TY - JOUR
T1 - A Meta-Analysis of Mathematics Word-Problem Solving Interventions for Elementary Students Who Evidence Mathematics Difficulties
AU - Myers, Jonté A.
AU - Witzel, Bradley S.
AU - Powell, Sarah R.
AU - Li, Hongli
AU - Pigott, Terri D.
AU - Xin, Yan Ping
AU - Hughes, Elizabeth M.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 AERA.
PY - 2022/10
Y1 - 2022/10
N2 - Since 1975, researchers have conducted interventions to improve the word-problem performance of elementary school students facing mathematics difficulties. The current study reports a meta-analysis of 52 studies that examined the effect of these interventions. We estimated multivariate, random-effects models (REM) with robust variance estimation (RVE) with and without outliers. Results showed a large, positive, and significant mean weighted effect size (g = 1.01 for the model with outliers; g = 0.81 for the model without outliers). Findings of meta-regression analyses showed several moderators, such as sample composition, group size, intervention dosage, group assignment approach, interventionist, year of publication, and dependent measure type, significantly explained heterogeneity in effects across studies. A sensitivity analysis showed these results were generally robust to outliers. We offer possible explanations for the findings and discuss study limitations. Finally, we propose recommendations for future research and classroom practice.
AB - Since 1975, researchers have conducted interventions to improve the word-problem performance of elementary school students facing mathematics difficulties. The current study reports a meta-analysis of 52 studies that examined the effect of these interventions. We estimated multivariate, random-effects models (REM) with robust variance estimation (RVE) with and without outliers. Results showed a large, positive, and significant mean weighted effect size (g = 1.01 for the model with outliers; g = 0.81 for the model without outliers). Findings of meta-regression analyses showed several moderators, such as sample composition, group size, intervention dosage, group assignment approach, interventionist, year of publication, and dependent measure type, significantly explained heterogeneity in effects across studies. A sensitivity analysis showed these results were generally robust to outliers. We offer possible explanations for the findings and discuss study limitations. Finally, we propose recommendations for future research and classroom practice.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85124316350&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85124316350&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3102/00346543211070049
DO - 10.3102/00346543211070049
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85124316350
SN - 0034-6543
VL - 92
SP - 695
EP - 742
JO - Review of Educational Research
JF - Review of Educational Research
IS - 5
ER -