A one-year classroom-randomized trial of mental abacus instruction for first- and second-grade students

Abstract

Mental Abacus (MA) is a popular arithmetic technique in which students learn to solve math problems by visualizing a physical abacus structure. Prior studies conducted in Asia have found that MA can lead to exceptional mathematics achievement in highly motivated individuals, and that extensive training over multiple years can also benefit students in standard classroom settings. Here we explored the benefits of shorter-term MA training to typical students in a US school. Specifically, we tested whether MA (1) improves arithmetic performance relative to a standard math curriculum, and (2) leads to changes in spatial working memory, as claimed by several recent reports. To address these questions, we conducted a one-year, classroom-randomized trial of MA instruction. We found that first-graders students struggled to achieve abacus expertise over the course of the year, while second-graders were more successful. Neither age group showed a significant advantage in cognitive abilities or mathematical computation relative to controls, although older children showed some hints of an advantage in learning place-value concepts. Overall, our results suggest caution in the adoption of MA as a short-term educational intervention.

The Role of Design and Training in Artifact Expertise: The Case of the Abacus and Visual Attention

“…Consistent with this, even children with typical levels of visuospatial ability can readily acquire physical and mental abacus expertise (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018. In particular, by presenting numerically relevant information in regions that even novices automatically attend to, the design of the abacus may scaffold learning how the device represents number, and thus make expertise more easily attainable.…”

“…These findings contribute to a rich literature that has indicated that both abacus training and design play a role in explaining abacus expertise (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018Dong et al, 2016;Frank & Barner, 2012;Hu et al, 2011;Wang et al, 2013;Yao et al, 2015). To address this question, we administered a series of visual search tasks to abacus experts and subjects who had little to no experience with the abacus.…”

“…We contrast this hypothesis with the idea that abacus expertise does not solely result from extensive training and associated enhancements to perceptual and cognitive resources and processes (Dong et al, 2016;Hu et al, 2011;Li, Wang, Hu, Liang, & Chen, 2013;Wang, Geng, Hu, Du, & Chen, 2013;Yao et al, 2015), but it is also scaffolded by the design of the abacus and its efficient use of preexisting cognitive resources (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018Frank & Barner, 2012). We contrast this hypothesis with the idea that abacus expertise does not solely result from extensive training and associated enhancements to perceptual and cognitive resources and processes (Dong et al, 2016;Hu et al, 2011;Li, Wang, Hu, Liang, & Chen, 2013;Wang, Geng, Hu, Du, & Chen, 2013;Yao et al, 2015), but it is also scaffolded by the design of the abacus and its efficient use of preexisting cognitive resources (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018Frank & Barner, 2012).…”

“…Our studies address the nature of abacus expertise by testing whether the extensive training abacus experts receive might lead them to develop special strategies for allocating their visual attention to semantically relevant aspects of the abacus, which could allow experts to efficiently process the abacus and help explain their remarkable computational abilities. We contrast this hypothesis with the idea that abacus expertise does not solely result from extensive training and associated enhancements to perceptual and cognitive resources and processes (Dong et al, 2016;Hu et al, 2011;Li, Wang, Hu, Liang, & Chen, 2013;Wang, Geng, Hu, Du, & Chen, 2013;Yao et al, 2015), but it is also scaffolded by the design of the abacus and its efficient use of preexisting cognitive resources (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018Frank & Barner, 2012). By this latter account, the design of the abacus may exploit general biases in visual attention, leading even na€ ıve subjects who have no familiarity with the abacus to selectively attend to semantically relevant aspects of the abacus.…”

“…For example, several studies have suggested that abacus training leads to structural changes in the brain, including enhancements of the white matter tracts that link visuospatial and motor areas, and modulation of neural activity in right fronto-parietal areas and the left occipitotemporal junction (Dong et al, 2016;Hu et al, 2011;. Additionally, and not incompatible with the idea that abacus training leads to augmented visuospatial resources, other studies have suggested that the abacus design has evolved to make efficient use of existing cognitive and perceptual resources in typical populations (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018Frank & Barner, 2012). Additionally, and not incompatible with the idea that abacus training leads to augmented visuospatial resources, other studies have suggested that the abacus design has evolved to make efficient use of existing cognitive and perceptual resources in typical populations (Barner et al, 2016(Barner et al, , 2018Frank & Barner, 2012).…”