Annemie Desoete

Metacognition and Mathematical Problem Solving in Grade 3

This article presents an overview of two studies that examined the relationship between metacognition and mathematical problem solving in 165 children with average intelligence in Grade 3 in order to help teachers and therapists gain a better understanding of contributors to successful mathematical performance. Principal components analysis on metacognition revealed that three metacognitive components (global metacognition, off-line metacognition, and attribution to effort) explained 66% to 67% of the common variance. The findings from these studies support the use of the assessment of off-line metacognition (essentially prediction and evaluation) to differentiate between average and above-average mathematical problem solvers and between students with a severe or moderate specific mathematics learning disability.

Can we predict mathematical learning disabilities from symbolic and non‐symbolic comparison tasks in kindergarten? Findings from a longitudinal study

BACKGROUND The ability to compare numbers, as the most basic form of number sense, has been related to arithmetical achievement. AIMS The current study addressed the predictive value of non-symbolic and symbolic (number word (NW) and Arabic number (AN)) comparison for arithmetics by means of a longitudinal design. SAMPLE Sixteen children with mathematical disabilities (MD), 64 low achievers (LA), and 315 typical achieving (TA) children were followed from kindergarten till grade 2. METHOD The association of comparison skills with arithmetical skills in grades l and 2 was studied. The performances of MD, LA and TA children were compared. RESULTS Regression analyses showed that non-symbolic skills in kindergarten were predictively related to arithmetical achievement 1 year later and fact retrieval 2 years later. AN comparison was predictively related to procedural calculation 2 years later. In grade 2, there was an association between both symbolic tasks and arithmetical achievement. Children with MD already had deficits in non-symbolic and symbolic AN comparison in kindergarten, whereas in grade 2 the deficits in processing symbolic information remained. CONCLUSIONS The combination of non-symbolic and symbolic deficits represents a risk of developing MD.

Can offline metacognition enhance mathematical problem solving

The effectiveness of a short metacognitive intervention combined with algorithmic cognitive instruction was assessed in an elementary school setting. Two hundred thirty-seven 3rd-grade children were randomly assigned to a 5-session metacognitive strategy instruction, an algorithmic direct cognitive instruction, a motivational program, a quantitative-relational condition, or a spelling condition. Children in the metacognitive program achieved significant gains in trained metacognitive skills compared with the 4 other conditions. Moreover, the children in the metacognitive program performed better on trained cognitive skills than children in the algorithmic condition, with a follow-up effect on domain-specific mathematics problem-solving knowledge. Despite the consistency of findings, no generalization effects were found on transfer of cognitive learning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Children with Mathematics Learning Disabilities in Belgium

In Belgium, between 3% and 8% of the children in elementary schools have mathematics learning disabilities (MLD). Many of these children have less developed linguistic, procedural, and mental representation skills. Moreover, a majority of the children have been found to show inaccurate prediction and evaluation skills in Grade 3. MLD often become obvious in elementary school. Whereas some children are retained, others are referred to special education. During the last 10 years, the number of children in special education and the number of children with learning disabilities who are following a special guidance program in general education (inclusive education) have increased. Children in Belgium with MLD can get therapy for about 2 years. Nevertheless, many problems continue unresolved even in high school and adulthood.

Detecting Children With Arithmetic Disabilities From Kindergarten: Evidence From a 3-Year Longitudinal Study on the Role of Preparatory Arithmetic Abilities

In a 3-year longitudinal study, 471 children were classified, based on their performances on arithmetic tests in first and second grade, as having persistent arithmetic disabilities (AD), persistent low achieving (LA), persistent typical achieving, inconsistent arithmetic disabilities (DF1), or inconsistent low achieving in arithmetic. Significant differences in the performances on the magnitude comparison in kindergarten (at age 5—6) were found between the AD and LA and between the AD and DF1 groups. Furthermore, the percentage of true-positive AD children (at age 7—8) correctly diagnosed in kindergarten by combination of procedural counting, conceptual counting, and magnitude comparison tasks was 87.50%. When composing clinical samples, researchers should pay attention when stipulating restrictive or lenient cutoffs for arithmetic disabilities and select children based on their scores in 2 consecutive years, because the results of studies on persistent low achievers or children with inconsistent disabilities cannot be generalized to children with persistent arithmetic disabilities.

Predicting Arithmetic Abilities: The Role of Preparatory Arithmetic Markers and Intelligence.

Arithmetic abilities acquired in kindergarten are found to be strong predictors for later deficient arithmetic abilities. This longitudinal study (N = 684) was designed to examine if it was possible to predict the level of childrens arithmetic abilities in first and second grade from their performance on preparatory arithmetic abilities in kindergarten. Furthermore, the role of intelligence in the assessment of developing mathematical reasoning and numerical facility was investigated. The results showed that good predictions of beginning arithmetic abilities can be made. Even in the long term, it was possible to make predictions of later arithmetic performances, especially for the domain of arithmetical reasoning. Logic thinking abilities such as seriation and classification and counting knowledge may be assessed in kindergarten as possible markers for at-risk development. Furthermore, it is important to take into account intelligence when looking for useful predictors of arithmetical reasoning.

Off-Line Metacognition--A Domain-Specific Retardation in Young Children with Learning Disabilities?.

Off-line metacognition (prediction and evaluation) was assessed in 437 normally intelligent children with or without learning disabilities in grades 2 and 3. Children with specific mathematics learning disabilities were compared with peers with specific reading disabilities, children with combined learning disabilities, age-matched peers and younger children matched at mathematical problem-solving level. Our results indicate that offline metacognition cannot be reduced to a demonstration of intelligence. Moreover, the off-line metacognitive scores of children with reading disabilities were comparable to those of age-matched peers without learning disabilities. Furthermore, significantly lower prediction and evaluation scores were found for children with specific or combined mathematics learning disabilities compared with age-matched peers. In addition, our data showed a different metacognitive profile for children with specific or combined mathematics learning disabilities, not comparable on all aspects to the profile of younger children, as suggested by the retardation or maturational-lag hypothesis. The educational implications of these results are discussed.

Classification, Seriation, and Counting in Grades 1, 2, and 3 as Two-Year Longitudinal Predictors for Low Achieving in Numerical Facility and Arithmetical Achievement?

Previous research stresses the importance of seriation, classification, and counting abilities that should be assessed in kindergarten, when looking for crucial predictors of mathematical learning disabilities in Grade 1. This study examines (n = 158) two-year-long predictive relationships between childrens seriation, classification, procedural counting knowledge, and conceptual counting knowledge, and their numerical facility and arithmetical achievement in Grades 3, 4, and 5. Path analyses reveal a relationship between procedural counting knowledge in Grades l and 3 and numerical facility, and between conceptual counting knowledge in Grade l and arithmetical achievement in Grades 1 and 2. In addition, procedural counting knowledge correlates with seriation, and conceptual counting knowledge correlates with classification as well as with seriation in Grade 1. Clinicians are encouraged to select early arithmetic subtests with caution when assessing and predicting arithmetic and arithmetical disabilities.

Working Memory in Children With Reading Disabilities and/or Mathematical Disabilities

Elementary school children with reading disabilities (RD; n = 17), mathematical disabilities (MD; n = 22), or combined reading and mathematical disabilities (RD+MD; n = 28) were compared to average achieving (AA; n = 45) peers on working memory measures. On all working memory components, 2 (RD vs. no RD) × 2 (MD vs. no MD) factorial ANCOVAs revealed clear differences between children with and without RD. Children with MD had lower span scores than the AA children on measures of the phonological loop and the central executive. A significant interaction effect between RD and MD was found only for listening recall and had a small, partial effect size. In addition, analyses showed that the best logistic regression model consisted of a visuospatial and a central executive task. The model significantly distinguished between the AA and clinical groups and between the MD and RD+MD groups. Evidence was found for domain-general working memory problems in children with learning disabilities. Management of working memory loads in structured learning activities in the classroom, at home, or during therapy may help these children to cope with their problems in a more profound manner.

How common are motor problems in children with a developmental disorder: rule or exception?

BACKGROUND Few co-morbidity studies have been conducted since the Leeds Consensus Statement on developmental co-ordination disorder (DCD) in 2006. In this Statement, international cut-offs and inclusion criteria were agreed and consequently, the status of DCD changed. Furthermore, most existing co-morbidity studies are small clinical studies, rather than epidemiological studies, resulting in a broad range of co-morbidity rates. DCD has a higher incidence for boys in comparison with girls; questions arise if this preponderance remains the same in combination with other developmental disorders. Therefore, in this study we aimed to determine co-morbidity and gender differences of motor problems in children with a pervasive developmental disorder, a hyperkinetic disorder and/or a speech, language or learning disability. METHODS Profiles of 3608 children (mean age: 9 years 1 month) referred to rehabilitation centres for behavioural, developmental and sensorineural disorders were studied. RESULTS Motor problems were reported in one-fifth of the total sample. Co-morbidity of motor problems in specific disorders varied from almost one-fourth to more than one-third. The male/female ratio was significantly higher in children with motor problems and two or more other disorders, compared with children with motor problems and less than two other disorders. CONCLUSIONS This study indicates that co-morbidity of motor problems with other clinical disorders is not exceptional and developmental deviance is seldom specific to one domain. However, current co-morbidity studies tend to overestimate the number of children with motor problems. In addition, there may be different patterns of symptoms between the genders. These findings stress the importance of assessing motor skills in children with various developmental disorders.