Effectiveness of Pearson’s SuccessMaker Mathematics for Students with Disabilities

Authors

https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.329
SuccessMaker mathematics is an instructional learning system rooted in behaviorist instructional theory. Previous research efforts have left much to be desired and have produced inconsistent results. Recent research for this program appears to be tapering off, despite advances in technology signaling integration of concepts from other theoretical positions. A quasi-experimental review of data from a sample of students (N = 1186) from a central Texas school district over a five-year period was reviewed. Multivariate analysis of variance identified that changes in state testing performance were not linked to program use. Changes in the rate of academic achievement were found to exist between usage groups. Students who met or exceeded usage recommendations (>20 hours of use) were found to have significantly greater rates of achievement (ES: d = 1.02). Recommendations for further studies and limitations of the current study are provided.

Bailey, G. D. (1992). Wanted: A road map for understanding integrated learning systems. Educational Technology, 32(9), 3-5.

Becker, H. J. (1992). Computer-based integrated learning systems in the elementary and middle grades: A critical review and synthesis of evaluation reports. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8(1), 1-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2190/23BC-ME1W-V37U-5TMJ

Bransford, J. D., Sherwood, R. D., Hasselbring, T. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Williams, S. M. (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology (pp. 115-142). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Burton, J., Moore, D., & Magliare, S. (2008). Behaviorism and instructional technology. In D. H. Jonassen & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology: A project of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (2nd Ed.; pp. 3-36). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cawley, J., Parmar, R., Yan, W., & Miller, J. (1998). Arithmetic computation performance of students with learning disabilities: Implications for curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 13, 68-74.

Cherryholmes, C. H. (1992). Notes on pragmatism and scientific realism. Educational Researcher, 14, 13-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X021006013

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Cooley, M. L. (2007). Teaching kids with mental health and learning disorders in the regular classroom: How to recognize, understand, and help challenged (and challenging) students succeed. Minneapolis, MN: Free Spirit Publishing.

Crawford, A. N. (1970). A pilot study of computer assisted drill and practice in seventh grade remedial mathematics. California Journal of Educational Research, 21, 170-174.

Creswell, J. W. (2011). Controversies in mixed methods research. In. N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (4th ed., pp. 269-283). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cruthirds, J., & Hanna, M. S. (1997). Programmed instruction and interactive multimedia: A third consideration. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED439464.pdf

Cummings, J. J., & Elkins, J. (1999). Lack of automaticity in the basic addition facts as a characteristic of arithmetic learning problems and instructional needs. Mathematical Cognition, 5, 149-180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/135467999387289

Delon, F. G. (1970). A field test of computer assisted instruction in first grade mathematics. Educational Leadership, 28, 170-180.

Ellis, P. D. (2010). The essential guide to effect sizes: Statistical power, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of research results. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511761676

Gatti, G. G. (2009). Pearson SuccessMaker math pilot study. Pittsburgh, PA: Gatti Evaluation, Inc.

Gee, A. P. (2008). An investigation of the impact of SuccessMaker on reading and math achievement at an elementary school (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (UMI: 3326592)

Graham, L., Bellert, A., Thomas, J., & Pegg, J., (2007). A basic skills intervention for middle school students with learning difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 410-419. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400050401

Joyce, B., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of teaching (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Kabacoff, R. I. (2014). Power analysis. Retrieved from http://www.statmethods.net/stats/power.html

Kirk, V. C. (2003). Investigation of the impact of integrated learning system use on mathematics achievement of elementary student (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (ProQuest Document ID: 305324110).

Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Cohen, P. A. (1980). Instructional technology and college teaching. Teaching of Psychology, 7(4), 199-205. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top0704_1

Kulik, C.-L. C., Schwalb, B. J., & Kulik, J. A. (1982). Programmed instruction in secondary education: A meta-analysis of evaluation findings. The Journal of Educational Research, 75(3), 133-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1982.10885369

Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction. In E. L. Baker & H. F. O’Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training, (pp. 9-33). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kulik, J. A. (2002). School mathematics and science programs benefit from instructional technology (Info Brief NSF 03-301). Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Manning, C. A. (2004). The effect of the Math Concepts and Skills (MCS) computer program on standardized test scores at a middle school in east central Florida (Doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando.

Martindale, T., Pearson, C., Curda, L., & Pilcher, J. (2005). Effects of an online instructional application on reading and mathematics standardized test scores. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 37, 349-360. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2005.10782442

McDonald, J., Yanchar, S., & Osguthorpe, R. (2005). Learning from programmed instruction: Examining implications for modern instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(2), 84-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504867

McKissick, S. K. (2016). Perceptions and obstacles encountered during SuccessMaker implementation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Chapter 2). Texas A&M University, College Station, TX.

Mendelsohn, M. (1972). CAI in New York City: The slow learner in mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics Yearbook, 355-364.

Mills, S. C., & Ragan, T. J. (2000). A tool for analyzing implementation fidelity of an integrated learning system. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 21-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300498

Mintz, K. S. (2000). A comparison of computerized and traditional instruction in elementary mathematics (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (ProQuest Document ID: 304577773).

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.

Ormrod, J. (2014). Human learning (6th ed.). Essex, UK: Pearson.

Pearson Digital Learning (n.d.). The Pearson timeline: Our history. Retrieved from http://timeline.pearson.com

Pearson Digital Learning. (2002). SuccessMaker evidence of effectiveness: Selected evaluation studies. Retrieved from http://www.pearsoned.com/wp-content/uploads/dc4-successmaker-enterprise-evidence-of-effectiveness.pdf

Pearson Digital Learning. (2004). Notes on SuccessMaker course levels, gain, and prescriptive scheduling. Pearson Education Inc. (2012, March). SuccessMaker mathematics time/gain estimates for student scheduling: A guide for scheduling student sessions to achieve target scores. Released publication from vendor provided by representative.

Pearson Education Inc. (2013). SuccessMaker 6 math reference guide. Retrieved from http://it.dadeschools.net/SuccessMakerNew/Teacher%20Resources/SuccessMaker_6_Math_Reference_Guide.pdf

Pellegrino, J. W., & Goldman, S. R. (1987). Information processing and elementary mathematics. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 23-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948702000105

Prince, J. D. (1969). A practitioner’s report results of two years of computer-assisted instruction in drill and practice mathematics. McComb, MS: McComb Schools.

Ragosta, M. (1983). Computer-assisted instruction and compensatory education: A longitudinal analysis. Machine-Mediated Learning, 1(1), 97-127.

Richards, J. (1996). Negotiating the negotiation of meaning: Comments on Voigt (1992) and Saxe and Bermudez (1992). In L. P. Steffe, P. Nesher, P. Cobb, G. A. Goldin, & B. Greer (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 69-75). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Schiro, M. S. (2013). Curriculum theory: Conflicting visions and enduring concerns (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Schmidt, M., Weinstein, T., Niemiec, R., & Walberg, H. J. (1985). Computer-assisted instruction with exceptional children. Journal of Special Education, 19, 493-501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002246698501900411

Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Skinner, B. (1986). Programmed instruction revisited. The Phi Delta Kappan, 68(2), 103-110.

Slavin, R. E. (1987). A theory of school and classroom organization. Educational Psychologist, 22(2), 89-109. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2202_1

Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 427-515. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308317473

Suppes, P., & Morningstar, M. (1969). Computer-assisted instruction. Science, 166, 343-350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.166.3903.343

Svoboda, D. S., Jones, A. L., van Vulpen, F., & Harrington, D. (2012). Programmed instruction. In J. Hattie & E. M. Andermann (Eds.), International guide to student achievement (392-395). New York, NY: Routledge.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (Eds.). (2003). Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Underwood, J., Cavendish, S., Dowling, S., Fogelman, K., & Lawson, T. (1996). Are integrated learning systems effective learning support tools? Computers & Education, 26(1), 33-40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-1315(95)00078-X

Van Dusen, L. M., & Worthen, B. R. (1995). Can integrated instructional technology transform the classroom? Educational Leadership, 53(2), 28-33.

Vockell, E. L., & Mihail, T. (1993). Behind computerized instruction for students with exceptionalities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 25(3), 38-43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/004005999302500309

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wendling, B. J., & Mather, N. (2009). Essentials of evidence-based academic interventions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Wood, K. M. (2004). Effects of SuccessMaker Math on students with learning disabilities in inclusive and special education classrooms. Journal of Teacher Initiated Research, 1. Retrieved from http://www.otterbein.edu/Files/pdf/Education/JTIR/VolumeI/woodfinal.pdf

Zafiropoulou, M., & Karmba-Schina, C. (2005). Applying cognitive-behavioral interventions in Greek mainstream school settings: The case of learning difficulties. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 3(2), 29-48.

There are 57 references in total.
McKissick, S. K. (2017). Effectiveness of Pearson’s SuccessMaker Mathematics for Students with Disabilities. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 12(1), 103-133. https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.329

Downloads

Article Information

  • Article Type Articles
  • Submitted January 1, 2017
  • Published February 15, 2017
  • Issue Winter 2017
  • Section Articles
  • File Downloads 0
  • Abstract Views 2
  • Altmetrics
  • Share
Download data is not yet available.