Approximate Arithmetic Training Improves Informal Math Performance in Low Achieving Preschoolers

Abstract

Recent studies suggest that practice with approximate and non-symbolic arithmetic problems improves the math performance of adults, school aged children, and preschoolers. However, the relative effectiveness of approximate arithmetic training compared to available educational games, and the type of math skills that approximate arithmetic targets are unknown. The present study was designed to (1) compare the effectiveness of approximate arithmetic training to two commercially available numeral and letter identification tablet applications and (2) to examine the specific type of math skills that benefit from approximate arithmetic training. Preschool children (n = 158) were pseudo-randomly assigned to one of three conditions: approximate arithmetic, letter identification, or numeral identification. All children were trained for 10 short sessions and given pre and post tests of informal and formal math, executive function, short term memory, vocabulary, alphabet knowledge, and number word knowledge. We found a significant interaction between initial math performance and training condition, such that children with low pretest math performance benefited from approximate arithmetic training, and children with high pretest math performance benefited from symbol identification training. This effect was restricted to informal, and not formal, math problems. There were also effects of gender, socio-economic status, and age on post-test informal math score after intervention. A median split on pretest math ability indicated that children in the low half of math scores in the approximate arithmetic training condition performed significantly better than children in the letter identification training condition on post-test informal math problems when controlling for pretest, age, gender, and socio-economic status. Our results support the conclusion that approximate arithmetic training may be especially effective for children with low math skills, and that approximate arithmetic training improves early informal, but not formal, math skills.

Testing the Efficacy of Training Basic Numerical Cognition and Transfer Effects to Improvement in Children’s Math Ability

“…Differences in the method by which non-numerical visual magnitudes were controlled across studies may have influenced the discrepancy in the type of cognitive process trained and the resulting assessment of outcome ability. Considering the observation of Szkudlarek and Brannon (2018) , it should also be emphasized that individuals (especially young children) with low ability may benefit more from approximate arithmetic training and that transfer effects of training may be specific to certain domains or components of math ability (e.g., informal math skills as opposed to formal math skills).…”

“…In some studies, training on approximate arithmetic (approximate addition and subtraction) using dot arrays improved the training groups’ symbolic addition/subtraction abilities compared to the control group ( Park and Brannon, 2013 , 2014 ; Hyde et al, 2014 ; Khanum et al, 2016 ; Park et al, 2016 ; Au et al, 2018 ; Szkudlarek and Brannon, 2018 ). In contrast, Räsänen et al (2009) did not find any improvement on arithmetic (addition and subtraction) and counting abilities after training with the Number Race program 1 ( Wilson et al, 2006 ) although children’s ANS acuity was improved ( Räsänen et al, 2009 ).…”

“…In contrast, Räsänen et al (2009) did not find any improvement on arithmetic (addition and subtraction) and counting abilities after training with the Number Race program 1 ( Wilson et al, 2006 ) although children’s ANS acuity was improved ( Räsänen et al, 2009 ). Szkudlarek and Brannon (2018) reported that approximate arithmetic vs. numeral identification training was effective for preschoolers with low vs. high math skills, respectively. But the training improved only early informal, but not formal, math skills.…”

Shared and distinct neural circuitry for nonsymbolic and symbolic double‐digit addition

“…However, an essential aspect of the human mathematical mind is the ability to perform operations across symbolic and nonsymbolic representational formats, for example, quickly summing the total number of people in a large crowd. Recent cognitive‐training studies have found that practice with nonsymbolic addition and subtraction problems (e.g., adding and subtracting sets of dots) leads to enhanced symbolic arithmetic abilities, suggesting a causal link between nonsymbolic and symbolic calculations (Hyde, Khanum, & Spelke, ; Park, Bermudez, Roberts, & Brannon, ; Park & Brannon, , ; Szkudlarek & Brannon, ). Such findings suggest the possibility that there may be a common set of neural mechanisms supporting both nonsymbolic and symbolic arithmetic (Bugden, DeWind, & Brannon, ).…”

Validity and Reliability Study of Turkish Version of Number Sense Screener for Children Aged 72-83 Months

“…Number Sense Screener is crucial in that it is a psycho-educative instrument providing researchers to catch at-risk students early, predict later mathematical achievement, start planning effective intervention programs, and monitor progress (Jordan et al, 2012). It can be seen in the body of literature that Number Sense Screener has been used in various studies, such as by Szkudlarek & Brannon (2018) to examine the effects of the arithmetic education program attended by pre-school children with low success levels on number and letter recognition and specific mathematical skills; by Starr, DeWind & Brannon (2017) to analyze the contributions of numerical acuity and non-numerical stimulus features to the development of the number sense and symbolic math achievement; by Jordan & Dyson (2016) to develop the numerical proficiencies of children and adults at risk with the Number Sense Intervention Project; by Dyson, Jordan, Beliakoff & Hassinger-Das (2015) to examine the effects of research-based number sense interventions applied to pre-school children with low success levels; and by Jordan, Glutting, Ramineni & Watkins (2010b) and by Jordan, Kaplan, Locuniak & Ramineni (2007) to analyze and assess pre-school and primary school period number sense success as the predictor of third-grade primary school number sense success. It has been concluded that in these studies, number sense is assessed during pre-school and primary school periods; number sense successes, especially in kindergarten and first-grade primary school, predict children"s later mathematical achievements; and number sense-based educational programs implemented during these periods are effective.…”