Arithmetic fluency and number processing skills in identifying students with mathematical learning disabilities.
A two-factor online screener that times number comparison and quick counting spots severe math learning disabilities with high accuracy across grades 3-9.
01Research in Context
What this study did
The team built a two-minute online screener for math learning disabilities. They tested it on kids in grades 3 through 9.
The screener mixes number comparison and quick counting tasks. It flags severe MLD cases and kids who just struggle a bit.
What they found
The tool caught almost every child with severe MLD. It also cut false alarms for low achievers.
Severe cases were easier to spot than mild ones. Accuracy stayed strong across all grade levels tested.
How this fits with other research
Schwenk et al. (2017) meta-analysis shows symbolic speed, not the distance effect, marks math trouble. The new screener uses that same speed measure, so results line up.
Defever et al. (2013) found kids with MLD only slow down on mixed notation trials. The new study adds quick counting and still finds a gap, so the deficit looks broader than access alone.
Ceulemans et al. (2014) saw no speed gap in teen enumeration. The new study finds one when counting is timed and paired with comparison, suggesting task design matters.
Why it matters
You can add a 60-second number comparison or dot-count probe to your intake battery. It costs nothing, needs no math facts, and sharpens MLD screening in one class period.
Get CEUs on This Topic — Free
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Time your student for 30 seconds on a number comparison app and note errors—use the cut score from the paper to flag risk.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
BACKGROUND: Students with mathematical learning disabilities (MLD) struggle with number processing skills (e.g., enumeration and number comparison) and arithmetic fluency. Traditionally, MLD is identified based on arithmetic fluency. However, number processing skills are suggested to differentiate low achievement (LA) from MLD. AIMS: This study investigated the accuracy of number processing skills in identifying students with MLD and LA, based on arithmetic fluency, and whether the classification ability of number processing skills varied as a function of grade level. METHODS AND PROCEDURES: The participants were 18,405 students (girls = 9080) from Grades 3-9 (ages 9-15). Students' basic numerical skills were assessed with an online dyscalculia screener (Functional Numeracy Assessment -Dyscalculia Battery, FUNA-DB), which included number processing and arithmetic fluency as two factors. OUTCOMES AND RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analyses supported a two-factor structure of FUNA-DB. The two-factor structure was invariant across language groups, gender, and grade levels. Receiver operating characteristics curve analyses indicated that number processing skills are a fair classifier of MLD and LA status across grade levels. The classification accuracy of number processing skills was better when predicting MLD (cut-off < 5 %) compared to LA (cut-off < 25 %). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Results highlight the need to measure both number processing and arithmetic fluency when identifying students with MLD.
Research in developmental disabilities, 2024 · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2024.104795