Kindergartners with mathematics difficulties randomly assigned to the ROOTS intervention made significantly greater fall-to-spring gains than control students on the NSB, ASPENS, TEMA-3, and RAENS¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i2 medium
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i2 ROOTS students made greater gains than control students on the NSB, ASPENS, TEMA-3, and RAENS from fall to spring of kindergarten, with Hedges' g of 0.40, 0.64, 0.31, and 1.08 respectively. → Doabler 2016

Evidence¶

Doabler 2016¶

Doabler, C. T., Clarke, B., Kosty, D. B., Kurtz-Nelson, E., Fien, H., Smolkowski, K., & Baker, S. K. (2016). Testing the efficacy of a tier 2 mathematics intervention: A conceptual replication study. Exceptional Children, 83, 92–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402916660084

q3 · i2 · causal · r2

Partially nested RCT in 36 Boston-area kindergarten classrooms; 319 students with mathematics difficulties randomly assigned within classrooms to ROOTS (2:1 or 5:1 groups) or no-treatment control. Time × Condition mixed models showed "greater gains than control students" on four measures; gains differences were 1.94 (NSB, g = 0.40), 21.78 (ASPENS, g = 0.64), 2.43 (TEMA-3, g = 0.31), and 6.50 (RAENS, g = 1.08).

"Students in the ROOTS condition made greater gains than control students on the NSB (t = 3.15, df = 94, p = .0022), ASPENS (t = 5.60, df = 118, p < .0001), TEMA-3 standard scores (t = 3.45, df = 99, p = .0008), and RAENS (t = 9.20, df = 126, p < .0001)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The Boston replication reproduced significant effects on the TEMA-3, ASPENS, and RAENS and newly found significant effects on the NSB and SESAT, with effect sizes within or exceeding the Oregon study's bounds — related
• ROOTS and control students were statistically equivalent at pretest on all measures — related
• ROOTS students also had higher covariate-adjusted SESAT posttest scores than control students — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• No statistically significant differences between ROOTS and control conditions on oral counting gains or covariate-adjusted SAT-10 scores — related
• Rates of treatment responsiveness on the TEMA-3 were similar across the Oregon and Boston ROOTS studies — related
• The ROOTS intervention produced greater fall-to-spring kindergarten gains than control instruction on four of five outcome measures for at-risk students — related
• ROOTS effects on mathematics achievement were not detected on first-grade follow-up measures — related
• An earlier preliminary investigation of ROOTS found small-to-medium positive effects on kindergarten mathematics achievement measures — related
• ROOTS students made greater gains than their not-at-risk peers, reducing the achievement gap — related
• Year 1 of the ROOTS efficacy trial used a classroom-blocked RCT assigning at-risk kindergartners to ROOTS-large, ROOTS-small, or no-treatment control conditions — related
• The Year 3 pilot is a randomized control trial assigning at-risk first graders within schools to FUSION or at-risk control, with an additional average control condition — related
• At-risk kindergarten students receiving the ROOTS Tier 2 intervention made significantly greater mathematics gains than at-risk control peers on the TEMA standard score — related
• Transition out of the high-risk category (below the 10th TEMA percentile) did not differ significantly between ROOTS and control students — related
• Student outcomes did not differ significantly between two-student and five-student ROOTS groups on any measure — related
• The ROOTS kindergarten mathematics intervention significantly improved fall-to-spring gains on three of six outcome measures compared with control, with positive effect sizes on all measures — related