Claims

Verbal and verbal+visual strategy conditions improve calculation accuracy for both ability groups

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? For both children with and without MD, verbal and verbal+visual conditions outperformed control on posttest calculation, with the article reporting treatment effects it characterizes as particularly strong (all ES > .80). → Swanson 2014

Evidence

Swanson 2014

Swanson, H. L., Orosco, M. J., & Lussier, C. M. (2014). The Effects of Mathematics Strategy Instruction for Children With Serious Problem-Solving Difficulties. Exceptional Children, 80(2), 149-168. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1048482

q3 · i? · causal · r2

HLM analysis of WRAT-3 calculation posttest scores in the randomized Grade 3 study, treating calculation as a transfer measure. The article reports "treatmenteffectsw ithinboth abilitygroupsw ere particularlystrongwhen verbaland verbal+spa - tialconditionswerecomparedtothecontrolcon - ditions(allES > .80)"; no single exact effect size value is printed for this contrast.

"treatmenteffectsw ithinboth abilitygroupsw ere particularlystrongwhen verbaland verbal+spa - tialconditionswerecomparedtothecontrolcon - ditions(allES > .80)"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-03
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.