Efficacy of a Learning Trajectory Approach Compared to a Teach-to-target Approach for Addition and Subtraction
Learning trajectory, LT approach, Addition, Subtraction, Level of thinking
Morgridge College of Education, Teaching and Learning Sciences, Curriculum and Instruction
Although basing instruction on a learning trajectory (LT) is often recommended, there is little direct evidence to support the premise of a “LT approach”—that to be maximally meaningful, engaging, and effective, instruction is best presented one LT level beyond a child’s present level of thinking. The present report serves to address the question: Is it necessary to teach each contiguous level of a LT or can instruction be similarly or more effective when skipping levels, provided the necessary exemplars are made? In a multimethod research study that included individual teaching experiments embedded inside of a quasi-experimental research design, one group of 13 kindergartners received instruction based on an empirically-validated LT for addition and subtraction (the “LT” treatment). The counterfactual, “skip” treatment (n = 12), received instruction focused mainly on levels at least two levels above their present level for the same amount of time as the LT treatment. More children in the LT treatment exhibited greater addition and subtraction learning during sessions and from pretest to posttest than children in the skip treatment. Implications for future study are discussed.
Copyright held by author or publisher. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
Clements, Douglas H, et al. “Efficacy of a Learning Trajectory Approach Compared to a Teach-to-Target Approach for Addition and Subtraction.” ZDM, vol. 52, no. 4, 2020, pp. 637–648. doi: 10.1007/s11858-019-01122-z.