# Effects of the AMPPS One-on-One Mathematics Intervention on Students’ Complex Computation, Word-Problem Solving, and Math Self-Concept

## TL;DR

This study examines how the AMPPS math intervention affects students' complex computation, word-problem solving, and math self-concept.

## Contribution

The study evaluates the AMPPS intervention using a multiple-baseline design and explores its effects on multiple math skills and self-concept.

## Key findings

- AMPPS showed mixed results, with limited effects on computation skills but some improvement in word-problem solving.
- Supplemental analyses suggested all participants benefited from the intervention.
- The study highlights the need for replication to understand the intervention's generalizability.

## Abstract

Despite consensus in the mathematics education literature regarding the mutually dependent components of math proficiency, as well as the importance of their development, most elementary-aged students in the United States demonstrate a lack of proficiency in math according to national assessment data. Whole number knowledge, which includes skills in computation and word-problem solving, is understood to be a critical foundation for the development of later math skills. This study used a multiple-baseline experimental design to evaluate the impacts of an evidence-based mathematics intervention, Accelerating Mathematics Performance with Practice Strategies (AMPPS), on third- through fifth-grade students’ skills with complex computation, as well as on their word-problem-solving performance. Furthermore, we evaluated effects on students’ math self-concept. Five students identified to have difficulties in math received AMPPS in a one-on-one, in-person format. The results of the study were mixed. For example, when using visual analyses as our primary analytic method, these analyses did not show robust intervention effects on students’ computation skills but did show at least some improvement for most students’ word-problem-solving skills. Additionally, supplemental analyses comparing student growth to national and school-based norms suggested that all participants seemed to benefit from the intervention, but these analyses were not intended to examine experimental causality. Despite study limitations and a lower than optimal number of AMPPS sessions (dosage) provided to students, the present study offers several directions for future research, as well as possible implications for practitioners regarding intervention selection, intensity, and evaluation. The findings will also be discussed in the context of conducting systematic replication studies, which are essential for understanding the generality of a given phenomenon (e.g., an effect of a school-based intervention) across a wide range of situations and conditions.