research study about numeracy

An IERI – International Educational Research Institute Journal

• Open access
• Published: 24 May 2023

Early numeracy and literacy skills and their influences on fourth-grade mathematics achievement: a moderated mediation model

• Isabelle Chang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8061-121X 1  

Large-scale Assessments in Education volume  11 , Article number:  18 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

6618 Accesses

1 Citations

Metrics details

This study explored the influence of early literacy and numeracy skills on fourth-grade math achievement using the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). The study utilized valuable information collected by TIMSS about context related questionnaires such as home resources for learning, early literacy and numeracy development, readiness for school, and students’ home and school lives in a cross cultural and linguistic framework. The main purpose of this study was aligned with those of TIMSS to improve math learning and performance and strengthen future employees’ skills in the global workplace. Participants were comprised of mostly Asian and European students. Results show that (1) early literacy skills have a stronger effect on G4 math scores than early numeracy skills; (2) Home resources for learning impact more on children’s early literacy skills than early numeracy skills; (3) both early literacy and numeracy activities have progressed to early literacy skills but demonstrated limited advancement to early numeracy skills, a missing link; (4) students’ confidence in math emerged as the strongest predictor of G4 math scores; (5) students with stronger early literacy skills and early numeracy skills are more confident in math; and (6) The moderated mediation analysis revealed that (a) early literacy skills have stronger direct effects on G4 math achievement than early numeracy skills; (b) the effects of early numeracy skills on G4 math scores become more pronounced for children with weaker early literacy skills (i.e., conditional effects); and (c) the effect of early numeracy skills on G4 math achievement is transmitted through students’ confidence (i.e., mediator) and the effect is more prominent for those who had more proficient early literacy skills (i.e., conditional indirect effects). Findings from the conditional direct and indirect effects of early numeracy skills on G4 math achievement suggest that children who had more proficient early literacy skills utilize strategies beyond just early numeracy skills to solve G4 math problems and that children’s strategies to solve math problems may be enhanced by the proficiency of their literacy skills.

Introduction

A prolific body of literature has identified the family as the key dynamic influencing the early development of children’s academic skills including literacy and numeracy (e.g., Liu et al., 2019 ; Manolitsis et al., 2013 ; McCormick et al., 2020 ; Munro et al., 2021 ; Van Voorhis et al., 2013 ). To further understanding of the influence of early literacy skills (ELS) and early numeracy skills (ENS) stemming from the home learning environment on children’s academic achievement, many researchers have focused on identifying the specific skills which may predominantly impact later math performance. Considerable research has confirmed ENS are the strongest predictor for later math achievement (e.g.,Duncan et al., 2007 ; Kiss et al., 2019 ; Nelson & McMaster, 2019 ; Nguyen et al., 2016 ; Scalise & Ramani, 2021 ). In contrast, other studies have found that ELS were the foremost predictor in later math achievement (e.g., Aragón et al., 2016 ; Birgisdottir et al., 2020 ; Purpura et al., 2011 ; Yang et al., 2021 ). In addition, topics related to children’s family resources and confidence in math have also received research attention seeking to identify factors that might affect the gaps in math achievement observed among various ethnic groups in the United States and among countries in the international comparisons.

Additionally, multiple studies have utilized mediation models to illustrate the indirect effects of ENS on later math achievement. For example, the effect of ENS on later math achievement has been found to transmit through a third variable which is math language skills (King & Purpura, 2021 ). However, the extant studies have rarely, if ever, examined whether the effect of ENS on later math achievement becomes more (or less) pronounced for children with different levels of ELS (i.e., moderation effect). Likewise, few if any studies have been initiated utilizing a moderated mediation model to explore whether the effects of ENS on later math achievement transmitted through a mediator differs depending upon the levels of a moderator (e.g., ELS). The present study will address these gaps by constructing a moderated mediation model utilizing the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS, 2019 ) data to explore the conditional direct and indirect effects of ENS on G4 math achievement.

Early literacy and numeracy activities

There is substantial literature demonstrating that home learning environments with parent–child early literacy activities (ELA) and early numeracy activities (ENA) encouraged children’s learning and enhanced their school achievement. Respective studies found differences in children’s outcomes resulted from distinct approaches in which parents interact with their children and have consistently confirmed home numeracy environment predicted ENS (e.g., Clerkin & Gilligan, 2018 ; Fazio et al., 2014 ; Segers et al., 2015 ; Siegler, 2016 ; Susperreguy et al., 2020 ). Parent–child activities in basic addition and subtraction lead to improved academic ability (Munro et al., 2021 ) and the home numeracy environment was predictive of numeracy (Napoli & Purpura, 2018 ). Children engaged in ELA and ENA became more confident and curious about math at age 10 (Clerkin & Gilligan, 2018 ) and later school academic achievement benefitted (Lehrl et al., 2020 ; Niklas & Schneider, 2017 ). Mothers who shared picture books with their children enhanced their math and literacy skills (Ribner et al., 2020 ) whereas fathers in Hong Kong reported higher frequencies of engagement in more real-life number game activities than mothers (Liu et al., 2019 ). Parents posed more complex questions about numbers to their sons than daughters (Uscianowski et al., 2020 ) while maternal use of relevant math facts during games were associated with their daughters’ later addition accuracy (Casey et al., 2020 ). Parent–child letter–sound interactions predicted growth in counting skills (Soto-Calvo et al., 2020 ) and formal home ENA (e.g., comparing numerals) predicted children’s symbolic number system knowledge (Skwarchuk et al., 2014 ). Moreover, symbolic knowledge was found to relate to broader mathematical competence (Chen & Li, 2014 ; Scalise & Ramani, 2021 ; Schneider et al., 2017 , 2018 ). Parents reported engaging in more literacy than numeracy practices as they considered literacy development more important than numeracy development (Napoli et al., 2021 ). Other parents reported prioritizing early numeracy and providing more math activities at home (Zippert & Rittle-Johnson, 2020 ).

McCormick et al. ( 2020 ) affirmed that unconstrained language and math activities predicted gains in children’s language and math skills. Examples of unconstrained skills are vocabulary and problem solving, while constrained skills would include competencies like letter knowledge and counting. Constrained skills are directly teachable and have a ceiling, while unconstrained skills are limitless and are acquired gradually through experience (Snow & Matthews, 2016 ). Everyday contexts such as shopping in grocery stores can promote math related conversations and potentially provide learning opportunities for children (Hanner et al., 2019 ). It appears that negligible research has been conducted exploring attainable ways for ELA to evolve to ELS or for ENA to advance to ENS much less how to develop curricula and remedial programs that help parents and teachers facilitate ELA and ENA to extend to ELS and ENS.

Early literacy and later math achievement

Studies on the influence of early literacy to later math achievement have largely focused on phonological awareness. Researchers have demonstrated the associations between phonological awareness and math achievement (De Smedt et al., 2010 ; Fuchs et al., 2006 ; Krajewski & Schneider, 2009 ) and fifth-grade computation skills (Hecht et al., 2001 ). Studies show that ENS and phonological processing influenced growth in math from kindergarten through third grade (Vukovic, 2012 ) and elementary school children with mild intellectual disabilities were found to profoundly rely on phonological awareness when solving math problems (Foster et al., 2015 ). However, other studies found early written language skills, but not phonological awareness, are unique predictors of Icelandic fourth graders’ (Birgisdottir et al., 2020 ) and Finnish third and fourth graders’ math achievement (). Verbal skills and visuomotor skills uniquely predicted fourth-grade math achievement (Kurdek & Sinclair, 2001 ) and reading skills significantly predicted Canadian children’s third-grade reading and math performance (Romano et al., 2010 ). Manfra et al. ( 2017 ) reported that writing and counting skills were consistently strong predictors of third-grade reading and math achievement among low-income, ethnically diverse children while Fuchs et al. ( 2016 ) found that second-grade language comprehension is more critical for fourth-grade word-problem solving than pre-algebraic knowledge. Furthermore, Kiss et al. ( 2019 ) affirmed that reading skills explained significant variations in third graders’ performance on number operations, algebra, data analysis, and geometry measurement. Third grade reading comprehension was related to a conceptual understanding and the application of math knowledge at eighth grade (Grimm, 2008 ). In addition, specific early literacy skills (e.g., vocabulary and print knowledge) were found to be influential in math development (e.g., Purpura & Napoli, 2015 ; Purpura et al., 2011 ). Purpura and Reid ( 2016 ) observed that math language (e.g., “more,” “many,” and “fewer”) is more proximal to numeracy skills than general language. Vanbinst et al. ( 2020 ) suggest that early reading and early arithmetic have a shared underlying cognitive basis for Flemish children. Furthermore, English literacy (second strongest to working memory) predicted Singaporean 11-year-olds’ algebraic word problem solving skills (Lee et al., 2009 ) and bilingualism is beneficial for children's math reasoning and problem-solving skills (Hartanto et al., 2018 ). Peng and colleagues’ (2020) meta-analysis results affirmed that more complicated language and math skills were associated with stronger relations between language and math.

Early numeracy and later math achievement

Early numeracy is a common term that is comprised of skills such as verbal counting, recognizing number patterns, comparing numerical magnitudes, manipulating quantities, and adding and subtracting objects. The associations between children’s ENS and their later math achievement have been well documented (e.g., Clerkin & Gilligan, 2018 ; Duncan et al., 2007 ; Raghubar & Barnes, 2017 ). While preliteracy skills were more strongly related to word reading, sensitivity to relative quantity was more strongly related to first-grade math (Chu et al., 2016 ). Basic numerical cognition was predictive of later procedural calculation skills and word problem development (Fuchs et al., 2010 ) and most strongly related to the ability to solve applied math problems (Jordan et al., 2010 ). Students who received early numeracy intervention improved their second-grade math performance (Bryant et al., 2021 ). Similarly, advanced counting competencies (Nguyen et al., 2016 ) and fluency in solving addition problems (Geary, 2010 ) were found to be strong predictors of fifth-grade math achievement. A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies revealed that number acuity may prospectively predict later math performance and is also retrospectively associated with early math performance (Chen & Li, 2014 ). Nevertheless, studies demonstrated that early math and reading skills positively influence each other in later school years (e.g., Cirino et al., 2018 ; Hooper et al., 2010 ) but when deficient also displayed comorbidities with each other.

Mediation effects

Some studies have employed more complex statistical techniques to identify and explain the mechanism or procedure that underlies an observed relation between ENS and math achievement via a third hypothetical variable (i.e., a mediator). For example, Purpura et al. ( 2017 ) detected that the relation between early math and literacy skills is mediated by children’s mathematical language skills and partially mediated by print knowledge (Purpura & Napoli, 2015 ). Math language mediates the relation between the direct home numeracy environment and numeracy skills (King & Purpura, 2021 ) and language abilities impact formal math skills partially through informal math skills (). In addition, verbal analogies were indirectly related to arithmetic knowledge through symbolic number skill (Vukovic & Lesaux, 2013 ) and reading comprehension skills may be partially mediating the relation between problem solving ability and growth in math (Vista, 2013 ).

It appears that the extant studies barely, if ever, explored how ELA and ENA directly or indirectly enhanced later math performance nor inquired into how ELA and ENA progress into ELS and ENS which in turn advance later math achievement. Furthermore, insufficient research has been undertaken examining whether a third variable influences the strength or direction of the relations between ENS and math achievement. For instance, if found to be significant, ELS can cause an amplifying or weakening effect between ENS and math achievement as the child’s ELS level increases (i.e., moderation). Hence, the question as to whether children with weaker ELS might rely more on ENS to solve math problems remains unexplored. This study will explore the moderation effect of ELS for ENS on G4M. For instance, whether the effect of ENS on G4M becomes less pronounced for children possessing stronger ELS.

HRL and math achievement

Many studies have confirmed the relation between home resources and children’s school achievement. Increases in school resources are consistently associated with improvements in math achievement for all groups, regardless of their individual resources (McConney & Perry, 2010 ). In China, increased levels of family and school resources were favorably related to student math achievement, and the association became more pronounced for levels of school resources in rural areas (Xue et al., 2020 ). In Japan, the student level of resources (i.e., number of books, computer access, paternal, and maternal educational levels) were positively related to student math achievement, whereas the school level of resources (i.e., rural and economically disadvantaged) were inversely related to student math achievement (Takashiro, 2017 ). In contrast, in Australia correlations between math performance and resources are far weaker in the nonmetropolitan schools than for those in the metropolitan areas (Murphy, 2019 ). In Tennessee, the higher the percentage of disadvantaged (determined by the percentage of students receiving federally subsidized free and reduced-priced lunches) the lower the achievement was. Hence, it appears there is a locale difference. Students with few resources in rural areas outperformed their economically disadvantaged nonrural peers. The author surmised that it is possible that support in the economically disadvantaged rural locales provides a sense of community not found in other economically disadvantaged areas which enables rural students to achieve higher in math than their nonrural peers (Hopkins, 2005 ). Furthermore, the effect of cognitive activation on math achievement was transmitted through self-efficacy which was moderated by resources at both the student level and the teacher level (Li et al., 2020 , 2021 ).

Researchers tested the Information Distortion Model (IDM) and hypothesized that in Australia children with a few resources would have higher academic interest compared to those with many resources and who were academically equally prepared. Results support the model and indicate that children with a few resources had higher numeracy interest than those who were equally prepared with many resources (Parker et al., 2021 ). In contrast, in China few family resources were shown to hamper middle school student math achievement, however high levels of subjective social mobility can buffer the adverse effects of low family resources on math achievement. Subjective social mobility reflects students’ personal beliefs in their ability to attain a higher social and economic status in the future and is regarded as a motivational resource (Zhang et al., 2020 ). Math and reading ability heightened future adult SES attainment (Ritchie & Bates, 2013 ). Further studies examining the underlying mechanism of family resources and its impact on academic achievement, as well as the varying influences on student achievement in different locales (e.g., rural vs. urban) in a cross-culture paradigm (e.g., European descents vs. Asian countries) are necessary. It appears that children with few resources in rural areas of mostly European descent countries (e.g., Australia and U.S.) outperformed their urban counterparts, whereas the reverse association was observed in Asian countries (e.g., China and Japan).

Confidence in math

Studies examining confidence and math achievement often focused on the reciprocal relations between the two. Typically, math self-efficacy improved math achievement and earlier math achievement was a consistent predictor of later confidence and interest, suggesting a reciprocal relation between confidence and math performance (e.g., Arens et al., 2017 ; Ganley & Lubienski, 2016 ; Grigg et al., 2018 ; Schöber et al., 2018 ; Sewasew et al., 2018 ). Nonetheless, Vogt et al. ( 2020 ) analyzed the NICHD SECCYD data and reported that children who scored higher on applied problems at 54 months had lower non-ability-based confidence (or overconfidence) at age 15 than those with a lower achievement. The associations between non-ability-based confidence and earlier development were similar for boys and girls. NICHD ( 2006 ) reported that the participants in SECCYD were comprised of “76.4% white, 12.7% African-American, 6.1% Hispanic…” (p. 30). Hence, caution is needed in generalization of the findings as the Hispanic group was underrepresented with whites overrepresented. In a cross-cultural study, self-rating in math and absence of disappointment with poor performance were associated with better performance in the English group, whereas no significant relationships between attitudes and performance were detected among Chinese first graders (Dowker et al., 2019 ). Fourth through sixth graders who perceived their classroom environments as more caring, challenging, and mastery oriented had significantly higher levels of math self-efficacy, which favorably impacted math performance. Note that the participants consisted of “Latino/a (62%) and Caucasian (31%) students” (Fast et al., 2010 , p. 731). Students from a sample of “5th grade to early college students (41% female, 80% white)” (Rice et al., 2013 , p. 1028) with greater social support for math and science from parents, teachers, and friends had more constructive attitudes and a higher sense of their own competence. Marked overconfidence was observed within the world regions that had lower scores on measures of cognitive ability whereas less inflated levels of overconfidence were noted among the high-achieving world regions based on samples from 33 nations (Stankov & Lee, 2014 ). Erickson and Heit ( 2015 ) cautioned that both overconfidence and anxiety can adversely affect metacognitive ability and can lead to math avoidance. Another cross-cultural study reported that teachers with greater self-efficacy in teaching math had higher job satisfaction and class levels of math achievement and interaction quality. At the student level, a higher individual self-concept advanced math achievement, and individual perceptions of interaction quality enhanced self-concept (Perera & John, 2020 ). It appears that the extant studies have given minimal attention as to whether the effect of ENS on later math achievement is transmitted through confidence (i.e., mediation). Furthermore, whether the effect of ENS on later math achievement becomes more pronounced for children with stronger ELS (i.e., moderation effect) is a topic deserving more comprehensive research.

The present study

The review of the existing studies on related topics has shown that complex relations among multiple variables influence students’ math achievement. However, few studies have explored moderators of ENS on later math performance and whether the effects might be inordinately impacted by the levels of the moderator (e.g., mean and ± 1SD). For example, the effect of ENS on math might become less pronounced as children’s ELS increased. In addition, whether the effect of ENS is transmitted through other variables (e.g., confidence) to enhance later math performance and if this effect may be stronger for children with stronger ELS (i.e., moderated mediation) deserves comprehensive study. This study uses the TIMSS 2019 data in a cross-linguistic and cross-cultural framework to examine the variables comprising (1) home environment support and (2) student engagement and attitudes that lead to the differing outcomes in students’ fourth-grade math achievement. Specifically, this study targeted the top eight performing countries on variables in home environment support including ELA, ENA, ELS, ENS, and HRL, as well as student engagement and attitudes (e.g., SCM), and fourth-grade math plausible values as the outcome variable. The hypotheses explored in this study are as follows:

Home environment support, student engagement, and attitudes are predictors of G4M. In particular, ELS are more effective than ENS in predicting G4M.

Home environment support and student engagement and attitudes are intercorrelated.

There are conditional direct effects of ENS on G4M.

ELS have a direct effect on G4M.

ENS have a direct effect on G4M.

ELS moderate the effect of ENS on G4M, and the effect of ENS on G4M is more prominent for children with weaker ELS

HRL (a covariate) have a direct effect on G4M.

There are conditional indirect effects of ENS on G4M (i.e., ENS → SCM → G4M).

ENS have a direct effect on SCM.

ELS have a direct effect on SCM.

ELS moderate the effect of ENS on SCM, and the effect of ENS on SCM is more pronounced for children with stronger ELS.

SCM have a direct effect on G4M.

SCM mediate the relation between ENS and G4M, and the effect is more evident for children with stronger ELS.

HRL (a covariate) have a direct effect on SCM.

Note that HRL serve as a covariate to control for ENS differences on SCM and G4M. The conceptual and statistical moderated mediation model diagrams are exhibited in Fig.  1 .

Moderated Mediation Diagrams. Predictor: ENS Early numeracy tasks (skills) beginning school/SCL, Moderator: ELS Early literacy tasks (skills) beginning school/SCL, Mediator: SCM Students confident in mathematics/SCL, Covariate: HRL Home Resources for Learning/SCL, Outcome variable: G4M Fourth-grade mathematics

Participants

UNESCO’s International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) 2011 (UNESCO, 2012 ) provides an internationally accepted classification scheme for describing levels of schooling across countries. All students enrolled in the grade that represents 4 years of schooling counting from the first year of ISCED Level 1 (providing the mean age at the time of testing is at least 9.5 years) are eligible to participate in TIMSS. Approximately 600,000 students from 64 countries and 8 benchmarking systems (e.g., Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, SAR) participated in TIMSS, 2019 . Approximately 32,000 participants from the top eight performing countries were included in the present study and their mean PVs are shown in Fig.  2 .

TIMSS 2019 Top Eight Fourth Grade Average Math Scale Scores. SGP Singapore, HKG Hong Kong, KOR Korea, TWN Taiwan, JPN Japan, RUS Russia, IRL Ireland, LAT Latvia

Assessments

The TIMSS, 2019 assessment migrated to eTIMSS, a digital version of the assessment administered to students on computers and tablets. eTIMSS also included a novel section consisting of problem solving and inquiry tasks (PSIs) designed to exploit the digital environment to its fullest. About half the participating countries chose to transition to eTIMSS. The eTIMSS participating countries also administered the paper version of their trend items to a sample of schools, providing a bridge that helped link the two test-taking modes. For TIMSS, 2019 , comparing the item statistics for eTIMSS and paperTIMSS was integral in identifying items that were psychometrically equivalent under the IRT scaling. This process enabled the eTIMSS and paperTIMSS achievement results to be reported on the same achievement scale (i.e., fourth-grade math). The TIMSS assessment was categorized into content and cognitive domains. The content domains were comprised of (1) numbers, (2) geometric shapes and measures, and (3) data display, while the cognitive domains consisted of (1) knowing, (2) applying, and (3) reasoning. Constructed response items were scored independently by two trained scorers and TIMSS, 2019 trend scoring reliability for human scored items was 97%. The agreement across items was 98% or higher across countries, whereas within-country scoring reliability was 98% (Fishbein et al., 2020 ).

TIMSS utilized Item Response Theory (IRT) models to compute proficiency scores to provide valid comparisons across student populations based on broad coverage of the achievement domain. These test items were arranged in blocks that were assembled into student booklets that contained different (but systematically overlapping) sets of item blocks. Because each student received only a fraction of the achievement items for 72 min test time, statistical and psychometric methods were required to link these different booklets together so that student proficiency could be reported on a comparable numerical scale even though no student answered all the tasks. IRT was well suited to handle such data collection designs in which not all students were tested with all items. In addition, TIMSS used the three-parameter logistic (3PL) for multiple-choice items, the 2PL IRT model for constructed response items worth 1 score point, and the generalized partial credit model for constructed response items worth up to 2 score points (von Davier, 2020 ).

Home Environment Support

Participating countries (except U.S. and England) administered an early learning survey to the parents/guardians and a questionnaire to students, both of which were linked to the achievement booklet. The scales were constructed using the partial credit model IRT scaling methods. Each context scale separated students into regions corresponding to high, middle, and low values on the construct using the combinations of responses. Partial credit IRT scaling was based on a statistical model that related the probability that a student would respond to an item to that student’s math ability on the underlying construct. The average Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for countries with data is approximately 0.88 for the early literacy and numeracy activities and the early literacy and numeracy tasks scales, and 0.70 for the home resources for learning scale (Yin & Fishbein, 2020 ).

Early literacy activities scale (9 items).

This survey asked parents, “ Before your child began elementary school, how often did you or someone else in your home do the following activities with him/her? ” Such an item included in this scale is “ Play with alphabet toys (e.g., blocks with letters of the alphabet) .” Students whose parents “ often ” engaged in five activities with them while “ sometimes ” doing the other four activities scored 10.8 or higher. Those whose parents “ never or almost never ” did five activities with them while “ sometimes ” doing the other four activities scored 6.2 or lower. All others sometimes engaged them in early literacy activities.

Early numeracy activities scale (9 items)

This survey asked parents, “ Before your child began elementary school, how often did you or someone else in your home do the following activities with him/her? ” Such an item included in this scale is “ Play games involving shapes (e.g., shape sorting toys, puzzles) .” Students whose parents “ often ” engaged in five activities with them while “ sometimes ” doing the other four activities scored 11.0 or higher. Those whose parents “ never or almost never ” did five activities with them while “ sometimes ” doing the other four activities scored 6.6 or lower. All others sometimes engaged them in early numeracy activities.

Early Literacy tasks scale (7 items)

This survey asked parents, “ How well could your child do the following when s/he began the first grade of elementary school? ” Such an item included in this scale is “ Write words other than his/her name .” Students whose parents rated “ very well ” to four tasks and “ moderately well ” to the other three tasks scored 11.2 or higher. Those whose parents rated “ not very well ” to four tasks while “ moderately well ” to three tasks scored 8.8 or lower.

Early numeracy tasks scale (5 items)

This survey asked parents, “ Could your child do the following when s/he began the first grade of elementary school? ” Such an item included in this scale is “ Recognize written numbers .” Students whose parents’ responses were “ very well ” to two tasks and “ moderately well ” to one task and “ yes ” to two tasks scored 11.7 or higher. Those whose parents’ responses were “ not very well ” to two tasks and “ moderately well ” to one task and “ no ” to two tasks scored 8.1 or lower (P. Foy, Personal Communication, July 26, 2021).

Home resources for learning scale (5 resources, 22 items)

One of the five resource questions comprised of this scale asked parents, “ Highest level of occupation of either parent (parents) .” Such an item included in this resource subscale was “ Professional (corporate manager or senior official, professional, or technician or associate professional). ” Students with many resources scored 11.8 or higher, having more than 100 books at home and both home study supports, more than 25 children’s books at home, at least one parent having finished university, and at least one parent having a professional occupation. Students with few resources scored 7.4 or lower, having 25 or fewer books at home and neither of the home study supports, 10 or fewer children’s books at home, neither parent having achieved beyond upper-secondary education, and neither parent owning a small business or holding a clerical or professional occupation. All others had some resources.

Student engagement and attitudes

Confidence in mathematics scale (9 items).

This scale asked students, “ How much do you agree with these statements about mathematics? ” Such an item included in this scale is “ I am good at working out difficult mathematics problems .” Those very confident in mathematics scored 10.7 or higher reporting “ agree a lot ” with five statements and “ agree a little ” with the other four. Students not confident in mathematics scored 8.5 or lower reporting “ disagree a little ” with five statements and “ agree a little ” with the other four. All others were somewhat confident in mathematics (Yin & Fishbein, 2020 ). The average Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficients for the students confident in math scale for these eight countries is 0.87.

Data analysis

The present study employed the IEA IDB Analyzer (Version 4.0.42, IEA, 2021 ) and PROCESS Macro (v4.0, 2022) (Hayes, 2022 ) in conjunction with IBM SPSS 28 ( 2022 ) to test on the public-use version of the TIMSS, 2019 data. The proportions of the sample are approximately 8% from Hong Kong, 18% from Singapore, and 12% from each of the remaining six countries with relatively similar contributions. IDB Analyzer was utilized to compute descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations. A moderated mediation model (Hayes, 2017 , model 8) was constructed to estimate the conditional effect of ENS on SCM (mediator) varied as a function of ELS (moderator). In addition, the conditional direct effect of ENS on G4M is also dependent upon the levels of ELS. An index of moderated mediation was used to test the significance of the moderated mediation. Confidence intervals did not contain zero between the lower and upper limits of the 95% confidence intervals indicating that the direct and indirect effects were conditional on the level of the moderator (ELS). The number of bootstrap samples for percentile bootstrap confidence intervals was 5,000.

Descriptive statistics and correlations

The average bivariate correlations comprised of mostly Asian and European students showed that ELS ( r  = 0.36) were effective than ENS ( r  = 0.21) in predicting G4M and ELA and ENA were inadequate indicators of G4M ( r s = 0.16 and 0.15). SCM dominated with the highest impact in G4M ( r  = 0.44) with HRL also prominent ( r  = 0.39). Hypothesis 1 has been supported.

Bivariate correlations between home learning environment and student attitudes showed that children who were proficient in ELS were also likely to be proficient in ENS ( r  = 0.30). ELS benefitted from both ELA ( r  = 0.34) and ENA ( r  = 0.32) while ENS were facilitated ineffectively from ELA and ENA ( r s = 0.09 and 0.11), and ENA evolved more to ELS ( r  = . 32) than ENS ( r  = 0.11). Parents with many HRL engaged in more early literacy ( r  = 0.30) and numeracy ( r  = 0.25) activities with their children than their counterparts who possessed fewer HRL, and parents engaged both activities with their children in proportional amounts ( r  = 0.77). HRL enriched children’s ELS ( r  = 0.34) more than ENS ( r  = 0.16), and inadequately boosted SCM ( r  = 0.19). Children who engaged in more ELA and ENA with their parents were not much more confident in math ( r s = 0.14 and 0.15). In a similar vein, students with more HRL, and who entered school with higher levels of ELS and ENS, were not more confident in math with r s = 0.17, 0.11, and 0.19 respectively. A correlation matrix with home environment support, student attitudes, and plausible values (PVs) is exhibited in Table 1 . Hypothesis 2 has been supported. Note that ELA and ENA were not included in further analysis mostly due to the weak correlation coefficients with G4M.

• Moderated mediation

A moderated mediation model was tested using the PROCESS macro (Hayes, 2022 ) in SPSS to estimate the conditional direct and indirect effects of ENS on G4M through SCM (i.e., mediator) as moderated by ELS. All variables were standardized prior to entering the analysis to facilitate interpretation of any effects resulting in the estimation of standardized coefficients (β). Betas are comparable in magnitude within a model as well as between studies with higher absolute β coefficients presenting stronger effects. Results from the present study exhibited that ENS and ELS both had direct effects on SCM (βs = 0.05 and 0.10 ps < 0.001, respectively) signifying that ELS had a stronger influence on SCM than ENS. Moreover, ELS moderated the relations between ENS and SCM (β = 0.02, p  < 0.001) suggesting that the effect of ENS on SCM became more pronounced for students with stronger ELS (β = 0.07, p  < 0.001) than those with lower ELS (i.e., mean and -1SD) (βs = 0.05 and 0.03, respectively, p s < 0.001). The results suggested that there were conditional effects of the focal predictor (ENS) at different levels of the moderator (i.e., ± 1SD and mean ELS) on SCM. Furthermore, HRL was significantly associated with SCM (β = 0.13, p  < 0.001).

ENS → SCM → G4M

ENS, SCM, and ELS had direct effects on G4M (βs = 0.09, 0.28, and 0.16, respectively, p s < 0.001) indicating that ELS was a much more prominent predictor of G4M than ENS despite SCM having the strongest effect on G4M. ELS moderated the relations between ENS and G4M (β = -0.04, p  < 0.001) suggesting that the effect of ENS on G4M was more evident for those with weaker ELS (βs = 0.13 and 0.09, respectively, p s < 0.001) than those with stronger ELS (β = 0.06, p  < 0.001). The results suggested that there were conditional direct effects of the focal predictor (ENS) varying with different levels of the moderator (ELS) on G4M implying that students who possessed stronger ELS utilized strategies more than ENS to solve fourth grade math problems. Further, HRL had a strong direct effect on G4M (β = 0.20, p  < 0.001). Sub-hypotheses ( a ) through ( d ) of H3 have been supported, suggesting that there are conditional direct effects of ENS at different levels of ELS on G4M.

The estimation of the moderated mediation models suggested that SCM was a mediator of the relation between ENS and G4M and had significant direct effects on G4M (ENS → SCM → G4M: Index of moderated mediation = 0.0056, BootSE  = 0.0013, BootLLCI  = 0.0030, BootULCI  = 0.0081). That is, the effect of ENS on G4M was transmitted through SCM. This denotes that (1) children who have stronger ENS had higher math achievement at fourth grade, (2) this relationship was explained by stronger SCM, and (3) this effect was stronger for children with stronger ELS. Sub-hypotheses ( a ) through ( f ) of H4 have been supported suggesting that there are conditional indirect effects of ENS on G4M transmitted through SCM at different levels of ELS.

In summary, the results indicate that (1) the mechanism linking ENS to G4M through a mediator SCM is related to ELS, and (2) the conditional direct effects of ENS on G4M vary at different levels of ELS suggesting that literacy skills might enhance students’ approaches in analyzing, interpreting, and solving math problems. The findings suggest that students with lower ELS benefitted more from ENS whereas those with higher ELS relied less on ENS to solve fourth-grade math problems. The full moderated mediation model with estimations of conditional direct and indirect effects are presented in Table 2 . The hypotheses that have been explored and supported are summarized in Table 3 .

IEA TIMSS has employed advanced techniques in methodology to derive the scale scores of home environment support and student engagement and attitudes and sub-categories in cognitive and content domains. This has provided data for researchers to explore multifaceted relations among variables using advanced statistical techniques to test models with moderated and mediated relations with the intent of improving math teaching and learning around the world. This study adds greater understanding of math learning and how early literacy and numeracy skills influence G4 math performance. The participants were comprised of mostly Asian and European students with results showing that ELS were stronger than ENS in predicting G4M and lend support to extant studies including Aragón et al. ( 2016 ), Birgisdottir et al. ( 2020 ), Purpura et al. ( 2011 ), and Yang et al. ( 2021 ). In contrast, it appears that the results from this study did not confirm children’s early numeracy skills as the strongest predictor of their later math achievement that have been reported by others (e.g., Bryant et al., 2021 ; Duncan et al., 2007 ; Raghubar & Barnes, 2017 ). Parents reported engaging in higher frequencies of ELA than ENA before their children started school, which is coherent with recent findings by Napoli et al. ( 2021 ). Both parent–child ELA and ENA developed into ELS, while bafflingly neither ELA nor ENA advanced into ENS which did not confirm that home numeracy environment predicted ENS (e.g., Clerkin & Gilligan, 2018 ; Fazio et al., 2014 ; Segers et al., 2015 ; Siegler, 2016 ; Susperreguy et al., 2020 ). Parents with many HRL engaged in moderately more ELA than ENA with their children than those with fewer HRL. In addition, HRL contributed more to ELS than ENS although children’s proficiencies in ELS and ENS were correlated. The findings that HRL fostered G4 math achievement are consistent with previous studies (e.g., McConney & Perry, 2010 ; Xue et al., 2020 ). Moreover, higher individual SCM advanced math achievement, in agreement with existent studies (e.g., Perera & John, 2020 ).

The positive moderation effect of the ELS on the relations between ENS and SCM indicate that the effect of ENS on SCM becomes more pronounced for children possessing stronger ELS. The negative moderation effect of the ELS on the relations between ENS and G4M appears to be in line with results from Fuchs et al. ( 2016 ) and Peng et al. ( 2020 ). The results suggest that children with weaker ELS utilized more ENS to assist them when approaching math problems whereas those with stronger ELS employed strategies more than ENS to answer math problems. Findings from this study suggest that children’s strategies to solve math problems might be enhanced by their literacy skills. Future studies that explore the dynamics between ELS and ENS and their combined influences and strengths on math achievement are urgently needed. In addition, studies to uncover how ELS help children answer math problems deserve comprehensive examination. It is necessary to separate ELS into different levels (e.g., ± 1SD and mean) when examining relations between ENS and math attainment. Moderated mediation analysis is an informative technique for assessing whether direct and indirect effects are conditional on values of a moderating variable such as ELS.

Limitations

The limitations of this study include characteristics of design or methodology that impacted or influenced the interpretation of the findings. For instance, parents reported low percentages of early literacy and numeracy activities with their children before school in the top five performing East Asian countries. Intriguingly, how Asian children have mastered their early literacy and numeracy skills and excelled to the top in international assessments remain undetermined. Likewise, low percentages of East Asian students reported that they were confident in math, nevertheless their performance was exceptional. In addition, participating countries included in this study were comprised of mostly Asian and European students and as such the findings should not be generalized to black and Hispanic children’s math learning. Future studies should explore whether the conditional direct and indirect effects are equal or more evident in black and/or Hispanic children’s math learning. If so, parents and educators should try to strengthen children’s literacy skills in tandem with numeracy skills to enhance their later math achievement. It would also be beneficial if the results of this moderated mediation model can be replicated using large-scale U.S. data which often include participants from more diverse ethnic backgrounds.

Implications

Both ELA and ENA advanced to children’s ELS and ELS are stronger than ENS in predicting children’s math achievement. Moreover, HRL have a stronger association with ELS than ENS. This study seeks to prompt awareness among parents and educators and should foster children’s literacy skills in concert with numeracy skills thanks to the critical role of ELS in their later math achievement. Most critically, parents are urged to engage in comparable levels of early literacy and numeracy practices utilizing instantaneous everyday situations with their children before entering school to enhance their children’s literacy and numeracy skills regardless of the availability of learning resources they can provide. However, whether strengthening literacy skills for students from disadvantaged groups with few resources can narrow the achievement gap deserves comprehensive studies.

Results from this study suggest that children’s early literacy skills have a critical role in their later math achievement in a cross-linguistic and cross-cultural framework. The effect of ENS on SCM becomes more pronounced when the level of ELS increases whereas the effect of ENS on SCM diminishes for those with weaker ELS. In addition, the effect of ENS is transmitted through SCM, and confidence has a strong effect on G4M. In contrast, the effect of ENS on G4M diminishes when the level of ELS increases. It appears that children with weaker ELS employ ENS whereas those with stronger ELS utilize strategies more than ENS to tackle math problems. This suggests that children’s math problem solving strategies might be advanced by their early literacy skills. Furthermore, ELS are more effective than ENS in predicting children’s G4 math achievement. The main takeaways from this study are: (1) ELS have a stronger effect on G4M than ENS; (2) HRL impact more on children’s ELS than ENS; (3) both early literacy and numeracy activities have progressed to ELS but demonstrated limited advancement to ENS, a missing link; (4) SCM emerged as the strongest predictor of G4M; (5) students with stronger ELS and ENS are more confident in math; and (6) The moderated mediation analysis revealed that (a) ELS have stronger direct effects on G4 math achievement than ENS; (b) the effects of ENS on G4M become more pronounced for children with weaker ELS (i.e., conditional effects); and (c) the effect of ENS on G4 math achievement is transmitted through SCM (ENS → SCM → G4M) and the effect is more prominent for those who had more proficient ELS (i.e., conditional indirect effects). Findings from the conditional direct and indirect effects of ENS on G4M suggest that children who had more proficient ELS utilize strategies beyond just ENS to solve G4 math problems and that children’s strategies to solve math problems may be enhanced by the proficiency of their literacy skills. Parents and educators should facilitate children’s literacy skills and numeracy skills to enhance their later math achievement.

Availability data and materials

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the TIMSS 2019 International Database repository, https://timss2019.org/international-database/.

Aragón, E., Navarro, J. I., Aguilar, M., Cerda, G., & García-Sedeño, M. (2016). Predictive model for early math skills based on structural equations. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 57 (6), 489–494. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12317

Article   Google Scholar  

Arens, A. K., Marsh, H. W., Pekrun, R., Lichtenfeld, S., Murayama, K., & vom Hofe, R. (2017). Math self-concept, grades, and achievement test scores: long-term reciprocal effects across five waves and three achievement tracks. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109 (5), 621–634. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000163

Birgisdottir, F., Gestsdottir, S., & Geldhof, G. J. (2020). Early predictors of first and fourth grade reading and math: the role of self-regulation and early literacy skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 53 (4), 507–519. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.05.001

Bryant, D. P., Pfannenstiel, K. H., Bryant, B. R., Roberts, G., Fall, A. M., Nozari, M., & Lee, J. (2021). Improving the mathematics performance of second-grade students with mathematics difficulties through an early numeracy intervention. Behavior Modification, 45 (1), 99–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145445519873651

Casey, B. M., Caola, L., Bronson, M. B., Escalante, D. L., Foley, A. E., & Dearing, E. (2020). Maternal use of math facts to support girls’ math during card play. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 68 , 101136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101136

Chen, Q., & Li, J. (2014). Association between individual differences in non-symbolic number acuity and math performance: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychologica, 148 , 163–172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.01.016

Chu, F. W., vanMarle, K., & Geary, D. C. (2016). Predicting children’s reading and mathematics achievement from early quantitative knowledge and domain-general cognitive abilities. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 775. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00775

Cirino, P. T., Child, A. E., & Macdonald, K. T. (2018). Longitudinal predictors of the overlap between reading and math skills. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54 , 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.06.002

Clerkin, A., & Gilligan, K. (2018). Pre-school numeracy play as a predictor of children’s attitudes towards mathematics at age 10. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 16 (3), 319–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X18762238

von Davier, M. (2020). TIMSS 2019 scaling methodology: Item Response Theory, population models, and linking across modes. In M. O. Martin, M. von Davier, & I. V. S. Mullis (Eds.), Methods and Procedures: TIMSS 2019 Technical Report (pp. 11.1–11.25). Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website: https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/methods/chapter-11.html

De Smedt, B., Taylor, J., Archibald, L., & Ansari, D. (2010). How is phonological processing related to individual differences in children’s arithmetic skills? Developmental Science, 13 (3), 508–520. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00897.x

Dowker, A., Cheriton, O., Horton, R., & Mark, W. (2019). Relationships between attitudes and performance in young children’s mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 100 (3), 211–230.

Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., Pagani, L. S., Feinstein, L., Engel, M., Brooks-Gunn, J., Sexton, H., Duckworth, K., & Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43 (6), 1428–1446. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428

Erickson, S., & Heit, E. (2015). Metacognition and confidence: comparing math to other academic subjects. Frontiers in Psychology, 6 , 742. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00742

Fast, L. A., Lewis, J. L., Bryant, M. J., Bocian, K. A., Cardullo, R. A., Rettig, M., & Hammond, K. A. (2010). Does math self-efficacy mediate the effect of the perceived classroom environment on standardized math test performance? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102 (3), 729–740. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018863

Fazio, L. K., Bailey, D. H., Thompson, C. A., & Siegler, R. S. (2014). Relations of different types of numerical magnitude representations to each other and to mathematics achievement. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 123 , 53–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.01.013

Fishbein, B., Foy, P., & Tyack, L. (2020). Reviewing the TIMSS 2019 achievement item statistics. In M. O. Martin, M. von Davier, & I. V. S. Mullis (Eds.), Methods and Procedures: TIMSS 2019 Technical Report (pp. 10.1–10.70). Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website: https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/methods/chapter-10.html

Foster, M. E., Sevcik, R. A., Romski, M., & Morris, R. D. (2015). Effects of phonological awareness and naming speed on mathematics skills in children with mild intellectual disabilities. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 18 (5), 304–316. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2013.843603

Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Compton, D. L., Powell, S. R., Seethaler, P. M., Capizzi, A. M., Schatschneider, C., & Fletcher, J. M. (2006). The cognitive correlates of third-grade skill in arithmetic, algorithmic computation, and arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98 (1), 29–43. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.98.1.29

Fuchs, L. S., Geary, D. C., Compton, D. L., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Seethaler, P. M., & Schatschneider, C. (2010). Do different types of school mathematics development depend on different constellations of numerical versus general cognitive abilities? Developmental Psychology., 46 (6), 1731–1746. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020662

Fuchs, L. S., Gilbert, J. K., Powell, S. R., Cirino, P. T., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Seethaler, P. M., & Tolar, T. D. (2016). The role of cognitive processes, foundational math skill, and calculation accuracy and fluency in word-problem solving versus prealgebraic knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 52 (12), 2085–2098. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000227

Ganley, C. M., & Lubienski, S. T. (2016). Mathematics confidence, interest, and performance: examining gender patterns and reciprocal relations. Learning and Individual Differences, 47 , 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2016.01.002

Geary, D. C. (2010). Missouri longitudinal study of mathematical development and disability. British Journal of Educational Psychology Monograph Series II, 7 , 31–49. https://doi.org/10.1348/97818543370009X12583699332410

Grigg, S., Perera, H. N., McIlveen, P., & Svetleff, Z. (2018). Relations among math self efficacy, interest, intentions, and achievement: a social cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 53 , 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.01.007

Grimm, K. J. (2008). Longitudinal associations between reading and mathematics achievement. Developmental Neuropsychology, 33 (3), 410–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565640801982486

Hanner, E., Braham, E. J., Elliott, L., & Libertus, M. E. (2019). Promoting math talk in adult–child interactions through grocery store signs. Mind, Brain, and Education, 13 (2), 110–118.

Hartanto, A., Yang, H., & Yang, S. (2018). Bilingualism positively predicts mathematical competence: evidence from two large-scale studies. Learning and Individual Differences . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.12.007

Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach . Guilford publications.

Hayes, A. F. (2022). Process (v4.0). https://www.processmacro.org/download.html .

Hecht, S. A., Torgesen, J. K., Wagner, R. K., & Rashotte, C. 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 (2), 192–227. https://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.2000.2586

Hooper, S. R., Roberts, J., Sideris, J., Burchinal, M., & Zeisel, S. (2010). Longitudinal predictors of reading and math trajectories through middle school from African American versus Caucasian students across two samples. Developmental Psychology, 46 , 1018–1029. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018877

Hopkins, T. M. (2005). If you are poor, it is better to be rural: a study of mathematics achievement in Tennessee. Rural Educator, 27 (1), 21–28.

Google Scholar  

IBM Corporation. (2022). IBM SPSS Statistics (version 28.0). Somers, NY: IBM Corporation.

International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement. (2021). IDB Analyzer (version 4.0.42). Hamburg, Germany: IEA Hamburg. http://www.iea.nl/data.html .

Jordan, N. C., Glutting, J., & Ramineni, C. (2010). The importance of number sense to mathematics achievement in first and third grades. Learning and Individual Differences, 20 (2), 82–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2009.07.004

King, Y. A., & Purpura, D. J. (2021). Direct numeracy activities and early math skills: math language as a mediator. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 54 , 252–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.09.012

Kiss, A. J., Nelson, G., & Christ, T. J. (2019). Predicting third-grade mathematics achievement: a longitudinal investigation of the role of early numeracy skills. Learning Disability Quarterly, 42 (3), 161–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948718823083

Krajewski, K., & Schneider, W. (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 (4), 516–531. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2009.03.009

Kurdek, L. A., & Sinclair, R. J. (2001). Predicting reading and mathematics achievement in fourth-grade children from kindergarten readiness scores. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93 (3), 451–455. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.93.3.451

Lee, K., Ng, E. L., & Ng, S. F. (2009). The contributions of working memory and executive functioning to problem representation and solution generation in algebraic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101 (2), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013843

Lehrl, S., Ebert, S., Blaurock, S., Rossbach, H. G., & Weinert, S. (2020). Long-term and domain-specific relations between the early years home learning environment and students’ academic outcomes in secondary school. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 31 (1), 102–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2019.1618346

Li, H., Liu, J., Zhang, D., & Liu, H. (2021). Examining the relationships between cognitive activation, self-efficacy, socioeconomic status, and achievement in mathematics: a multi-level analysis. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 91 (1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12351

Li, S., Xu, Q., & Xia, R. (2020). Relationship between SES and academic achievement of junior high school students in China: the mediating effect of self-concept. Frontiers in Psychology, 10 , 2513. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02513

Liu, Y., Zhang, X., Song, Z., & Yang, W. (2019). The unique role of father–child numeracy activities in number competence of very young Chinese children. Infant and Child Development, 28 (4), e2135. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2135

Manfra, L., Squires, C., Dinehart, L. H., Bleiker, C., Hartman, S. C., & Winsler, A. (2017). Preschool writing and premathematics predict grade 3 achievement for low-income, ethnically diverse children. The Journal of Educational Research, 110 (5), 528–537. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2016.1145095

Manolitsis, G., Georgiou, G. K., & Tziraki, N. (2013). Examining the effects of home literacy and numeracy environment on early reading and math acquisition. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 28 (4), 692–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2013.05.004

McConney, A., & Perry, L. B. (2010). Socioeconomic status, self-efficacy, and mathematics achievement in Australia: a secondary analysis. Educational Research for Policy and Practice, 9 (2), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10671-010-9083-4

McCormick, M. P., Weissman, A. K., Weiland, C., Hsueh, J., Sachs, J., & Snow, C. (2020). Time well spent: home learning activities and gains in children’s academic skills in the prekindergarten year. Developmental Psychology, 56 (4), 710–726. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000891

Munro, K. J., Jose, P. E., & Huntsinger, C. S. (2021). Home-Based activities in support of New Zealand children’s literacy and numeracy Skills. Journal of Educational and Developmental Psychology, 11 (2), 17–28. https://doi.org/10.5539/jedp.v11n2p17

Murphy, S. (2019). School location and socioeconomic status and patterns of participation and achievement in senior secondary mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31 (3), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0251-9

Napoli, A. R., Korucu, I., Lin, J., Schmitt, S. A., & Purpura, D. J. (2021). Characteristics related to parent-child literacy and numeracy practices in preschool. Frontiers in Education . https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.535832

Napoli, A. R., & Purpura, D. J. (2018). The home literacy and numeracy environment in preschool: cross-domain relations of parent–child practices and child outcomes. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 166 , 581–603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.10.002

Nelson, G., & McMaster, K. L. (2019). The effects of early numeracy interventions for students in preschool and early elementary: a meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111 (6), 1001–1022. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000334

Nguyen, T., Watts, T. W., Duncan, G. J., Clements, D. H., Sarama, J. S., Wolfe, C., & Spitler, M. E. (2016). Which preschool mathematics competencies are most predictive of fifth grade achievement? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36 (3), 550–560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2016.02.003

NICHD. (2006). Findings for Children up to Age 4½ Years. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, National institute of child Health and Human Development. NIH Pub. No. 05–4318. https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/documents/seccyd_06.pdf

Niklas, F., & Schneider, W. (2017). Home learning environment and development of child competencies from kindergarten until the end of elementary school. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 49 , 263–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2017.03.006

Parker, P., Sanders, T., Anders, J., Sahdra, B., Shure, N., Jerrim, J., & Cull, N. (2021). Does school average achievement explain the effect of socioeconomic status on math and reading interest? A test of the Information distortion model. Learning and Instruction, 73 , 101432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2020.101432

Peng, P., Lin, X., Ünal, Z. E., Lee, K., Namkung, J., Chow, J., & Sales, A. (2020). Examining the mutual relations between language and mathematics: a meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 146 (7), 595. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000231

Perera, H. N., & John, J. E. (2020). Teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs for teaching math: Relations with teacher and student outcomes. Contemporary Educational Psychology., 61 , 101842. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101842

Purpura, D. J., Hume, L. E., Sims, D. M., & Lonigan, C. 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 (4), 647–658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.07.004

Purpura, D. J., Logan, J. A. R., Hassinger-Das, B., & Napoli, A. R. (2017). Why do early mathematics skills predict later reading? The role of mathematical language. Developmental Psychology, 53 (9), 1633–1642. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000375

Purpura, D. J., & Napoli, A. R. (2015). Early numeracy and literacy: untangling the relation between specific components. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 17 (2–3), 197–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2015.1016817

Purpura, D. J., & Reid, E. E. (2016). Mathematics and language: Individual and group differences in mathematical language skills in young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36 , 259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2015.12.020

Raghubar, K. P., & Barnes, M. A. (2017). Early numeracy skills in preschool-aged children: a review of neurocognitive findings and implications for assessment and intervention. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31 (2), 329–351. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1259387

Ribner, A. D., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Liben, L. S. (2020). Mothers’ distancing language relates to young children’s math and literacy skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 196 , 104863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2020.104863

Rice, L., Barth, J. M., Guadagno, R. E., Smith, G. P., & McCallum, D. M. (2013). The role of social support in students’ perceived abilities and attitudes toward math and science. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42 (7), 1028–1040. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9801-8

Ritchie, S. J., & Bates, T. C. (2013). Enduring links from childhood mathematics and reading achievement to adult socioeconomic status. Psychological Science, 24 (7), 1301–1308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612466268

Romano, E., Babchishin, L., Pagani, L. S., & Kohen, D. (2010). School readiness and later achievement: replication and extension using a nationwide Canadian survey. Developmental Psychology, 46 (5), 995–1007. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018880

Scalise, N. R., & Ramani, G. B. (2021). Symbolic magnitude understanding predicts preschoolers’ later addition skills. Journal of Cognition and Development, 22 (2), 185–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2021.1888732

Schneider, M., Beeres, K., Coban, L., Merz, S., Schmidt, S. S., Stricker, J., & De Smedt, B. (2017). Associations of non-symbolic and symbolic numerical magnitude processing with mathematical competence: a meta-analysis. Developmental Science, 20 (3), e12372. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12372

Schneider, M., Merz, S., Stricker, J., De Smedt, B., Torbeyns, J., Verschaffel, L., & Luwel, K. (2018). Associations of number line estimation with mathematical competence: a meta-analysis. Child Development, 89 (5), 1467–1484. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13068

Schöber, C., Schütte, K., Köller, O., McElvany, N., & Gebauer, M. M. (2018). Reciprocal effects between self-efficacy and achievement in mathematics and reading. Learning and Individual Differences, 63 , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2018.01.008

Segers, E., Kleemans, T., & Verhoeven, L. (2015). Role of parent literacy and numeracy expectations and activities in predicting early numeracy skills. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 17 (2–3), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/10986065.2015.1016819

Sewasew, D., Schroeders, U., Schiefer, I. M., Weirich, S., & Artelt, C. (2018). Development of sex differences in math achievement, self-concept, and interest from grade 5 to 7. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 54 , 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2018.05.003

Siegler, R. S. (2016). Magnitude knowledge: the common core of numerical development. Developmental Science, 19 (3), 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12395

Skwarchuk, S. L., Sowinski, C., & LeFevre, J. A. (2014). Formal and informal home learning activities in relation to children’s early numeracy and literacy skills: the development of a home numeracy model. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 121 , 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2013.11.006

Snow, C. E., & Matthews, T. J. (2016). Reading and language in the early grades. The Future of Children, 57–74

Soto-Calvo, E., Simmons, F. R., Adams, A. M., Francis, H. N., Patel, H., & Giofrè, D. (2020). Identifying the preschool home learning experiences that predict early number skills: evidence from a longitudinal study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 53 (4), 314–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2020.04.004

Stankov, L., & Lee, J. (2014). Overconfidence across world regions. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45 (5), 821–837. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022114527345

Susperreguy, M. I., Di Lonardo Burr, S., Xu, C., Douglas, H., & LeFevre, J. A. (2020). Children’s home numeracy environment predicts growth of their early mathematical skills in kindergarten. Child Development, 91 (5), 1663–1680. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13353

Takashiro, N. (2017). A multilevel analysis of Japanese middle school student and school socioeconomic status influence on mathematics achievement. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 29 (3), 247–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-016-9255-8

TIMSS. (2021). Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS 2019) International Database, International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA). Publisher: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education and Human Development, Boston College, Boston, MA. https://timss2019.org/international-database/

UNESCO. (2012). International Standard Classification of Education ISCED 2011 . Montreal: UNESCO Institute of Statistics. http://uis.unesco.org/sites/default/files/documents/international-standard-classification-ofeducation-isced-2011-en.pdf

Uscianowski, C., Almeda, M. V., & Ginsburg, H. P. (2020). Differences in the complexity of math and literacy questions parents pose during storybook reading. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 50 , 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.07.003

Vanbinst, K., van Bergen, E., Ghesquière, P., & De Smedt, B. (2020). Cross-domain associations of key cognitive correlates of early reading and early arithmetic in 5-year-olds. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 51 , 144–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2019.10.009

Vista, A. (2013). The role of reading comprehension in maths achievement growth: investigating the magnitude and mechanism of the mediating effect on maths achievement in Australian classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research, 62 , 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2013.06.009

Vogt, R. L., Cheng, J. T., & Briley, D. A. (2020). Childhood growth in math and reading differentially predicts adolescent non-ability-based confidence: an examination in the SECCYD. Learning and Individual Differences, 83 , 101933. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101933

Van Voorhis, F. L., Maier, M. F., Epstein, J. L., & Lloyd, C. M. (2013). The impact of family involvement on the education of children ages 3 to 8: A focus on literacy and math achievement outcomes and social-emotional skills. MDRC

Vukovic, R. K. (2012). Mathematics difficulty with and without reading difficulty: findings and implications from a four-year longitudinal study. Exceptional Children, 78 (3), 280–300. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291207800302

Vukovic, R. K., & Lesaux, N. K. (2013). The relationship between linguistic skills and arithmetic knowledge. Learning and Individual Differences, 23 , 87–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.10.007

Xue, Y., Xuan, X., Zhang, M., Li, M., Jiang, W., & Wang, Y. (2020). Links of family-and school-level socioeconomic status to academic achievement among Chinese middle school students: a multilevel analysis of a national study. International Journal of Educational Research, 101 , 101560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101560

Yang, X., Dulay, K. M., McBride, C., & Cheung, S. K. (2021). How do phonological awareness, rapid automatized naming, and vocabulary contribute to early numeracy and print knowledge of Filipino children? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 209 , 105179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2021.105179

Yin, L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). Creating and interpreting the TIMSS 2019 context questionnaire scales. In M. O. Martin, M. von Davier, & I. V. S. Mullis (Eds.), Methods and Procedures: TIMSS 2019 Technical Report (pp. 16.1–16.331). Retrieved from Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center website: https://timssandpirls.bc.edu/timss2019/methods/chapter-16.html

Zhang, F., Jiang, Y., Ming, H., Yang, C., & Huang, S. (2020). Family socioeconomic status and adolescents’ academic achievement: the moderating roles of subjective social mobility and attention. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 49 (9), 1821–1834. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-020-01287-x

Zhang, J., Fan, X., Cheung, S. K., Meng, Y., Cai, Z., & Hu, B. Y. (2017a). The role of early language abilities on math skills among Chinese children. PLoS ONE, 12 (7), e0181074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal

Zhang, X., Koponen, T., Räsänen, P., Aunola, K., Lerkkanen, M. K., & Nurmi, J. E. (2014). Linguistic and spatial skills predict early arithmetic development via counting sequence knowledge. Child Development, 85 (3), 1091–1107. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12173

Zhang, X., Räsänen, P., Koponen, T., Aunola, K., Lerkkanen, M. K., & Nurmi, J. E. (2017b). Knowing, applying, and reasoning about arithmetic: roles of domain-general and numerical skills in multiple domains of arithmetic learning. Developmental Psychology, 53 (12), 2304–2318. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000432

Zippert, E. L., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2020). The home math environment: more than numeracy. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 50 , 4–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2018.07.009

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a sabbatical leave granted by Temple University.

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychology, Temple University, 1701 N. 13th Street, Weiss Hall 522, Philadelphia, PA, 19122, USA

Isabelle Chang

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Isabelle Chang, the sole author. The author read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Isabelle Chang .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests, additional information, publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Chang, I. Early numeracy and literacy skills and their influences on fourth-grade mathematics achievement: a moderated mediation model. Large-scale Assess Educ 11 , 18 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00168-6

Download citation

Received : 25 May 2022

Accepted : 01 May 2023

Published : 24 May 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-023-00168-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Frontiers in Education
• Teacher Education
• Research Topics

Best Practices in Numeracy Education for the 21st Century

Total Downloads

Total Views and Downloads

About this Research Topic

There is a growing demand and prioritisation of numeracy, as a life skill, and it is viewed as a requirement for informed engagement in society and economic sustainability. Internationally, governments and stakeholders in education are prioritising numeracy in an effort to ensure that people have the ...

Keywords : Education, Numeracy as a priority, 21st century skills, Curriculum, Adult numeracy, Teacher education

Important Note : All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.

Topic Editors

Topic coordinators, recent articles, submission deadlines.

Submission closed.

Participating Journals

Total views.

• Demographics

No records found

total views article views downloads topic views

Top countries

Top referring sites, about frontiers research topics.

With their unique mixes of varied contributions from Original Research to Review Articles, Research Topics unify the most influential researchers, the latest key findings and historical advances in a hot research area! Find out more on how to host your own Frontiers Research Topic or contribute to one as an author.

Facets of Numeracy: Teaching, Learning and Practices

• First Online: 21 April 2020

Cite this chapter

• Vince Geiger 7 ,
• Keiko Yasukawa 8 ,
• Anne Bennison 9 ,
• Jill Fielding Wells 7 &
• Carly Sawatzki 10  

3004 Accesses

6 Citations

The purpose of this chapter is to develop an inclusive and coherent discussion about research developments within numeracy while, at the same time, highlighting the contributions of its different facets. These facets include two broad contexts in which numeracy development and practices take place, schooling/initial teacher education and the workplace, and two centred on specific areas of mathematical content, statistical and financial literacy. Research in this review is analysed through the dimensions of the Model of Numeracy for the 21st Century—contexts, mathematical knowledge, tools, dispositions and critical orientation. The chapter concludes with a discussion of potential new directions for numeracy research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Curriculum Intent, Teacher Professional Development and Student Learning in Numeracy

Pedagogical Approaches to Teaching and Learning English: Connections with Critical Numeracy

Transforming Professional Practice in Numeracy Teaching

Alangui, W. V. (2018). Building stone walls: A case study from the Philippines. In K. Yasukawa, A. Rogers, K. Jackson, & B. V. Street (Eds.), Numeracy as social practice: Global and local perspectives (pp. 58–76). Abingdon: Routledge.

Google Scholar  

Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81 (2), 132–169.

Article   Google Scholar  

Allmond, S., & Makar, K. (2018). Scaffolding data conversations in a primary classroom. In M. A. Sorto, A. White, & L. Guyot (Eds.), Looking back, looking forward. Proceedings of the tenth International Conference on Teaching Statistics . Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

Arnold, P., & Pfannkuch, M. (2016). The language of shape. In D. Ben-Zvi, K. Makar (Eds.), The teaching and learning of statistics (pp. 51–61). Cham: Springer International Publishing Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23470-0_5 .

Arnold, P., & Pfannkuch, M. (2019). Posing comparative statistical investigative questions: International perspectives. In G. Burrill & D. Ben-Zvi (Eds.), Topics and trends in current statistics education research (pp. 173–195). Switzerland: Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03472-6_8 .

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2017). Australian curriculum: English. Retrieved December 21, 2019, from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/english/ .

Bauer, R. (2018). Adult literacy and socio-cultural learning at Pina Pina Jarrinjaku (Yuendumu learning centre). Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 58 (1), 125–145.

Bennison, A. (2016a). A sociocultural approach to understanding identity as an embedder-of-numeracy: A case of numeracy and history. European Educational Research Journal, 15 (4), 491–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904116643327 .

Bennison, A. (2016b). Teacher identity as an embedder-of-numeracy: Identifying ways to support teachers to promote numeracy learning across the curriculu m (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

Bennison, A. (2019). Numeracy across the curriculum in initial teacher education. In G. Hine, S. Blackley, & A. Cooke (Eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 125–132). Perth, WA: MERGA.

Black, S., & Yasukawa, K. (2016). Research that counts: OECD statistics and ‘policy entrepreneurs’ impacting on Australian adult literacy and numeracy policy. Research in Post-Compulsory Education, 21 (3), 165–180.

Blue, L. E., O’Brien, M., & Makar, K. (2018). Exploring the classroom practices that may enable a compassionate approach to financial literacy education. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30 (2), 143–164.

Blue, L. E., & Pinto, L. E. (2017). Other ways of being: Challenging dominant financial literacy discourses in Aboriginal context. Australian Educational Researcher, 44 (1), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-017-0226-y .

Budgett, S., & Rose, D. (2017). Developing statistical literacy in the final school year. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16 (1), 139–162.

Callingham, R., & Watson, J. M. (2017). The development of statistical literacy at school. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16 (1), 181–201.

Callingham, R., Watson, J., & Oates, G. (2019). Statistics and probability: From research to the classroom. In D. Siemon, T. Barkatsas, & R. Seah (Eds.), Researching and learning progressions (trajectories) in mathematics education (pp. 181–204). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

Carmichael, C., Muir, T., & Callingham, R. (2017). The impact of within-school autonomy on students’ goal orientations and engagement with mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29 (2), 219–236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0200-z .

Carter, M., Klenowski, V., & Chalmers, C. (2016). Who pays for standardised testing? A cost-benefit study of mandated testing in three Queensland secondary schools. Journal of Educational Policy, 31 (3), 330–342.

Chick, H., Watson, J., & Fitzallen, N. (2018). “Plot 1 is all spread out and plot 2 is all squished together”: Exemplifying statistical variation with young students. In J. Hunter, P. Perger, & L. Darragh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 218–225). Auckland: MERGA.

Chigeza, P., & Sorin, R. (2016). Kindergarten children demonstrating numeracy concepts through drawings and explanations: Intentional teaching within play-based learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41 (5), 65–77.

Chua, H. P., Khan, R. N., Humphry, S., & Hassell, R. (2017). Effect of national partnerships on NAPLAN. Cogent Education , 4 (1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2016.1273166 .

Coben, D., & Alkema, A. (2018). Scoping the development of a measure of adults’ numeracy (and literacy) practices. Contemporary research in adult and lifelong learning of mathematics (pp. 75–92). Cham: Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Coben, D., & McCartney, N. (2016). Beyond compliance. In K. Yasukawa & S. Black (Eds.), Beyond economic interests . Critical perspectives on adult literacy and numeracy in a globalised world (pp. 119–134). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Cockcroft, W. (1982). Mathematics counts . London: HMSO.

Cooper, B. Cowie, B., Furness, J., Peter, M., & Bailey, J. (2017). Mathematical reasoning and knowledge in initial teacher education (MARKITE). Retrieved December 21, 2019 from http://www.tlri.org.nz/sites/default/files/projects/Final%20formatted%20report%20_Cooper%20and%20Cowie%28v3%29.pdf .

Disbray, S., & Bauer, R. (2016). A place to learn and work: Yuendumu learning centre. Learning Communities: International Journal of Learning in Social Contexts, 19, 26–45. https://doi.org/10.18793/LCJ2016.19.03 .

English, L. D. (2018). Young children’s statistical literacy in modelling with data and chance. In A. Leavy, M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Statistics in early childhood and primary education: Supporting early statistical and probabilistic thinking (pp. 295–313). Singapore: Springer.

English, L. D., & Watson, J. M. (2016). Development of probabilistic understanding in fourth grade. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 47 (1), 28–62.

English, L., & Watson, J. M. (2018). Modelling with authentic data in sixth grade. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50 (1–2), 103–115.

Evans, J., Yasukawa, K., Mallows, D., & Creese, B. (2017). Numeracy skills and the numerate environment: Affordances and demands. Adults Learning Mathematics: An International Journal, 12 (1), 17–26.

Exley, B., & Trimble-Roles, R. (2017). Written numeracy assessment in the early years: The challenges of pronouns and noun groups. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41 (1), 100–105.

Farrell, L. (2014). What research has been/is being undertaken in adult literacy and numeracy and by whom and why: internationally and locally? Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 22 (1), 59–68.

Fielding-Wells, J. (2018a). Dot plots and hat plots: Supporting young students emerging understandings of distribution, center and variability through modelling. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50 (7), 1125–1138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0961-1 .

Fielding-Wells, J. (2018b). Scaffolding statistical inquiries for young children. In A. Leavy, M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Statistics in early childhood and primary education: Supporting early statistical and probabilistic thinking (pp. 109–127). Singapore: Springer.

Fitzallen, N., Watson, J., Wright, S., & Duncan, B. (2018). Data representations in a stem context: The performance of catapults. In M. A. Sorto, A. White, & L. Guyot (Eds.), Looking back, looking forward. Proceedings of the tenth International Conference on Teaching Statistics . Voorburg, The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

FitzSimons, G. E., & Boistrup, L. B. (2017). In the workplace mathematics does not announce itself: Towards overcoming the hiatus between mathematics education and work. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 95 (3), 329–349.

Flynn, M. C., Pillay, H., & Watters, J. (2016). Industry–school partnerships: Boundary crossing to enable school to work transitions. Journal of Education and Work, 29 (3), 309–331. https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080.2014.934789 .

Forgasz, H., & Hall, J. (2019). Learning about numeracy: The impact of a compulsory unit on pre-service teachers’ understandings and beliefs. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44 (2), 15–33.

Forgasz, H., & Leder, G. (2016). Numeracy and Australian teachers. In B. White, M. Chinnappan, & S. Trenholm. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 238–245). Adelaide, SA: MERGA.

Frejd, P., & Geiger, V. (2017). Exploring the notion of mathematical literacy in curricula documents. In G. Stillman, G. Kaiser, & W. Blum (Eds.), Mathematical modelling and applications: Crossing and researching boundaries in mathematics education (pp. 255–264). Cham: Springer.

Furness, J., Cowie, B., & Cooper, B. (2017a). Scoping the meaning of “critical” in mathematical thinking for initial teacher education. Policy Futures in Education, 15 (6), 713–728. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210317719778 .

Furness, J., Robertson, N., Hunter, J., Hodgetts, D., & Nikora, L. W. (2017b). Wellbeing effects from family literacy education: An ecological study. Community Psychology in Global Perspective, 3 (2), 22–37.

Galligan, L., Frederiks, A., Wandel, A. P., Robinson, C., Abdulla, S., & Hussain, Z. (2017). Nursing students’ readiness for the numeracy needs of their program: Students’ perspective. Adults Learning Mathematics: An International Journal, 12 (1), 27–38.

Geiger, V. (2016). Teachers as designers of effective numeracy tasks. In B. White, M. Chinnappan, & S. Trenholm (Eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 252–259). Adelaide: MERGA.

Geiger, V. (2018). Generating ideas for numeracy tasks across the curriculum. In J. Hunter, P. Perger, & L. Darragh (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41st Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 314–320). Auckland, NZ: MERGA.

Geiger, V. (2019). Using mathematics as evidence supporting critical reasoning and enquiry in primary science classrooms. ZDM Mathematics Education, 51 (7), 929–940. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01068-2 .

Geiger, V., Goos, M., & Forgasz, H. (2015). A rich interpretation of numeracy for the 21st Century: A survey of the state of the field. ZDM—The International Journal on Mathematics Education, 47 (4), 531–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-015-0708-1 .

Geiger, V., Mulligan, J., Data-Huxtable, L., Ahlip, R., Jones, D. H., May, E. J., et al. (2018). An interdisciplinary approach to designing online learning: Fostering pre-service mathematics teachers’ capabilities in mathematical modelling. ZDM Mathematics Education, 50 (1–2), 217–232.

Goos, M., Dole, S., & Geiger, V. (2012). Auditing the numeracy demands of the Australian curriculum. In J. Dindyal, L. Chen & S. F. Ng (Eds.), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 210–217). Singapore: MERGA.

Goos, M., Geiger, V., & Dole, S. (2010). Auditing the numeracy demands of the middle years curriculum. In L. Sparrow, B. Kissane & C. Hurst (Eds.), Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia , (pp. 210–217). Fremantle: MERGA.

Goos, M., Geiger, V., & Dole, S. (2014). Transforming professional practice in numeracy teaching. In Y. Li, E. Silver, & S. Li (Eds.), Transforming mathematics instruction: Multiple approaches and practices (pp. 81–102). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04993-9_6 .

Goos, M., Geiger, V., Dole, S., Forgasz, H., & Bennison, A. (2019). Enhancing numeracy teaching and learning across the curriculum . Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Gorur, R. (2019). Post script: Has critique begun to gather steam again? Beyond ‘critical barbarism’ in studying ILSAs. In B. Maddox (Ed.), International large scale assessments in education: Insider research perspectives (pp. 219–228). London: Bloomsbury.

Goss, P., Sonnemann, J., Chisholm, C., & Nelson, L. (2016). Widening gaps: What NAPLAN tells us about student progress. Grattan Institute.

Guenther, J., Bat, M., Stephens, A., Skewes, J., Boughton, B., Williamson, F., et al. (2017). Enhancing training advantage for remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander learners . Adelaide: NCVER.

Hunter, J. (2016). Critical re-visioning. In K. Yasukawa & S. Black (Eds.), Beyond economic interests . Critical perspectives on adult literacy and numeracy in a globalised world (pp. 223–237). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Hunter, J., & Sawatzki, C. (2019). Discovering diverse students’ funds of knowledge related to finance: Pāsifika students in New Zealand. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31, 419–439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00259-0 .

Kane, P. (2018). Estimation by kiwifruit orchard managers and urban refuse/recycling operators within their situated horticultural or civic workplace practices: Case studies from New Zealand. In K. Yasukawa, A. Rogers, K. Jackson, & B. V. Street (Eds.), Numeracy as social practice: Global and local perspectives (pp. 39–57). London: Routledge.

Lehrer, R., & English, L. (2018). Introducing children to modelling variability. In D. Ben-Zvi, K. Makar, & J. Garfield (Eds.), International handbook of research in statistics education (pp. 229–260). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Lisciandro, J. G., Jones, A., & Geerlings, P. (2018). Enabling learners starts with knowing them: Student attitudes, aspiration and anxiety towards science and maths learning in an Australian pre-university enabling program. Australian Journal of Adult Learning, 58 (1), 13–40.

Livock, C. (2016). Walking the tightrope: Market drivers versus social responsibility with implications for language, literacy and numeracy, and inclusive teaching. International Journal of Training Research, 14 (1), 35–48.

Logan, T., & Lowrie, T. (2017). Gender perspectives on spatial tasks in a national assessment: A secondary analysis. Research in Mathematics Education, 19 (2), 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/14794802.2017.1334577 .

Maass, K., Geiger, V., Ariza, M. R., & Goos, M. (2019). The role of mathematics in interdisciplinary STEM education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 51 (7), 869–884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01100-5 .

Makar, K. (2016). Developing young children’s emergent inferential practices in statistics. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 18 (1), 1–24.

Makar, K. (2018a). Theorising links between context and structure to introduce powerful statistical ideas in the early years. In A. Leavy, M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Statistics in early childhood and primary education: Supporting early statistical and probabilistic thinking (pp. 3–20). Singapore: Springer.

Makar, K. (2018b). Rethinking the statistics curriculum: Holistic, purposeful and layered. In M. A. Sorto, A. White, & L. Guyot (Eds.), Looking Back, Looking Forward. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Teaching Statistics . The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

McPhee, D., & Makar, K. (2018). Early childhood experiences in informal inferential statistics using an inquiry approach. In M. A. Sorto, A. White, & L. Guyot (Eds.), Looking Back, Looking Forward. Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Teaching Statistics . The Netherlands: International Statistical Institute.

Miller-Reilly, B., & O’Brien, C. (2018). A tale of two journeys. In K. Safford-Ramus, J. Maaß, & E. Süss-Stepancik (Eds.), Contemporary research in adult and lifelong learning of mathematics (pp. 251–268). Cham: Springer.

Ministry of Education. (1959). 15 to 18: A report of the central advisory council for education . London: HMSO.

Morony, S., Lamph, E., Muscat, D., Nutbeam, D., Dhillon, H. M., Shepherd, H., et al. (2017). Improving health literacy through adult basic education in Australia. Health Promotion International, 33 (5), 867–877.

Morris, A., Hanckel, B., Yasukawa, K., & Gamage, S. (2017). The perceptions that homeless people and those at risk of homelessness have of literacy classes . Sydney: UTS Institute for Public Policy and Governance.

Muir, T., Livy, S., Herbert, S., & Callingham, R. (2018). School leaders’ identification of school level and teacher practices that influence school improvement in national numeracy testing outcomes. Australian Educational Researcher, 45, 297–313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-017-0252-9 .

Muscat, D., Shepherd, H., Morony, S., Smith, S., Dhillon, H., Trevena, L., et al. (2016). Can adults with low literacy understand shared decision making questions? A qualitative investigation. Patient Education and Counseling, 99 (11), 1796–1802.

Niss, M. A., & Jablonka, E. (2014). Mathematical literacy. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 391–396). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.

Northcote, M. T., & Marshall, L. (2016). What mathematics calculations do adults do in their everyday lives? (Part 1 of a report on the Everyday Mathematics Project). Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 21 (2), 8–17.

O’Keeffe, L. (2016). A preliminary analysis of the linguistic complexity of numeracy skills test items for pre-service teachers. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp. 503–510). Adelaide, SA: MERGA.

O’Keeffe, L., O’Halloran, K., Wignell, P., & Tan, S. (2017). A linguistic analysis of the sample numeracy skills test items for pre-service teachers issued by the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER). Australian Educational Researcher, 44, 233–253. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-017-0238-7 .

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2017a). PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic, financial literacy and collaborative problem solving. Revised edition. Paris: OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264281820-en .

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). (2017b). PISA 2015 results (Volume IV): Students’ financial literacy . Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264270282-en .

Book   Google Scholar  

Osmond, P. (2016). What happened to our community of practice? The early development of adult basic education in NSW through the lens of professional practice theory’. Literacy and Numeracy Studies, 24 (2), 3–23.

Parkinson, J., & Mackay, J. (2016). The literacy practices of vocational training in Carpentry and Automotive Technology. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 68 (1), 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2015.1104714 .

Parkinson, J., Mackay, J., & Demecheleer, M. (2018). Putting yourself into your work: Expression of visual meaning in student technical writing. Visual Communication . https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357218784323 .

Parnis, A. J., & Petocz, P. (2016). Secondary school students’ attitudes towards numeracy: An Australian investigation based on the national assessment program—Literacy and numeracy (NAPLAN). Australian Educational Researcher, 43 (5), 551–566. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-016-0218-3 .

PIAAC Numeracy Expert Group. (2009). PIAAC numeracy: A conceptual framework . OECD Education Working Papers, No. 35. Paris: OECD Publishing.

Prodromou, T., & Dunne, T. (2017). Data visualisation and statistics education in the future. In T. Prodromou (Ed.), Data visualization and statistical literacy for open and big data (pp. 1–28). Hershey, PA: IGI-Global.

Sawatzki, C. (2017). Lessons in financial literacy task design: Authentic, imaginable, useful. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29 (1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-016-0184-0 .

Sawatzki, C., Downton, A., & Cheeseman, J. (2019). Stimulating proportional reasoning through questions of finance and fairness. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 31, 465–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00262-5 .

Sawatzki, C., & Goos, M. (2018). Cost, price and profit: What influences students’ decisions about fundraising? Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30, 525–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0241-y .

Sawatzki, C., & Sullivan, P. A. (2017a). Shopping for shoes: Teaching students to apply and interpret mathematics in the real world. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9833-3 .

Sawatzki, C., & Sullivan, P. A. (2017b). Teachers’ perceptions of financial literacy and the implications for professional learning. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42 (5), 51–65. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2017v42n5.4 .

Schwenger, B. (2018). Research on training wheels—Embedding academic literacy and numeracy in vocational pedagogy through action research. Educational Action Research, 26 (2), 288–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2017.1310053 .

Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group (TEMAG). (2014). Action now: Classroom ready teachers . Canberra: Department of Education.

Thomson, S., & De Bortoli, L. (2017). PISA 2015: Financial literacy in Australia . Melbourne: ACER.

Thomson, S., De Bortoli, L., & Underwood, C. (2016). PISA 2015: A first look at Australia’s results . Melbourne: ACER.

Tout, D., Coben, D., Geiger, V., Ginsburg, L., Hoogland, K., Maguire, T., et al. (2017). Review of the PIAAC numeracy assessment framework: Final report . Camberwell, Australia: ACER.

Watson, J. (2017). Open data in Australian schools: Taking statistical literacy and the practice of statistics across the curriculum. In T. Prodromou (Ed.), Data visualization and statistical literacy for open and big data (pp. 29–54). Hershey, PA: IGI-Global.

Watson, J. (2018). Variation and expectation for six-year-olds. In A. Leavy, M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Statistics in early childhood and primary education: Supporting early statistical and probabilistic thinking (pp. 55–73). Singapore: Springer.

Watson, J., & English, L. D. (2016). Repeated random sampling in Year 5. Journal of Statistics Education, 24 (1), 27–37.

Watson, J., & English, L. D. (2018). Eye color and the practice of statistics in Grade 6: Comparing two groups. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 49, 35–60.

Watson, J., & English, L. D. (2017a). Reaction time in grade 5: Data collection within the practice of statistics. Statistics Education Research Journal, 16 (1), 262–293.

Watson, J., & English, L. D. (2017b). Statistical problem posing, problem refining, and further reflection in Grade 6. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 17 (4), 347–365. https://doi.org/10.1080/14926156.2017.1380867 .

Watson, J., & Fitzallen, N. (2016). Statistical software and mathematics education: Affordances for learning. In L. English & D. Kirshner (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (3rd ed., pp. 563–594). New York: Taylor and Francis.

Watson, J., Fitzallen, N., English, L., & Wright, S. (2019). Introducing statistical variation in Year 3 in a STEM context: Manufacturing licorice. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology , 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020739X.2018.1562117 .

Watson, J., Fitzallen, N., Fielding-Wells, J., & Madden, S. (2018). The practice of statistics. In D. Ben-Zvi, K. Makar, & J. Garfield (Eds.), International handbook of research in statistics education (pp. 105–137). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

Yasukawa, K. (2018). The workplace as a site for learning critical numeracy practice. In K. Yasukawa, A. Rogers, K. Jackson, & B. V. Street (Eds.), Numeracy as social practice: Global and local perspectives (pp. 225–240). London: Routledge.

Yasukawa, K. (2019). The role of national media in adult literacy and numeracy policy: A case study from Australia. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 19 (1), 1–13.

Yasukawa, K., & Black, S. (2016). Policy making at a distance. In K. Yasukawa & S. Black (Eds.), Beyond economic interests: Critical perspectives on adult literacy and numeracy in a globalised world (pp. 19–40). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

Yasukawa, K., Hamilton, M., & Evans, J. (2017). A comparative analysis of national media responses to the OECD Survey of Adult Skills: Policy making from the global to the local? Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education ,  47 (2), 271–285.

Yasukawa, K., Jackson, K., Kane, P., & Coben, D. (2018). Mapping the terrain of social practice perspectives of numeracy. In K. Yasukawa, A. Rogers, K. Jackson, & B. V. Street (Eds.), Numeracy as social practice: Global and local perspectives (pp. 3–20). London: Routledge.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Australian Catholic University, Brisbane, Australia

Vince Geiger & Jill Fielding Wells

University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, Australia

Keiko Yasukawa

University of the Sunshine Coast, Sunshine Coast, Australia

Anne Bennison

Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia

Carly Sawatzki

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vince Geiger .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Jennifer Way

Western Sydney University, Penrith, NSW, Australia

Catherine Attard

Judy Anderson

Janette Bobis

Heather McMaster

Katherin Cartwright

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Geiger, V., Yasukawa, K., Bennison, A., Wells, J.F., Sawatzki, C. (2020). Facets of Numeracy: Teaching, Learning and Practices. In: Way, J., Attard, C., Anderson, J., Bobis, J., McMaster, H., Cartwright, K. (eds) Research in Mathematics Education in Australasia 2016–2019. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4269-5_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4269-5_4

Published : 21 April 2020

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-15-4268-8

Online ISBN : 978-981-15-4269-5

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Open access
• Published: 11 October 2018

Developing numeracy skills using interactive technology in a play-based learning environment

• Tess Miller   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6984-9326 1  

International Journal of STEM Education volume  5 , Article number:  39 ( 2018 ) Cite this article

53k Accesses

50 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

The purpose of this study was to measure the impact of interactive technology in the form of mathematical applications (apps) delivered using iPads on kindergarten children’s learning of number sense in a play-based learning environment. Secondly, factors influencing the use of interactive technology in a play-based environment were examined. This technology was introduced to a small ( n  = 13) rural kindergarten classroom using an experimental design embedded in a mixed methods approach.

The teacher was keen to introduce technology to her class but was self-described as a beginner in using iPads for personal or teaching tasks. Small gains were noted between the control and intervention groups but they were not significant. Further, children were observed collaborating which supported prior research. Another observation was related to attention span, when an app became too challenging children would abandon the app or use a trial and error method to move to the next level. Lastly, when given choice, children were drawn to creative and entertaining apps rather than apps that were more pedagogically accurate but less creative. Although there was not a large gain in achievement, using interactive technology promoted student collaboration and engagement in a play-based learning environment.

Conclusions

Small gains in mathematics achievement and high levels of engagement suggest that using interactive technology in the kindergarten classroom enhances learning of mathematics. Factors influencing the use of interactive technology included the quality of the app such that creative and fun apps promoted children’s engagement in learning mathematics. The level of difficulty of an app was a second factor influencing children’s use of interactive technology. If the difficulty level was too challenging, children became disengaged with the app.

In the next era of technological advancements, we can only envision futuristic developments such as no-touch interfaces and sensors that read and predict our movements (Loganathan 2013 ). However, for the current generation, we are enjoying the developments in technology that have focused on interactive tablets among a host of other interactive gadgets currently on the market. The intuitive design of iPads positions them for use in educational settings, including early years classrooms (Warmoth 2013 ). Their design was built on mental models of how we perceive an experience (Weinschenk 2011 ). For example, when reading a book, we turn pages by using the index finger to flip to the next page. This method of turning pages has been modeled on the iPad where the user also uses his/her index finger to flip to the next page. Interacting with an iPad in this manner facilitates data flow through the interface (i.e., what the user sees on the screen) linking the user and technology and is referred to as interactive technology (Large 2016 ). Page flipping and other interactive features (e.g., voice recognition) on an iPad make using this form of technology simple or intuitive even for the youngest of learners.

The introduction of iPads into early learning classrooms has revealed gains in student achievement (Bebell et al. 2012 ); however, measuring gains in achievement should not be the sole factor determining the merit of interactive technology. Leveraging student engagement in a discipline like mathematics also makes iPads a worthy investment for the classroom given that they can be used to gather information, read a book, take photos, record physical activity, make artistic drawings, and learn about literacy or numeracy through the use of stimulating and creative applications (apps). Given the abundance of apps currently available, examples of how iPads can be used to engage children and promote learning is much larger than what is posited here. In the next era of educational technology, we need to think of the iPad as a manipulative that children can choose from a host of other manipulatives to discover new concepts.

The purpose of this study is to measure the impact of interactive technology in the form of mathematical applications delivered using iPads on kindergarten children’s learning of numeracy in a play-based learning environment (Fesseha and Pyle 2016 ). In particular, numeracy concepts were focused on the number-sense strand (Department of Education, Early Learning and Culture of PE 2008 ). Secondly, factors influencing the use of interactive technology in a play-based environment were examined. The research questions posed in this study are as follows: To what extent does the use of mathematical apps using iPads enhance children’s learning of numeracy in kindergarten? What factors influence children’s use of interactive technology in a play-based learning environment?

Considering the relatively short evolution of iPads that were introduced in 2010 with Apple’s launch of iPad 1 (Ritchie 2014 ), a significant body of literature has been published on the use of iPads in education, building on literature reporting on the use of desktop computers in education. In a systematic review of what the authors described as mobile learning, Crompton et al. ( 2017 ) reviewed 113 studies of which four were at the pre- or kindergarten levels and these four studies were conducted in 2014 and 2015 suggesting interactive technology was slowly making its way into the early grades. Unfortunately, these authors did not cross list their review to identify the subject domains the four studies were conducted in.

Of the research focusing on technology in early learning, studies focused on children and teachers’ perceptions of technology (Knezek and Christensen 2002 ; Tsitouridou and Vryzas 2003 ) as well as the use of technology in literacy development (e.g., Chiong and Shuler 2010 ; Flewitt et al. 2015 ; Primavera et al. 2001 ). Fewer studies have been in the area of numeracy (Clements and Sarama 2007 ). This literature review begins with teachers’ perceptions towards using technology given that teachers’ comfort with technology, including the teacher in this study, has been shown to impact the use of technology in the classroom (Simon et al. 2013 ). The second part of this literature review focuses on literature exploring the effective use of iPads in the area of literacy and numeracy. This review concludes with a look at studies that advocated against the use of technology in early learning.

Teachers’ perceptions towards using technology

For many preschool teachers, their use of technology is less than teachers in higher grades and was limited to downloading images for instructional purposes and digital cameras (Public Broadcasting Service and Grunwald Associates 2009 , 2011 ). This absence of technological integration into early years classrooms is most likely due to limited opportunities for professional development on interactive technology as well as the lack of technology itself. Hence, to advance interactive technology in early years classrooms, it is important to recognize that teachers need professional development on the appropriate use of technology in the classroom (Simon et al. 2013 ), as well as opportunities to acquire technology. In a case study of four kindergarten teachers by Lu et al. ( 2017 ), teachers’ experiences using iPads in a literacy context was also found to be beneficial as it allowed teachers to meet the demands of creating individual assessments or work on lesson preparation as the iPads “functioned like an extra teaching assistant, providing feedback to students” (Lu et al. 2017 , p.19).

Studies employing interactive technology in the form of tablets reported improved motivation, supported learning in small groups, and independent work as well as gains in vocabulary and phonological awareness (Dobler 2012 ; Hutchison et al. 2012 ; Flewitt et al. 2015 ; Hutchison and Reinking 2011 ; Simon et al. 2013 ; Takac et al. 2015 ). For example, Simon et al. ( 2013 ) concluded that tablets in addition to desktop computers supported learning in small groups or individually. These researchers also noted a tendency for longer periods of use especially when children had choice in their activity. Similarly, Flewitt et al. ( 2015 ) introduced iPads in early learning for the purpose of literacy development, which included writing and video recording of stories for sharing with the class. One iPad was given to a classroom with 3- and 4-year-olds and another iPad to a class of 4- and 5-year-olds for 2 months. Each iPad contained a story-creation app as well as a number of other learning apps. Training was provided to both instructors and data collection consisted of surveys, observations, and conversations. These researchers reported increased motivation and use of iPads. This was especially noted among children who were not easily engaged in traditional writing tasks. Further, the touch screen interface was reported to be easier than a keyboard. Similar to findings reported by Simon et al. ( 2013 ), the iPads fostered small group and independent learning. At the same time, children were observed helping each other use the iPads which is aligned with the findings from Shifflet et al. ( 2012 ) who reported that pre-school children using tablets developed a collaborative approach to learning which enhanced their social skills.

In terms of academic gains, an experimental study revealed that kindergarten children in both the control and experimental groups (i.e., with iPads) showed gains as measured using the Rigby Benchmark Assessment and the Children’s Progress Academic Assessment but the differences between groups were not statistically significant (Bebell et al. 2012 ). However, on a third measure, the Observation Survey of Early Literacy Achievement assessment, a statistically significant difference in phonemic awareness was reported where children in the iPad group scored higher (Bebell et al. 2012 ). Based on this study, the introduction of iPads in early learning did not appear to hinder learning, and in some areas of literacy, they enhanced children’s understanding of the discipline.

Of the studies that examined early learning of mathematics using tablets, most studies reported gains in achievement or positive experiences (Alade et al. 2016 ; Dejonckheere et al. 2015 ; Hubber et al. 2016 ; Hung et al. 2015 ; Kosko and Ferdig 2016 ; Mattoon et al. 2015 ; Outhwaite et al. 2017 ; Presser et al. ( 2015 ); Reeves et al. 2017 ; Stubbe et al. 2016 ). However, Bebell and Pedulla’s ( 2015 ) longitudinal study examining the impact of mathematics apps on achievement in grades kindergarten (K) to 2 did not reveal any consistent gains. Despite different outcomes, each of these studies dispelled the argument that iPads and other digital manipulatives were not edutainment but rather effective learning aids (Baird and Henninger 2011 ).

A few studies narrowed their focus to a small number of apps or a specific mathematical skill, which provided insight on the connection between the app and student gains for young children. For example, Reeves et al. ( 2017 ) selected apps that focused on skills related to counting, sequencing, and early addition. In each area of skill development, gains were reported. Dejonckheere et al. ( 2015 ) also focused on a specific skill and reported a gain in achievement. These researchers used tablets to allow 4- to 6-year-olds to play on a digital number line exploring concepts related to estimation. This focus on one numeracy concept applying different strategies for estimation revealed a significant gain in accuracy of estimation for the two groups that were given strategies but not for the control group. Likewise, Presser et al. ( 2015 ) focused on skills related to subitizing (recognizing how many in a set without counting) and equi-partitioning (splitting an area or set into equal groups) using an app known as Next Generation Preschool . Gains in numeracy skills were also reported in their study.

Along the same focus, Kosko and Ferdig ( 2016 ) examined gains in achievement but approached their study from the perspective of selecting apps that were pedagogically accurate and aligned with curriculum. These researchers reported that well-designed mathematics apps improved achievement and concluded that well-designed mathematics apps can support student learning but more research was needed to explore the extent to which these apps improved learning. Given the number of mathematics apps available on the iPad, it is particularly important to consider characteristics of mathematics apps to better understand the impact, if any, an app has on student learning. Further, neither of these studies centered on a play-based learning environment that allowed for flexible and creative use of time and space or provided choice in selecting an app (Steglin 2005 ). Hence, the characteristics of apps that attracted children are largely unknown.

Advocates against interactive technology

Although Dinehart ( 2015 ) was an advocate against the use of technology in early learning, citing that it diminished children’s fine motor skills, she did not consider apps designed for early childhood education that fostered fine motor skills through writing letters and numbers. Other concerns against the use of technology in early learning focused on the amount of time spent viewing screens. Vanderloo ( 2014 ) reported that children between 4 and 7 years of age spent an average 1.5 to 7.0 h viewing screens each day. Unfortunately, there was no differentiation between viewing screens for different activities such as watching a movie, watching a lesson on the interactive whiteboard, or playing games on an iPad (Vanderloo 2014 ). The sedentary nature of viewing screens was the catalyst for Vanderloo’s work, which is undoubtedly a concern; however, moderation of screen viewing may better guide the use of technology in early learning rather than banning it all together. This position is more aligned with the National Association for Education of Young Children ( 2012 ) who differentiated between screen viewing for interactive activities (e.g., mathematical apps) and non-interactive activities (e.g., movies) to promote active learning using technology.

When drawing on the literature presented above, it is reasonable to conclude that young children experienced gains when using iPads to learn about literacy and numeracy, and in one study, gains were long term (Outhwaite et al. 2017 ). When these gains were compared to a control group, the gains were not always statistically significant. Concerns related to excessive screen viewing were tempered by differentiating between interactive learning versus non-interactive learning. Since most studies narrowed their focus to a few mathematical apps, there is much to learn about the characteristics of apps that children gravitate towards when left to their own accord in a play-based learning environment.

Theoretical framework

The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework was utilized to explore the implications of using mathematical apps installed on iPads in an early learning context. Integrating technology to enhance learning requires knowledge related to the subject content (i.e., numeracy), pedagogy, and technology (Mishra and Koehler 2006 ). Based on the TPACK framework, technology can be successfully integrated into learning when these three domains are successfully woven together. Hence, when apps were selected for this study on early numeracy concepts, the pedagogy had to be aligned with children’s level of cognitive development, and at the same time, the technology had to be simple and intuitive so that kindergarten children could be successful using it.

This research also builds on Naismith et al.’s ( 2004 ) theories in identifying six theory-based categories of activities for interactive technology: behaviorist, constructivist, situated, collaborative, internal and lifelong, and learning and teaching support. These researchers described behaviorist activities as those that primarily aim to change behavior through reinforcement of a stimulus such as feedback. For example, when a student responds correctly to a mathematics question, a pleasing sound or an animated character may appear in an app designed for kindergarten level students. In contrast, constructivist activities were described as activities that call on the student to apply what they know to new contexts and build new learning. The game, Environmental Detectives , was created for high school students who engage in the game as environmental engineers tasked with solving a problem is an example of a constructist activity/game. For a younger audience, Minecraft is similar in that students create and manipulate objects and engage in a task. When selecting apps for this study, there were no constructivist activities/games for the iPads that were aimed at the early learner.

In returning the focus to the theory-based categories, the remaining four theory-based categories of activities/games for interactive devices involved a higher cognitive engagement and advanced interactive software, which is appropriate for students in the senior grades. Subsequently, interactive activities designed for early learners appears to be founded on the behaviorist theory-based category which is similar to the finding in Bray and Tangney’s ( 2017 ) systematic review of literature focused on using technology in mathematics education. These researchers identified a wide range of technologies being used in different contexts within the middle and senior mathematics classrooms with a predominance of constructivist and social constructivist tasks. Such tasks appear to be aligned with higher grade levels where the curriculum calls for higher levels of inquiry-based, student-centered, and collaborative approaches to learning mathematics leaving the behaviorist types of activities/games for the younger students.

This study was implemented in a small rural Canadian primary school. The kindergarten teacher selected to be involved in the study was a veteran teacher with over 20 years of early years teaching experience. Although the teacher was not fluent with iPad technology, she was keen to learn and introduce the technology to her classroom. Funds to purchase four iPads with protective childproof cases and glass screen protectors, apps, stylus, and child safe headsets (control the volume such that the sound does not increase above 85 dB) were obtained through a small university grant. The agreement between the researcher and the primary school allowed the iPads and supporting technology to remain a property of the kindergarten class. Ethics permission was obtained through the university research ethics board as well as the local school board ethics authority.

A mixed methods design was applied using qualitative and quantitative data to explore the impact of mathematical apps on the learning of numeracy skills and the factors influencing the use of this technology in an early years setting. The qualitative data included field notes documenting conversations during the training session with the kindergarten teacher as well as observation notes of students using iPads. The experimental component provided the quantitative data. In this aspect of the study, the quantitative measures were the pre- and post-test measures for the experimental and control groups. The rationale for choosing a mixed methods design was to provide a wider perspectives of the context of using interactive technology in an early years setting as well as to have greater understanding of the research questions posed in this study (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie 2004 ; Almalki 2016 ). A mixed methods approach allows the researcher to compensate for the fundamental weaknesses that are associated with using only a quantitative or qualitative study (Almalki 2016 ).

Study design

The participating kindergarten teacher was selected for this study because she had demonstrated excellent knowledge about teaching mathematics to kindergarten children and was keen to engage in a research project. Prior to commencing the study, four iPads with several language arts and mathematics apps that were aligned with the curriculum were selected in collaboration with the teacher and researcher. The researcher and teacher met three times prior to commencing the study to select and experiment with the apps.

One week prior to commencing the study, one iPad was placed at each play station for approximately 20 min each day for 1 week. Children had the choice of using the iPads without receiving guided instructions. This pre-exposure to the iPads was intended to remove any novelty effects that might influence a gain in numeracy skills (Gravetter and Forzano 2011 ).

In the experimental phase, 13 children in the kindergarten class, aged four and five, were randomly selected to one of two groups. One group received a 2-week intervention involving the use of iPads to learn numeracy concepts each day and the other group followed the traditional play-based learning activities that focused on numeracy development, in particular, concepts of number sense. In a conversation with the teacher, she believed that students would be able to master the outcomes being learned in the 2-week period.

Children’s mathematical skills from both groups were measured at the beginning of the study (time 1) with 30 items that were aligned with the curriculum being taught and again following the 10-day intervention period (time 2). At the conclusion of the study, the control group was introduced to the iPads in the same manner as the experimental group (i.e., 10 days) for the purpose of ensuring equal opportunity to engage with the iPads.

The intervention consisted of using interactive technology in a play-based mathematics classroom in lieu of the teachers’ originally planned play-based lessons. A teacher-trained, research assistant removed Group 1 children to another classroom during the time designated for learning mathematics, which was approximately 20 min each day. This group of children was introduced to various mathematical apps while the control group, Group 2, children followed the play-based activities that fostered the same skill development that was in the apps. For example, one of the apps fostered the development of writing numerals and a play-based activity required students to trace numerals.

The intervention began using 10 apps for the first week and then a new app was introduced each day thereafter for a total of 15 apps. Children would receive instruction on how to use a particular app at the start of the lesson followed by time to play with the app. In the second part of the lesson, children could choose whatever app they preferred for the remainder of the lesson. The apps were downloaded from the Apple Store for free or for a nominal fee. The app icons used in this study are shown in Fig.  1 .

Apps used in study

Table  1 , below, summarizes the types of skill development in each of the apps.

The items used to measure children’s mathematics ability in the pre- and post-tests were created based on the concepts taught in the classroom, which were aligned with the curriculum outcomes as previously noted. A map of the curriculum outcome and corresponding items is shown in Table 4 in the Appendix . These items were modeled from the exemplars provided in the provincial curriculum document and in consultation with the teacher (Department of Education, Early Learning and Culture of PE 2008 ).

Data collection

Data in the form of children’s numeracy test scores was collected using an application called Explain Everything. This application is an interactive screen-casting whiteboard, which stored the test items and recorded children’s responses to each item. To capture children’s responses, the examiner would orally read instructions that were printed on the bottom of each test page and then the child would respond by speaking, writing, or manipulating objects on the screen; all of which were captured using Explain Everything simultaneous video and audio recording feature known as screen casting. Figure  2 shows an original test item as presented in Explain Everything and how a student manipulated the objects on the screen (on the right) to demonstrate their understanding.

Original test item and test item after answered by student

The researcher and a research assistant independently scored each child’s test by reviewing each screen-cast. When the scores did not match, we discussed our responses and agreed on a score. Each item was scored based on a 4-point rubric: (1) Do not know or responded incorrectly, (2) demonstrated some understanding of the concept but response was not correct, (3) provided a correct response but the strategy was not strategic or efficient, and (4) provided a correct response that was efficient. An example of a level 2 response would be a number written backwards or upside down and an example of a level 3 response is writing the number seven starting from the bottom and moving to the top (i.e., drawing the number from the finish position to the start position). The kindergarten teacher reviewed and agreed with the 4-point rubric. In the sample response shown in Fig.  2 , the child would receive a 4 for the first answer (i.e., 5) but a 3 for the second answer because the child orally indicated the set containing six elements but they had difficulty writing the digit 6.

The pre-test at time 1 and post-test at time 2 contained the same items except that the colors or the shape of objects were changed. Prior to implementing the study, the test was piloted with three children from another school and reviewed by the kindergarten teacher. Small changes to the printed instructions on each slide were made to better align the vocabulary with children’s understanding.

During the experimental phase, the research assistants recorded field notes documenting children’s behaviors and the apps that were most favored. Children’s feedback on what they liked about the apps (i.e., the characteristics of the apps) and other observations were also documented.

Mean scores were calculated for both groups on the pre-test. Due to the small sample size, it was not possible to conduct the stringent inferential analysis of covariance; therefore, group difference scores were analyzed. The observational field notes were conceptually analyzed to determine the presence of common words or phrases to make inferences about the observations. The coding began with predefined categories such as collaboration, level of engagement, and choice of apps but was flexible to allow for the addition of other unanticipated themes.

Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the internal consistency of the scale. After removing poor performing items due to poor discrimination, 22 items remained. The items that discriminated poorly were due to all students receiving the top score on the item; subsequently, there was no discrimination between ability. Easy items were purposefully included on the assessment to ease students into the testing; hence, it was expected that a number of items would be removed from the test due to poor discrimination. Cronbach’s alpha for the remaining 22-item scale on the pre-test was 0.803 and 0.805 for the post-test. Thus, the coefficient exceeded the absolute minimum threshold of 0.7 but also met the ideal minimum threshold of 0.8 (Tabachnick and Fidell 2012 ), indicating a reliable set of test items.

Descriptive summary of items

Group 1 consisted of four females and three males, and group 2 had two females and four males. All children were 4 or 5 years old. Items ranged in difficulty with the hardest being items 1.7b (write the number 6; M  = 2.46, SD  = 1.27), 1.7c (write the number 5; M  = 2.92, SD  = 1.19), and 1.2h (recognize seven dots on a 10 frame; M  = 2.92, SD  = 0.28). Easier items were 1.4b (create a set of 7; M  = 3.77, SD  = 0.83), 1.7k (count backwards from 5; M  = 3.67, SD  = 0.89), 2.1d (identify repeating and non-repeating patterns; M  = 3.54, SD  = 1.13), 1.2a (identify 3 on a die, M  = 3.54, SD  = 0.52), and 1.2b (identify 4 on a die, M  = 3.54, SD  = 0.52).

Given that four out of 10 apps involved drawing numbers, an increase in this skill was anticipated from the pre- to the post-test. However, of the two items assessing drawing numbers, only one item (i.e., 1.7b drawing the number 6) revealed a significant increase from M  = 2.86 and SD  = 1.46 to M  = 3.29 and SD  = 1.25, following the intervention.

When comparing mean scores, the experimental and control group differed by 0.01 on the pre-test (see Table  2 ). After the intervention, the experimental group increased slightly (+ 0.02) and the control group decreased slightly (− 0.04). On the post-test, the two groups differed by 0.05 with the experimental group having the higher mean score (see Table  2 ). These differences are too small to suggest the intervention had any effect on students’ mathematics ability.

Observational findings

All children were keen to use the iPads over the 10 days of mathematics lessons as they asked the teacher each day when the research team was arriving so that they could use the iPads. During the introduction to a new app phase at the beginning of each guided mathematics lesson, where the children were shown how to use an app (if they needed help), children did not use a headset so that they could hear the instructions (volume was turned down on the ipads). During this guided instruction, children were more apt to collaborate with each other to share what was on their screens and provide help to get to another level or step. When the children wore a headset, there was a greater tendency for children to focus on their own screen as they were not distracted by sounds coming from other iPads or giggles and exclamations coming from their peers.

The four stronger children in the class (as identified by the teacher and confirmed by the pre-test) appeared to have a better understanding of how to maneuver through different levels in an app whereas the weaker children frequently needed guidance on how to proceed to the next level. Another observation related to levels in an app was the difficulty of the level. When an the app level became too challenging, children would either look to abandon the app or randomly select answers until they eliminated all incorrect responses and identified the correct response. An example of this type of question was the equation 2 + 3 = ? which was supplemented by corresponding dots along with responses of 4, 5, and 6. When we debriefed the teacher about this trial and error process of selecting the correct response, she believed that children were learning more than we were giving them credit for which was encouraging; however, we were still concerned that children may be learning by memorizing rather than having a conceptual understanding of the concept. Another finding related to children’s ability was that stronger children exhibited more independence in using apps. These children were able to use a new app by listening to the audio instructions provided in the app or were confident enough to skip over the audio instructions and starting using the app immediately. In comparison, weaker children frequently needed the research assistant to provide oral instruction as well as provide a demonstration (i.e., model using the app) for new apps.

When drawing numbers, three children would opt to use their index finger to trace the number. Given that children were still developing their fine motor skills, we believed that it was important to encourage children to use a stylus; hence, we encouraged children to use a stylus at all times but particularly when they were drawing numbers.

After every 3 days, children were asked, what was their favorite app? The last app that they played was the most common response, likely because it was the most current in their mind. When prompted further to think about the other apps, the most favored apps were not the most pedagogically structured apps but rather apps that had a lot of bling. For example, children were drawn to apps that had exploding stars when they completed a set of tasks or would see a funny character dance across the screen (e.g., Endless 123). In the same vein, children were quick to move from one app to another. For example, all children quickly grew tired of number drawing and when left to their own choices they would not select apps with this skill development. When debriefing this finding with the teacher she noted that an app tended to have a life expectancy of a few days and then children would become tired with the simplicity of the app unless the app captured their attention with bling. Table  3 displays the app and frequency of children’s preference for the app, which was based on the frequency they choose the app during their structured playtime. This is a holistic measure taking into consideration that there were parts of an app children played frequently, while other parts of the app were ignored. The frequency is also influenced by mathematics ability in that more challenging apps were used less frequently by weaker children.

In terms of the teacher’s experience with the iPads, pre-experiment meetings revealed that she was completely new to using iPads and did not own an iPad of her own. She received instruction on how to (a) access the internet, (b) link the iPads so that apps could be downloaded automatically to more than one device, (c) download apps, (d) organize apps into a folder, and (e) delete apps that were no longer being used or accidentally downloaded. Throughout the study, the teacher would periodically sought assistance for these tasks. Following the study, we met twice to solve problems related to purchasing new apps and simultaneously downloading them to all four devices.

This discussion is framed by the two research questions posed in this study. In addition, other insights garnered in the study are discussed.

To what extent does the use of mathematical apps using iPads enhance children’s learning of numeracy in kindergarten?

Considering the small gains in achievement by the experimental group in comparison to a slight decrease in achievement in the control group, there was no significant difference in children’s understanding of numeracy as measured on the pre- and post-tests between the two groups. Although a difference was anticipated based on prior research, these findings were the same as Mattoon et al. ( 2015 ) who also reported small gains but no significant difference between their two groups in a 6-week long study. Despite the absence of significant gains between the two groups, this study provides evidence that using technology in this context did not deter or lessen children’s development of numeracy skills. This study adds to the work of Bebell et al. ( 2012 ) who reported that iPads do not hinder early learning of literacy. We can now conclude that iPads do not hinder early learning of numeracy as well as literacy. This is an important finding that will broaden the utility of iPads in the early years classroom. In summary, the use of mathematical apps on iPads slightly enhanced children’s learning of mathematics as shown by gains from the pre- to the post-test; however, the gains were not significant between groups.

What factors influence children’s use of interactive technology in a play-based learning environment?

Factors that influenced children’s use of interactive technology focused on (a) collaboration, (b) ability, (c) use of a stylus, (d) maturity, and (e) teachers’ skill level. A factor known to influence children’s use of interactive technology was their affinity for collaboration. Given that prior research documented how technology fostered a collaborative learning environment (Shifflet et al. 2012 ), it was not surprising that children naturally collaborated without any guidance to do so from the researcher. During the introduction phase of a new app, children naturally gravitated towards each other to share what was on their iPad as well as to help each other progress to the next level or game. This affinity for collaboration is an asset to learning mathematics that needs to be supported so that when children leave the play-based learning environment they are still drawn to helping each other with tasks in general but specifically, in the learning of mathematics.

Another observation focused on the impact of children’s prior mathematics ability and experience with apps. No research was found that examined the relationship between children’s mathematics ability and interaction with apps. However, Hung et al. ( 2015 ) reported that when children were challenged, they reported higher levels of engagement and satisfaction. Extending Hung et al.’s ( 2015 ) finding, it appears that children with stronger skills in mathematics were more apt to persevere and be engaged with the app. In contrast, weaker children were more apt to abandon the app or use a trial and error process to progress to the next level, in which case, the quality of their learning was questioned, as learning may be memorized rather than conceptual. Children’s ability level can be connected to attention span since apps that required greater concentration would be met with a shorter attention span. This short attention span appeared to be age appropriate considering the attention span for 4- to 5-year-olds is a maximum 6 to 7 min (i.e., chronological age + 1); although attention span for children playing or being socially engaged can exceed, these maximum times are typically reserved for formal instruction (Wesson 2011 ). Hence, challenging and less creative apps (e.g., Montessori Math) might be perceived more like a formal lesson whereas entertaining and creative apps with bling (e.g., Count-up-to-ten) may be perceived as play.

Further endorsing the need for more research in this area was the absence of research focusing on the use of a stylus versus the index finger to interact with iPads. Although children naturally gravitated towards using their index finger, we encouraged children to use the stylus to reinforce printing skills learned with a pencil. More research is needed to corroborate this practice.

The fact that children in this study gravitated towards apps that stimulated laughter through humorous animated characters or bursts of stars or sparkles confirmed our thoughts about their level of maturity and corresponding desire for play. Once children had been exposed to the new app each day, they were able to choose any app to play with for the remaining time. The outcome of children’s decision-making resulted in the selection of apps that were creative and fun in contrast to other apps that were more pedagogically accurate containing appropriate levels of difficulty and sequencing of questions. This finding needs further research to explore the extent to which this affinity for creative and fun apps continues through the elementary and primary grades.

The last factor that influenced children’s use of interactive technology was the teachers’ skill level and interest in implementing apps as curricular learning resources. As noted above, the teacher participating in this study could be described as a beginner in using interactive technology and her skill set was similar to what was previous documented as limited to downloading images for presentations (Public Broadcasting Service and Grunwald Associates 2009 , 2011 ). However, her interest, rather than ability, was the catalyst for implementing technology in her classroom and through opportunities for professional development as called for by other researchers (i.e., Simon et al. 2013 ); this teacher can now be described as experienced and innovative in her use of interactive technology in the classroom. Key to this transformation was providing professional development in a one-to-one session and in an as-needed basis.

With the advancement of interactive technology and more user-friendly touchable interfaces, the use of these devices in early years classrooms is not only suitable but also appropriate in preparing early years children for the technological world they will live in (Gordon and Williams Browne 2016 ). This study revealed that children using interactive technology in the form of mathematics apps as part of a play-based learning environment for mathematics had small gains in achievement as measured using a pre- and post-test. Although the gains in achievement were not significant between the control and intervention groups, learning using interactive technology did not lessen children’s opportunity to learn about numeracy concepts as children were observed collaborating and were highly engaged, particularly with apps that were creative. A longer experiment with a larger sample is needed to validate this finding.

Another important finding related to using interactive technology in a play-based learning environment was the need for guided direction in selecting quality apps that supported learning. When children were left to their own accord, they almost always selected apps or segments of apps that were high in entertainment value and low in educational value. Given the premise of play-based learning environments where play is situated in intentional and specific learning contexts that nurtures learning while providing children with independence to choose activities, it is important to select mathematical apps that are not only aligned with the curriculum but are also creative and fun and provide opportunities to learn. In these learning environments, pleasurable, entertaining play is encouraged in balance with other play-based activities that foster learning in specific domains such as numeracy. This finding was connected to children’s attention span which appeared to be dependent on the creativity of the app as well as the difficulty level of the app such that more creative apps held children’s attention spans longer but also the difficulty level influenced student engagement with apps. This finding corroborates the work of Couse and Chen ( 2010 ) who reported that engagement increased with age and by extension mathematics ability.

In sum, interactive technology in the form of iPads with mathematical apps promoted student collaboration and engagement. However there is still much to learn about the quality of apps and their impact on children’s learning, particularly when children are encouraged to make choices in a play-based learning environment.

Alade, F., Lauricella, A. R., Beaudoin-Ryan, L., & Wartella, E. (2016). Measuring with Murray: touchscreen technology and preschoolers’ STEM learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 62 , 433–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.080 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Almalki, S. (2016). Integrating quantitative and qualitative data in mixed methods research—Challenges and benefits. Journal of Education and Learning, 5 (3), 288–296. https://doi.org/10.5539/jel.v5n3p288 .

Baird, C., & Henninger, M. (2011). Serious play, serious problems: issues with ebook applications. Cosmopolitan Civil Societies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 3 (2), 1–17.

Google Scholar  

Bebell, D., Dorris, S., & Muir, M. (2012). Emerging results from the nation’s first kindergarten implementation of iPads. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/hackedu/Adv2014_ResearchSum120216.pdf

Bebell, D., & Pedulla, J. (2015). A quantitative investigation into the impacts of 1:1 iPads on early learners’ ELA and math achievement. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 14 , 191–215.

Bray, A., & Tangney, B. (2017). Technology usage in mathematics education research: A systematic review of recent trends. Computers & Education, 114, 255–273.

Chiong, C., & Shuler, C. (2010). Learning: is there an app for that? Investigations of young children’s usage and learning with mobile devices and apps. Retrieved from https://clalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/files/learningapps_final_110410.pdf .

Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2007). Effects of a preschool mathematics curriculum: Summative research on the building blocks project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38 (2), 136–163.

Couse, L., & Chen, D. (2010). A tablet computer for young children? Exploring viability for early childhood education. Journal of Research on Technology Education, 43 (1), 75–98.

Crompton, D., Burke, D., & Gregory, K. H. (2017). The use of mobile learning in PK-12 education: a systematic review. Computers and Education, 110 , 51–93.

Dejonckheere, P. J. N., Smitsman, A. W., Desoete, A., Haeck, B., Ghyselinck, K., Hillaert, K., & Coppenolle, K. (2015). Early math learning with tablet PCs: the role of action. European Journal of Psychology and Educational Studies, 2 (3), 79–87.

Department of Education, Early Learning & Culture of PE (2008). Kindergarten integrated curriculum document. Retrieved from http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/k_doc.pdf .

Dinehart, L. (2015). Handwriting in early childhood education: current research and future implications. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 15 (1), 97–118.

Dobler, B. (2012). Using iPads to promote literacy in the primary grades. Reading Today, 29 (3), 18.

Fesseha, E., & Pyle, A. (2016). Conceptualising play-based learning from kindergarten teachers’ perspectives. International Journal of Early Years Education, 24 (3), 361–377.

Flewitt, R., Messer, D., & Kucirkova, N. (2015). New directions for early literacy in a digital age: the iPad. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 15 (3), 289–310.

Gravetter, F. J., & Forzano, L. B. (2011). Research methods for the behavioral sciences . Belmont: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Gordon, A., & Williams Browne, K. (2016). Beginnings and Beyond: Foundations in early childhood education. place: Toronto, ON: Nelson.

Hubber, P. J., Outhwaite, L. A., Chigeda, A., McGrath, S., Hodgen, J., & Pitchford, N. J. (2016). Should touch screen tablets be used to improve educational outcomes in primary school children in developing countries? Frontiers in Psychology, 7 (839). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00839 .

Hung, C., Sun, J. C., & Yu, P. (2015). The benefits of a challenge: student motivation and flow experience in tablet-PC-game-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 23 (2), 172–190.

Hutchison, A., Beschorner, B., & Crawford-Schmidt, D. (2012). Exploring the use of iPad for literacy learning. The Reading Teacher, 66 (1), 15–23.

Hutchison, A., & Reinking, D. (2011). Teachers’ perceptions of integrating information and communication technologies into literacy instruction: a national survey in the U.S. Reading Research Quarterly, 46 (4), 308–329.

Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33 (7), 14–26.

Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2002). Impact of new information technologies on teachers and students. Education and Information Technologies, 7 , 369–376.

Kosko, K., & Ferdig, R. (2016). Effects of a tablet-based mathematics application for pre-school children. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 35 (1), 61–79.

Large, M. (2016). Interactive tech in the classroom; it’s all about engagement. Retrieved from http://edtechnology.co.uk/Article/interactive-tech-in-the-classroom-its-all-about-engagement

Loganathan, I. (2013). Recent trends: No-touch interfaces. In Web technology Retrieved from http://indhuit.blogspot.ca/2013/07/recent-trends-no-touch-interfaces.html .

Lu, Y., Ottenbreity-Leftwich, A., Ding, A., & Glazewski, K. (2017). Experienced iPad using early childhood teachers: practices in the one-to-one iPad classroom. Computers in the School: Interdisciplinary Journal of Practice, Theory, and Applied Research, 34 (2), 9–23.

Mattoon, C., Bates, A., Shifflet, R., Latham, N., & Ennis, S. (2015). Examining computational skills in pre-kindergarteners: the effects of traditional and digital manipulatives in a prekindergarten classroom. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 17 (1) Retrieved from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v17n1/mattoon.html .

Mishra, F., & Koehler, M. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: a framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108 , 1017–1054.

Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., & Sharples, M. (2004). Mobile technologies and learning. Futurelab, 11 Retrieved from https://lra.le.ac.uk/handle/2381/8132 .

National Association for Education of Young Children. (2012). Technology and young children. Retrieved from https://www.naeyc.org/resources/topics/technology-and-media/preschoolers-and-kindergartners .

Outhwaite, L. A., Guilford, A., & Pitchford, N. J. (2017). Closing the gap: Efficacy of a tablet intervention to support the development of early mathematics skills in UK primary school children. Computers & Education, 108 , 43–58.

Presser, A. L., Vahey, P., & Dominguez, X. (2015). Improving mathematics learning by integrating curricular activities with innovative and developmentally appropriate digital apps: findings from the next generation preschool math evaluation. In SREE Spring 2015 Conference .

Primavera, J., Wiederlight, P., & DiGiacomo, T. (2001). Technology access for low-income preschoolers: bridging the digital divide. Paper presented at the American Psychological Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco. Retireved from www.knowledgeadventure.com/jumpstartworld/_docs/ChildTechnology_White_Paper.pdf .

Public Broadcasting Service & Grunwald Associates. (2009). Deepening connections: teachers increasingly rely on media and technology. Retrieved from http://www.grunwald.com/pdfs/PBS-GRUNWALD_2011_ANNUAL_ED_TECH_STUDY.pdf .

Public Broadcasting Service & Grunwald Associates. (2011). Lack of technology infrastructure in classrooms. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/about/blogs/news/pbs-and-grunwald-national-research-indicates-lack-of-technology-infrastructure-in-classrooms/ .

Reeves, J. L., Gunter, G. A., & Lacey, C. (2017). Mobile learning in pre-kindergarten: Using student feedback to inform practice. Educational Technology & Society, 20 (1), 37–44.

Ritchie, R. (2014). History of the iPad (original): Apple makes the tablet magical and revolutionary. Retrieved from http://www.imore.com/history-ipad-2010

Shifflet, R., Toledo, C., & Mattoon, C. (2012). Touch tablet surprises: a preschool teacher’s story. Young Children, 67 (3), 36–41.

Simon, F., Nemeth, K., & McManis, D. (2013). Technology in ECE classrooms: Results of a new survey and implications for the field. Exchange, 35 (5), 68–75. Retrieved from http://echd430-f13-love.wikispaces.umb.edu/file/view/TechnologyECEclassrooms.pdf .

Steglin, D. A. (2005). Making the case for play policy: research-based reasons to support play-based environments. Young Children, 60 (2), 76–86.

Stubbe, H., Badri, A., Telford, R., van der Hulst, A., & van Joolingen, W. (2016). Electronic Journal of eLearning, 14 (2), 136–149.

Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2012). Using Multivariate Statistics, 6th edition. Boston: Pearson.

Takac, Z. K., Swart, E. K., & Bus, A. G. (2015). Benefits and pitfalls of multimedia and interactive features in technology-enhanced storybooks: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 85 (4), 698–739.

Tsitouridou, M., & Vryzas, K. (2003). Early childhood teachers’ attitudes towards computer and information technology: the case for Greece. Information Technology in Childhood Annual, 1 , 187–207.

Vanderloo, L. (2014). Screen viewing among preschoolers in childcare: A systematic review, BMC Paediatrics Retrieved February 12, 2016, from http://bmcpediatr.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2431-14-205 .

Warmoth, B. (2013). iPads in education: education dive’s ultimate guide. Retrieved from http://www.educationdive.com/news/ipads-in-education-education-dives-ultimate-guide/144936/

Weinschenk, S. (2011). The secret to designing an intuitive UX: psychology concepts underlying good user experience and usability. Retrieved from http://uxmag.com/articles/the-secret-to-designing-an-intuitive-user-experience

Wesson, K. (2011). Attention span revisited. In Science master Retrieved from http://sciencemaster77.blogspot.ca/2011/01/attention-spans-revisited.html .

Download references

This study was supported by a small research grant from the author’s university.

Availability of data and materials

The data set generated and analyzed during the current study is not publicly available because our university ethics stipulate that data is to be stored on secured, password-protected computers for a 5-year period, and then, it is permanently destroyed. However, inquiries about aspects of the data can be addressed to the corresponding author.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Prince Edward Island, 550 University Avenue, Charlottetown, PE, C1A 3C2, Canada

Tess Miller

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

I am the sole author of this manuscript and was responsible for data collection, analysis, and writing. I have approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tess Miller .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This study was approved by the institutional Research Ethics Board for research involving human subjects (approval no. 6005882). Written consent to participate was obtained from the teacher and parents/guardians of the students involved in the study.

Consent for publication

The teacher involved in the study signed a consent form to participate in the study and publish findings. Consent for the children to participate in the study and publish findings was obtained through their parents/legal guardian, and the study was orally explained to the children. Participant names or other identifying characteristics were not included in the manuscript.

Competing interests

The author declares that she has no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Miller, T. Developing numeracy skills using interactive technology in a play-based learning environment. IJ STEM Ed 5 , 39 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0135-2

Download citation

Received : 29 May 2018

Accepted : 17 September 2018

Published : 11 October 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0135-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Interactive technology
• Early learning
• Mathematics
• Mobile learning device play-based learning