Cited by 185Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skillsMathematics Education and PedagogyBehavioral and Psychological Studies

The Effects of Instruction in Solving Mathematical Word Problems for Students with Learning Problems: A Meta-Analysis

Yan Ping Xin, Jitendra, Asha K.·1999·The Journal of Special Education

Abstract

This article provides a synthesis of word-problem-solving intervention research with samples of students with learning problems (i.e., mild disabilities and at risk for mathematics failure). The effectiveness of word-problem-solving instruction in 25 outcome studies was examined across student characteristics (e.g., grade, IQ); instructional features (e.g., intervention approach, treatment length); methodological features; skill maintenance; and generalization components. Separate analyses were performed for group-design studies and single-subject studies using standardized mean change and percentage of nonoverlapping data (PND), respectively. The overall mean weighted effect size ( d ) and PND for word-problem-solving instruction were positive across the group-design studies (ES = +.89) and single-subject studies (PND = 89%). In addition, positive effects for skill maintenance and generalization were found for group design (ES = +.78 and +.84, respectively) and single-subject studies (PND = 100%). Computer-assisted instruction was found to be most effective for group-design studies. Effects for representation techniques and strategy training were found to be significantly higher than the "other" approach for both group-design and single-subject studies. Long-term (> 1 month) intervention effects were significantly higher than short- or intermediate-term interventions for group-design studies, whereas both long-term and intermediate treatments were seen to be more effective t…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/002246699903200402

Cites

5 of 5 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xin, Y. P., & Jitendra, A. K.
Affiliations
Lehigh University (US)
Venue
The Journal of Special Education
Published
1999-01
Volume
32
Issue
4
Pages
207-225
ISSN
  • 0022-4669 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-4764
OpenAlex
W2080854742
Cited by
185
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal of Special Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Cognitive and developmental aspects of mathematical skills
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Applied Mathematics › Mathematics Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Behavioral and Psychological Studies
Keywords
mathematical word problem solving, students with learning disabilities, mild disabilities, at-risk students, intervention effectiveness, skill retention, generalization, computer-assisted instruction, representation techniques, strategy training, intervention duration, mathematics failure

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