Examining the Differential Effectiveness and Efficiency of Alternative Multiplication Drill Interventions with Third-Grade Students
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A large number of students demonstrate difficulty acquiring and retaining math facts highlighting the need for early math intervention. This study used a single-case cumulative acquisition design to examine the differential effectiveness and efficiency of three drill interventions, incremental rehearsal (IR), incremental rehearsal with visual representations (IRR), and traditional drill (TD) for teaching multiplication facts to three third-grade students with multiplication difficulties in a school setting. Results were mixed regarding intervention effectiveness as little differentiation was evident in students’ cumulative next day multiplication fact retention across the three intervention conditions. Students made significantly more errors in the TD condition and maintained the most multiplication facts one week after the interventions in the IR condition. TD was the most efficient intervention as students retained the most multiplication facts per instructional minute in this condition, with the IR conditions requiring significantly more time to implement than the TD condition. Implications for intervention practices and future research are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it