The purpose of this pilot study was to explore the impact of mathematics and reading learning difficulties on the mathematics–vocabulary understanding of fifth–grade students. Students (n = 114) completed three measures: mathematics computation, general vocabulary, and mathematics vocabulary. Based on performance on the mathematics computation and general vocabulary measures, students were categorized with no learning difficulty (i.e., typical), mathematics difficulty without reading difficulty (MD–only), reading difficulty without mathematics difficulty (RD–only), and combined mathematics and reading difficulties (MDRD). On the mathematics–vocabulary measure, students with MD–only or RD–only scored significantly lower than typical students, and students with MDRD demonstrated significantly lower performance than students with MD–only or RD–only.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArchibaldL. M. D., CardyJ. O., JoanisseM. F., & AnsariD. (2013). Language, reading, and math learning profiles in an epidemiological sample of school age children. PloS ONE, 8(10), e77463. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077463
2.
AdamsT. L. (2003). Reading mathematics: More than words can say. The Reading Teacher, 56, 786–795.
3.
BaddeleyA., GathercoleS., & PapagnoC. (1998). The phonological loop as a language learning device. Psychological Review, 105(1), 158–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295x.105.1.158
BodovskiK., & FarkasG. (2007). Mathematics growth in early elementary school: The roles of beginning knowledge, student engagement, and instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 108, 115–130. https://doi.org/10.1086/525550
8.
BryantD. P., GoodwinM., BryantB. R., & HigginsK. (2003). Vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities: A review of the research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26, 117–128. https://doi.org/10.2307/1593594
9.
CainK., & OakhillJ. (2006). Profiles of children with specific reading comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 76, 683–696. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905x67610
10.
CarterT. A., & DeanE. O. (2006). Mathematics intervention for grades 5–11: Teaching mathematics, reading or both? Reading Psychology, 27, 127–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/02702710600640248
11.
CharlesR. I., MurphyS. J., CaldwellJ. H., SammonsK. B., CopleyJ., SchielackJ. F., et al. (2014). Texas EnVisionMATH 2.0 grade 5. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
12.
ChowJ. C., & JacobsM. (2016). The role of language in fraction performance: A synthesis of literature. Learning and Individual Differences, 47, 252–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.12.017
13.
CoyneM. D., McCoachD. B., & KappS. (2007). Vocabulary intervention for kindergarten students: Comparing extended instruction to embedded instruction and incidental exposure. Learning Disability Quarterly, 30, 77–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/30035543
14.
CunninghamA. E., & StanovichK. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934–945. https://doi.org/10.1037//0012-1649.33.6.934
15.
De SmedtB., TaylorJ., ArchibaldL., & AnsariD. (2010). How is phonological processing related to individual differences in children's arithmetic skills? Developmental Science13, 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00897.x
16.
DixonJ. K., LarsonM. R., BurgerE. B., & Sandoval–MartinezM. E. (2014). Texas Go Math!: Student edition grade 5. Orlando, FL: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
17.
DuncanG. J., DowsettC. J., ClaessensA., MagnusonK., HustonA. C., KlebanovP., et al. (2007). School Readiness and Later Achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1428–1446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428
18.
EnglertC. S., CulattaB. E., & HornD. G. (1987). Influence of irrelevant information in addition word problems on problem solving. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 29–36. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510752
19.
EspinC. A., BuschT. W., LembkeE. S., HamptonD. D., SeoK., & ZukowskiB. A. (2013). Curriculum–based measurement in science learning: Vocabulary–matching as an indicator of performance and progress. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 38(4), 203–213. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534508413489724
20.
EspinC. A., ShinJ., & BuschT. W. (2005). Curriculum–based measurement in the content areas: Vocabulary matching as an indicator of progress in social studies learning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38, 353–363. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380041301
21.
Every Child Succeeds Act of 2015, 20 U.S.C. 70 § 6301 et seq. (2015).
22.
FuchsL. S., & FuchsD. (2002). Mathematical problem–solving profiles of students with mathematics disabilities with and without comorbid reading disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 563–573. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194020350060701
23.
FuchsL. S., FuchsD., & ComptonD. L. (2012). Intervention effects for students with comorbid forms of learning disability: Understanding the needs of nonresponders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46, 534–548. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412468889
24.
FuchsL. S., FuchsD. & PrenticeK. (2004). Responsiveness to mathematical problem–solving instruction: Comparing students at risk of mathematics disability with and without risk of reading disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 293–306. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370040201
25.
GearyD. C. (1990). A componential analysis of an early learning deficit in mathematics. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 49, 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(90)90065-g
26.
GearyD. C. (1993). Mathematical disabilities: Cognitive, neuropsychological and genetic components. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 345–362. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.114.2.345
27.
GearyD. C., HamsonC. O., & HoardM. K. (2000). Numerical and arithmetical cognition: A longitudinal study of process and concept deficits in children with learning disability. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 77, 236–263. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2000.2561
HartB., & RisleyT. R. (1999). The social world of children learning to talk. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
30.
HechtS. A., TorgensenJ. K., WagnerR. K., & RashotteC. A. (2001). The relations between phonological processing abilities and emerging individual differences in mathematical computation skills: A longitudinal study from second to fifth grades. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 79, 192–227. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2000.2586
Individuals with Disabilities Educational Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
33.
JitendraA. K., EdwardsL. L., SacksG., & JacobsonL. A. (2004). What research says about vocabulary instruction for students with learning disabilities. Council for Exceptional Children, 70, 299–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290407000303
34.
JordanN. C., & HanichL. B. (2003). Characteristics of children with moderate mathematics deficiencies: A longitudinal perspective. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 18, 213–221. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5826.00076
35.
JordanN. C., HanichL. C., & KaplanD. (2003). Arithmetic fact mastery in young children: A longitudinal investigation. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 85, 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-0965(03)00032-8
36.
JordanN. C., KaplanD., & HanichL. B. (2002). Achievement growth in children with learning difficulties in mathematics: Findings of a two–year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 586–597. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-0663.94.3.586
37.
KrajewskiK., & SchneiderW. (2009). Exploring the impact of phonological awareness, visual–spatial working memory, and preschool quantity–number competencies on mathematics achievement in elementary school: Findings from a 3–year longitudinal study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 103, 516–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.03.009
38.
LeFevreJ.–A., FastL.Smith–ChantB. L., SkwarchukS.–L., BisanzJ., KamawarD., et al. (2010). Pathways to mathematics: Longitudinal predictors of performance. Child Development, 81, 1753–1767. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01508.x
39.
LocuniakM. N., & JordanN. C. (2008). Using kindergarten number sense to predict calculation fluency in second grade. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 451–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219408321126
40.
LyonsR. G. (1998). The NICHD research program in reading development, reading disorders and reading instruction: A summary of research findings. Keys to successful learning: A national summit on research in learning disabilities. Retrieved from www.eric.ed.gov/?id=ED430366.
41.
MabbottD. J., & BisanzJ. (2008). Computational skills, working memory, and conceptual knowledge in older children with mathematics learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219407311003
42.
MacGinitieW. H., MacGinitieR. K., MariaK., & DreyerL. G. (2000). Gates–MacGinitie reading tests, level 5 (4th ed.). Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing Company.
43.
MariaK., & HughesK. E. (2008). Gates–MacGinitie Reading Tests technical report supplement. Rolling Meadows, IL: Riverside Publishing.
MontagueM. (1993). Mathematical problem–solving characteristics of middle school students with learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 7, 175–201. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246699302700203
46.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards Mathematics. Washington, D.C.: Authors.
47.
National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence–based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction. Retrieved from www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/pubs/nrp/Documents/report.pdf.
PengP., & FuchsD. (2016). A meta–analysis of working memory deficits in children with learning difficulties: Is there a difference between verbal domain and numerical domain?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49, 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414521667
50.
PierceM. E., & FontaineL. (2009). Designing vocabulary instruction in mathematics. Reading Teacher, 63, 239–243. https://doi.org/10.1598/RT.63.3.7
51.
PimpertonH., & NationK. (2010). Understanding words, understanding numbers: An exploration of the mathematical profiles of poor comprehenders. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 225–268. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709909x477251
52.
PowellS. R., DriverM. K., RobertsG., & FallA. M. (2017). An analysis of the mathematics vocabulary knowledge of third– and fifth–grade students: Connections to general vocabulary and mathematics computation. Learning and Individual Differences, 57, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.05.011
53.
PurpuraD. J., HumeL. E., SimsD. M., & LoniganC. J. (2011). Early literacy and early numeracy: The value of including early literacy skills in the prediction of numeracy development. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110, 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.07.004
54.
RaikerA. (2002). Spoken language and mathematics. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32, 45–60.
55.
RiccominiP. J., SmithG. W., HughesE. M., & FriesK. M. (2015). The language of mathematics: The importance of teaching and learning mathematical vocabulary. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 31, 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2015.1030995
56.
RubensteinR. N., & ThompsonD. R. (2002). Understanding and supporting children's mathematical vocabulary development. Teaching Children Mathematics, 9, 107–112.
57.
ScarboroughH. S. (2005). Developmental relationships between language and reading: Reconciling a beautiful hypothesis with some ugly facts. In CattsH. W., & KamhiA. G. (Eds.), The connections between language and reading disabilities (pp. 3–24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
58.
SchleppegrellM. J. (2007). The linguistic challenges of mathematics teaching and learning: A research review. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 23, 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560601158461
59.
SeethalerP. M., FuchsL. S., StarJ. R., & BryantJ. (2011). The cognitive predictors of computational skill with whole versus rational numbers: An exploratory study. Learning and Individual Differences. 21, 536–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.05.002
60.
ShalevR. S., AuerbachJ., ManorO., & Gross–TsurV. (2000). Developmental dyscalculia: Prevalence and prognosis. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 9, 58–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787007000
61.
StahlS. A., & FairbanksM. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model–based meta–analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56, 72–110.
62.
StanovichK. E. (1988). Explaining the differences between the dyslexic and the garden–variety poor reader: The phonological core variable difference model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 590–604. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948802101003
63.
SwansonH. L., & JermanO. (2006). Math disabilities: A selective meta–analysis of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 76, 249–274. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076002249
64.
SwansonH. L., JermanO., & ZhengX. (2009). Math disabilities and reading disabilities: Can they be separated?Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 27, 175–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282908330578
65.
SwansonH. L., ZhengX., & JermanO. (2009). Working memory, short–term memory and reading disabilities: A selective meta–analysis of the literature. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42, 260–287. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219409331958
66.
TollS. W., & Van LuitJ. E. (2014). The developmental relationship between language and low early numeracy skills throughout kindergarten. Exceptional Children, 81, 64–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914532233
67.
VanbinstK., GhesquièreP., & De SmedtB. (2014). Arithmetic strategy development and its domain–specific and domain–general cognitive correlates: A longitudinal study in children with persistent mathematical learning difficulties. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35, 3001–3013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.06.023
68.
VellutinoF. R., FletcherJ. M., SnowlingM. J., & ScanlonD. M. (2004). Specific reading disability (dyslexia): What have we learned in the past four decades? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0021-9630.2003.00305.x
69.
VukovicR. K. (2012). Mathematics difficulty with and without reading difficulty: Findings and implications from a four–year longitudinal study. Exceptional Children, 78, 280–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291207800302
70.
VukovicR. K., & LesauxN. K. (2013). The language of mathematics: Investigating the ways language counts for children's mathematical development. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 115, 227–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.02.002
71.
VukovicR. K., & SiegelL. S. (2010). Academic and cognitive characteristics of persistent mathematics difficulty from first through fourth grade. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 25, 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00298.x
72.
WakefieldD. V. (2000). Math as a second language. The Educational Forum, 64(3), 272–279.
73.
WillcuttE. G., PetrillS. A., WuS., BoadoR., DeFriesJ. C., OlsonR. K., et al (2013). Comorbidity between reading disability and math disability: Concurrent psychopathology, functional impairment, and neuropsychological functioning. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 46(6), 500–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413477476
74.
WilkinsonG. S., & RobertsonG. J. (2006). Wide range achievement test (4th ed). Lutz, FL: PAR.
