Page 95 - Children’s mathematical development and learning needs in perspective of teachers’ use of dynamic math interviews

Table 1 Descriptive Statistics
Visuospatial updating 388
Verbal updating 454 Inhibition 452 Shifting + inhibition 451 Arithmetic fluency 452 Mathematical problem-solving T1 453 Mathematical problem-solving T2 446
Note. T1 = start grade 4; T2 = end grade 4. Table 2 Correlations Between Measures
1. Visuospatial updating - 2. Verbal updating .218 3. Inhibition -.206 4. Shifting + inhibition -.268 5. Arithmetic fluency .258 6. Mathematical problem-solving T1 .374 7. Mathematical problem-solving T2 .334
Note. p < .001 for all correlations.
19.54 (6.20) 0.01 11.64 (2.44) 0.35 87.02 (19.73) 0.46 85.38 (18.70) 0.44 106.90 (34.49) 0.18 215.67 (28.27) 0.05 239.41 (25.82) -0.09
0.11 0.72 1.61 1.72 -0.58 0.51 0.25
Role of executive functioning in mathematical development
Measures
N
M (SD)
Skewness
Kurtosis
Measures
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
- -.311 -.230 .238 .383 .316
- .600 -.366 -.235
3
-
-.349 - -.203 .547
-
-.172 -.177 .490 .759 -
Predicting mathematical problem-solving performance
To answer the first research question, namely whether children’s mathematical problem-solving at the end of grade 4 is predicted by their arithmetic fluency and their executive functioning at the start of grade 4 (or not), the results of the multiple regression analyses were examined (see Table 3). As can be seen, 23.6% of the variance in the children’s mathematical problem-solving at the end of grade 4 could be explained by their arithmetic fluency alone. When the components of executive functioning were added to the model, 31.4 % of the variance in mathematical problem-solving was accounted for. Examination of the individual contributions of the predictors in model 2 showed arithmetic fluency, visuospatial updating, and verbal updating to be significant predictors. Inhibition and shifting + inhibition at the start of grade 4 did not predict mathematical problem-solving at the end of grade 4.
93