Grade level, nonverbal intelligence, and working memory predicted mathematics achievement, explaining 88% of intercept variance but only 16-22% of slope variance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In Year 1, grade level, nonverbal intelligence, visual-spatial working memory and verbal working memory explained 88% of the variance of the intercept and 16% of the variance of the slope; only grade level significantly predicted the slope, and negatively (students in lower grades acquired new knowledge faster). → Prast 2018

Evidence¶

Prast 2018¶

Prast, E. J., Van de Weijer-Bergsma, E., Kroesbergen, E. H., & Van Luit, J. E. H. (2018). Differentiated instruction in primary mathematics: Effects of teacher professional development on student achievement. Learning and Instruction, 54, 22-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.01.009

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Latent growth curve Model 1 (N = 4751, Year 1) with covariates predicting intercept and slope of CMT competence scores. All covariates had significant positive effects on the intercept, largest for grade level; in Year 2 the covariates explained 88% of intercept and 22% of slope variance.

"Taken together, grade level, nonverbal intelligence, visual-spatial working memory and verbal working memory explained 88% of the variance of the intercept and 16% of the variance of the slope of mathematics achievement."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• IQ and working memory are reliable predictors of academic achievement at the beginning of school when domain knowledge is not controlled — related
• Neither IQ nor WMC significantly predicted early mathematics when both were in the same model, explaining only about 5% of variance — related
• When previous academic achievement is controlled, intelligence predicts only later reading comprehension and age-10 mathematics, and WMC predicts nothing additionally — related
• Previous domain knowledge accounts for most of the variance in later achievement, considerably reducing the predictive impact of IQ and WM — related
• Teacher PD on differentiated instruction produced a small significant positive effect on mathematics achievement growth in Year 1 (β = 0.15, p = .007) — related