1. A Scale to Measure Mathematical Resilience in Year 1 Children
Katie Baker
Supervisory Team: Julia Carroll, Emma Vardy, Donna-Lynn Shepherd, Clare Wood

2. What I’m going to talk about:
Why I developed the scale
The stages of scale development
Worrying insights
Some statistics on MR in young children

3. Why a scale for Year 1? Why do children have differing levels of MR?
When do differences in MR first begin to show themselves?
Can we stop these differences from developing?
What contributes to the development of MR?
Aim to work with parents on developing MR.

4. Stages of Scale Development: Adaptation of the Kooken et al Scale
Development and Validation of the Mathematical Resilience Scale (2015)
Measurement and Evaluation in Counselling and Development Kooken, J.; Welsh, M.; McCoach, D.; Johnston –Wilder, S.; Lee, C
Math courses are very helpful no matter what I decide to study.
Maths will help me when I grow up.
Good mathematicians experience difficulties when solving problems.
Children who are good at maths find some of the questions hard.
Everyone’s math ability is determined at birth.
You are born good or bad at maths.

5. Stages of Scale Development: Adaptation of the response options
Thumbs up and down scale

6. Stages of Scale Development: Cognitive Interviewing
Concurrent Verbal Probing
Comprehension/interpretation probes – e.g. What do the words ‘in a good maths group’ mean to you?
Paraphrasing – Participants were asked to put the item into their own words.
General Probes a)Why did you choose that answer
b) Was that easy or difficult to answer?
c) Did you understand what that meant?
Caspar, R.A.; Lessler, J.T.; Willis, G.B. (1999) Cognitive Interviewing: A How to Guide

7. Stages of Scale Development: Is the scale reliable?
15 items retained.
Cronbach’s Alpha (measure of how closely connected items are) = .775
(values >.7 acceptable)

8. Stages of Scale Development: Is the scale valid over time?
Between 4 and 8 weeks later
Wilcoxan Signed Rank Test
No significant difference in the Scale Total.

9. Worrying Insights
What maths is
Can you get better at maths?

10. Thoughts for the Future
Findings and
Thoughts for the Future

11. Average MR Percentages by Level
Significant effect of group on MR, F(3,217)=4.86, p = .003, ω = .05
Post hoc tests revealed that those who were Exceeding expectations had significantly higher MR than all other groups .

12. Average Value Percentages by Level
There was no significant effect of group on Value, F(3,217)= 1.181, p = .318

13. Average Struggle Percentages by Level
Significant effect of group on belief in Struggle, F(3,217)=3.465, p = .017, ω = .03
Post hoc tests revealed that those who were working At expectations had significantly lower belief in Struggle than those who were Exceeding expectations.

14. Average Growth Percentages by Level
Significant effect of group on belief in Growth, F(3,217)=5.513, p = .001, ω = .06
Post hoc tests revealed that those who were Exceeding expectations had significantly higher belief in Growth than all other groups and At expectations than Below.

15. Schools Average Growth Scores against KS2 Sats 2016

16. Average Percentages by Gender
No statistically significant effect of gender was found on the total MR score or any of the subscales.

17. My Details