;Stock, Desoete, & Roeyers, 2010), little work has investigated the relative stability or change over time of within-task parameters (e.g., reaction times [RTs]) in these two tasks. Indeed, most previous longitudinal work has reported global measures of performance (usually RT or correct performances) and has paid little attention to the stability or otherwise of within-task parameters.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability and change in markers of core numerical competencies.

Reeve¹,

Reynolds²,

Humberstone³

et al. 2012

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

104

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dot enumeration (DE) and number comparison (NC) abilities are considered markers of core number competence. Differences in DE/NC reaction time (RT) signatures are thought to distinguish between typical and atypical number development. Whether a child's DE and NC signatures change or remain stable over time, relative to other developmental signatures, is unknown. To investigate these issues, the DE and NC RT signatures of 159 children were assessed 7 times over 6 years. Cluster analyses identified within-task and across-age subgroups. DE signatures comprised 4 parameters: (a) the RT slope within the subitizing range, (b) the RT slope for the counting range, (c) the subitizing range (indicated by the point of slope discontinuity), and (d) the overall average DE RT response. NC RT signatures comprised 2 parameters (NC intercept and slope) derived from RTs comparing numbers 1 to 9. Analyses yielded 3 distinct DE and NC profiles at each age. Within-age subgroup profiles reflected differences in 3 of the 4 DE parameters and only 1 NC parameter. Systematic changes in parameters were observed across ages for both tasks, and both tasks broadly identified the same subgroups. Sixty-nine percent of children were assigned to the same subgroup across age, even though parameters themselves changed across age. Subgroups did not differ in processing speed or nonverbal reasoning, suggesting that DE and NC do not tap general cognitive abilities but reflect individual differences specific to the domain of numbers. Indeed, both DE and NC subgroup membership at 6 years predicted computation ability at 6 years, 9.5 years, and 10 years.

show abstract

“…Firstly, neuropsychologists believe that dyscalculia is a neurological disorder (Butterworth & Laurillard, 2010;Dehaene, Piazza, Pinel, & Cohen, 2005;Desoete, Ceulemans, Roeyers, & Huylebroeck, 2009;Fayol & Seron, 2005;Kaufmann, 2008;Landerl et al, 2004;Penner-Wilger et al, 2005;Piazza et al, 2010;Rousselle & Noel, 2007;Shalev & von Aster, 2008;Wilson & Waldie, 2010). Secondly, psychologists believe that it is a working memory deficit (Geary, 2010;Geary, Hamson, & Hoard, 2000;Keeler & Swanson, 2001).…”

Section: Different Terminologies For Dyscalculiamentioning

confidence: 96%

A teacher's perspective of dyscalculia: Who counts? An interdisciplinary overview

Williams

2013

Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are many reasons why children have difficulties with mathematics. Dyscalculia is one of them. Teachers need to know what dyscalculia is in order to effectively assist the child to overcome the challenges it presents. However, the literature on the remediation of dyscalculia is in its infancy. The potential for multidisciplinary research is great, but would require maths educators to become involved in this issue, where previously they have been silent. Successful teachers know their students and value knowledge that will help them to help their students. As well as knowing what dyscalculia is, teachers need to understand its causes and have effective strategies to deal with it. Teachers also need to know how dyscalculia affects a child's self-belief system in order to counter the potentially devastating effects of poor self-esteem. Reportedly, there is an incidence rate of 5% in Australian schools, yet there is a lack of recognition, identification and diagnosis of dyscalculia despite the fact that the behavioural characteristics of dyscalculia are well defined and generally agreed on. There are a number of reasons why the diagnosis of dyscalculia is masked. The existence of another (possibly previously diagnosed specific learning disability) is one of them; for example 50% of dyslexics have dyscalculia. This paper seeks to address the ''who, what, how and why'' of dyscalculia.

show abstract

Subitizing or counting as possible screening variables for learning disabilities in mathematics education or learning?

Cited by 44 publications

References 115 publications

Learning difficulties screening web application

Learning difficulties screening web application

Stability and change in markers of core numerical competencies.

A teacher's perspective of dyscalculia: Who counts? An interdisciplinary overview

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About