Subject Knowledge in Grade 3 After an Inclusive Mathematics Intervention in Preschool

Introduction

Of all countries participating in PISA 2003-2012, Sweden had a high increase of low-performing students in mathematics. In PISA 2015 the trend seemed to be broken for Sweden but the number of low-performing students is still high (OECD, 2016). Students’ early education have been shown to affect the performance in later years and early interventions have in various studies shown to be crucial for preventing students at-risk from becoming low-performing students (e.g., Sterner, 2015; Aunio, Heiskari, Van Luit & Vuorio, 2014; Holmes & Dowker, 2013). However, studies of long-term effect of early interventions in school remain few and inconclusive (Mononen, Aunio, Koponen, & Aro, 2014). Therefore, the need for research on methods for preventing students from becoming low performing is still high.

However, results suggest that using the whole-class teaching programme Think, Reason and Count (TRC by Sterner, Helenius & Wallby, 2014) during preschool-class (at age 6) positively affects at-risk-students’ mathematical performance in Grade 3 (at age 9) (Vennberg & Norqvist, 2018). At-risk-students refer both to students already in mathematical difficulties and students at-risk of becoming low-performing students or facing mathematical difficulties. The results show that TRC-students performed better and that the performance gap for the students at-risk were reduced. Vennberg & Norqvist (2018) suggest that TRC may be successful in preventing future mathematical difficulties. That indication is in line with results suggested by other studies in this field (e.g., Duncan, Dowsett, Claessens, Magnusson & Huston, et al., 2007; McIntosh, 2008; Morgan, Farkas & Wu, 2011; Nunes, Bryant, Sylva & Barros, 2011). In addition, improvement among students at-risk using TRC had no negative effect on students who performed at higher levels. In fact, the results suggested that also students at higher performance levels, might benefit from following TRC (Vennberg & Norqvist, 2018).

To understand why TRC-students perform better than their peers at age 9 and given the lack of longitudinal studies of early interventions and ways to help students at-risk to succeed in mathematics, questions arise regarding which key components and within which areas of mathematics the students were helped when using TRC. Therefore, a detailed analysis of students tests results on Swedish national test in grade 3 (NT) in mathematics can help explain the differences in performance between and within groups of at-risk and not-at-risk students and identify areas of mathematics that can help students at-risk avoid low-performance in mathematics later in school.

To reveal potential differences in areas of mathematics between the TRC-group and the control group and understand the correspondence to TRC, three questions have guided this study.

Q1: What differences can be seen in a comparison of the results of the subtests of the national test (NT) between the TRC-group and the control group, and what characterizes the group of at-risk-students in this comparison?

Q2: In which areas of mathematics are differences in the subtests’ results visible, and what characterises the group of at-risk-students in this comparison?

Q3: In what way does the mathematical content of TRC corresponded to the content and results of the subtests?

Background

In an international context, the Swedish preschool-class (6 years old) is a unique educational form. Preschool-class has a special position in the Swedish school system and are not to be seen as an extra school year. From school year 2018/2019 preschool-class is included in compulsory education but continues to be a separate form of schooling within the school system (Prop. 2017/18:9). The purpose of the preschool-class is to transition students from informal learning in preschool (1-5 years old) to formal learning in school (7-15 years old; Grade 1-9) and to link the two different school forms (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2001).