QuickSmart

Abstract

QuickSmart is a basic academic skills intervention designed for persistently low-achieving students in the middle years of schooling that aims to improve the automaticity of basic skills to improve higher-order processes, such as problem solving and comprehension, as measured on standardized tests. The QuickSmart instructional program consists of three structured, teacher- or teacher aide-directed, 30-minute, small-group lessons each week for approximately 26 weeks. In this study, 42 middle school students experiencing learning difficulties (LD) completed the QuickSmart reading program, and a further 42 students with LD took part in the QuickSmart mathematics program. To investigate the effects of the intervention, comparisons were made between the reading and mathematics progress of the intervention group and a group of 10 high-achieving and 10 average-achieving peers. The results indicated that although the standardized reading comprehension and mathematics scores of QuickSmart students remained below those of comparison students, they improved significantly from pretest to posttest. In contrast, the standardized scores of comparison students were not significantly different from pretest to posttest. On measures of response speed and accuracy gathered using the Cognitive Aptitude Assessment System (CAAS), QuickSmart students were able to narrow the gap between their performance and that of their high- and average-achieving peers. Implications are drawn regarding the importance of interventions that emphasize the automaticity of basic academic skills for students with learning difficulties.

Extensive Reading Interventions for Students With Reading Difficulties After Grade 3

“…However, gains in standard scores suggest that students accelerated learning above expectations. Graham, Bellert, Thomas, and Pegg (2007) also reported significant differences between pretest and posttest raw scores on a standardized measure of comprehension for struggling readers in Grades 5 through 7 following a fluency-based intervention provided three times per week for 26 weeks (30-minute sessions) in groups of two students. The comprehension of a comparison sample of average-and highachieving readers did not improve significantly over the same time period, suggesting students receiving the intervention accelerated their learning; however, comprehension levels of the struggling readers were still significantly lower than the average-and high-achieving readers at posttest.…”

Effectiveness of the Use of Learning Tools Based on Academics Success Skills in Achieving Cognitive Learning Indicators

“…Students are directed through procedural learning activities and problems that stimulate curiosity to find various information as an alternative solution. Various learning experiences experienced form the personality of students to be able to succeed in the work that will be undertaken in accordance with the profile of graduates [2], [4], [7], [8], [23]. Thus, the success of universities in producing graduates who have the ability and skills in accordance with the profile of graduates is more effective with learning tools based on academic success skills.…”

“…By having metacognition knowledge, Students can achieve success in planning and various considerations taken to live life. Therefore, the use of learning tools based on academic success skills is needed to be done repeatedly and applied to become a standard and better improvement results [4], [5], [12], [16], [17], [21], [22], [25].…”

“…The indicators shown by graduates in achieving optimal results are the basis of the application of learning that internalizes Academic success skills indicators. Optimal achievement is the effect of the results achieved from systematically implemented planning [2], [4], [5], [7]- [10], [21], [24], [26]. Thus, planning that has been made can produce effectiveness at the objectives achieved.…”

Seven Pervasive Statistical Flaws in Cognitive Training Interventions

“…This is particularly problematic in training interventions because numerous studies are designed to measure the effectiveness of a treatment after an initial selection based on baseline scores. For example, many studies intend to assess the impact of a cognitive intervention in schools after enrolling the lowest-scoring participants on a pretest measure (e.g., Graham et al, 2007 ; Helland et al, 2011 ; Stevens et al, 2013 ). Median- or mean-split designs should always wary the reader, as it does not adequately control for regression toward the mean and other confounds (e.g., sampling bias) – if the groups to be compared are not equal at baseline, any interpretation of improvement is precarious.…”