Cited by 70Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsBehavioral and Psychological StudiesMathematics Education and Pedagogy

A comparative analysis of massed vs. distributed practice on basic math fact fluency growth rates

Schutte, Greg M., Duhon, Gary J., Solomon, Benjamin G., Poncy, Brian C., Moore, Kathryn, Story, Bailey·2015·Journal of School Psychology

Abstract

To best remediate academic deficiencies, educators need to not only identify empirically validated interventions but also be able to apply instructional modifications that result in more efficient student learning. The current study compared the effect of massed and distributed practice with an explicit timing intervention to evaluate the extent to which these modifications lead to increased math fact fluency on basic addition problems. Forty-eight third-grade students were placed into one of three groups with each of the groups completing four 1-min math explicit timing procedures each day across 19 days. Group one completed all four 1-min timings consecutively; group two completed two back-to-back 1-min timings in the morning and two back-to-back 1-min timings in the afternoon, and group three completed one, 1-min independent timing four times distributed across the day. Growth curve modeling was used to examine the progress throughout the course of the study. Results suggested that students in the distributed practice conditions, both four times per day and two times per day, showed significantly higher fluency growth rates than those practicing only once per day in a massed format. These results indicate that combining distributed practice with explicit timing procedures is a useful modification that enhances student learning without the addition of extra instructional time when targeting math fact fluency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jsp.2014.12.003

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 80 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Schutte, G. M., Duhon, G. J., Solomon, B. G., Poncy, B. C., Moore, K., & Story, B.
Affiliations
Oklahoma State University (US)
Corresponding author
Schutte, Greg M.
Venue
Journal of School Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-04
Volume
53
Issue
2
Pages
149-159
ISSN
0022-4405 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2000649097
Cited by
70
References
80
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 1
FWCI
4.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of School Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
Keywords
massed practice, distributed practice, math fact fluency, addition facts, third grade, instructional modification
MeSH terms
Achievement, Child, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Mathematics, Schools, Students, Time Factors

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review