1. Girls and STEM: Improved Math Performance and Confidence through Intensive Word-Problem Intervention
Katherine A. Berry and Sarah R. Powell
The University of Texas at Austin

2. Thank You! Teachers and students in Austin, Texas
Graduate research assistants at The University of Texas at Austin

3. Abstract
Fewer girls than boys participate in STEM and pursue STEM careers. To increase girls’ participation and performance in math, we provided a 16-week word-problem intervention to third-grade students with math difficulty. Girls who received the intervention outperformed students in the control condition and showed significantly higher growth than boys who received the intervention.

4. Introductions What is your name/job title?
What grade/subjects do you teach?
How many years have you been teaching math?
How do you teach students to solve word problems?
Have you noticed differences in how boys and girls solve math word problems? If so, please describe.

5. Why Girls? Future job growth relies heavily on STEM
Number of girls pursuing STEM is limited
Girls and math:
Are outnumbered by boys
Sometimes perform lower on math tests than boys in elementary school
Report less self-confidence and aspiration than boys
(Else-Quest, Hyde, & Lynn, 2010; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2002)

6. Why Word Problems?
Embedded into majority of items on high-stakes tests
Needed to demonstrate successful math competency
Prove challenging for students with math difficulty (MD)
Include multiple steps to develop a problem solution
Provide entry point for enhancing math performance
(Fuchs & Fuchs, 2002; Jordan, Hanich, & Kaplan, 2003)

7. Word Problems at Grade 3

8. Why Girls and Word Problems?
Performance gap widens for girls with MD
Sometimes poorer performance on problem-solving
Difficulty selecting operations to solve word problems
Misuse of irrelevant information in word problems
Evidence-based math interventions broaden STEM pipeline
(Dasgupta & Stout, 2014 ; Jitendra et al., 2013)

9. Purpose
To investigate the efficacy of a word-problem intervention for third-grade students with math difficulty.
To examine if math performance differences exist between girls and boys who participated in the intervention and who did not participate in the intervention.

10. Research Questions
Does an intensive word-problem intervention improve the word-problem performance of third-grade students with math difficulty?
Do girls with math difficulty who receive the intervention outperform girls with math difficulty who do not receive the intervention?
Do girls with math difficulty who receive the intervention demonstrate improved performance over boys who receive the intervention?

11. Hypotheses
The intensive word-problem intervention will improve the word-problem performance of third-grade students with math difficulty.
Girls with math difficulty who receive the intervention will outperform girls with math difficulty who do not receive the intervention.
Girls with math difficulty who receive the intervention will demonstrate improved performance over boys who receive the intervention.

12. Research Design Randomized control trial (Year 1 of 4 data; 2015-2016)
University IRB approval
1,111 third-graders recruited and screened from 14 schools
83 third-graders identified with MD (<13th percentile)
Identified students randomly assigned to one of 2 groups
Students pre-/post-tested (cognitive/mathematical measures)
Word-Problem Intervention Group
Business-as-Usual Comparison Group
Intervention with schema instruction
No intervention
16 weeks of individualized tutoring
Teacher implemented math lessons
n = 40
n = 43
M = 18; F = 22
M = 21; F = 22

13. Participating Schools
14 schools in diverse, urban district
Serve elementary students, pre-K-8
Offer free and reduced meals (FARMS)
1 of 14 is dual language (2-way Spanish)
1 of 14 is dual language (2-way Vietnamese)
7 of 14 are dual language (1-way Spanish)

14. Participants Identified as third-graders with MD
Scored <13th percentile on a word-problem measure
Obtained parental consent
Represent diverse backgrounds
Minority students from low SES backgrounds
Students identified with disabilities

15. Schema Instruction Why Schemas?
Identify a word problem as belonging to a problem type
Use a specific solution strategy to solve problem
Why Schemas?
Help students categorize to understand novel problems
Influence whether students answer problems correctly
Prove more effective than other techniques
For example, key words or mnemonic devices
(Cooper & Sweller, 1987; Fuchs, Fuchs, & Prentice, 2004; Fuchs et al., 2006; Fuchs et al., 2008; Ng & Lee, 2009; Zhang & Zin, 2012)

16. Schemas Total Difference Change Putting parts together
Comparing two amounts
Change
An amount that increases or decreases

20. Pirate Math Intervention
16 weeks
48 one-on-one lessons
3 times/wk; 30 min sessions
Implemented by trained master’s and doctoral candidates
Fidelity data collected on > 20% of sessions
In-person supervisory observations
Analysis of audio-recorded sessions
Pirate Math session activities:
Math Fact Flashcards
Equation Quest
Buccaneer Problems
Shipshape Sorting
Jolly Roger Review

21. Math Fact Flashcards

22. Equation Quest

23. Buccaneer Problems

24. Buccaneer Problems

25. Buccaneer Problems

26. Buccaneer Problems

27. Shipshape Sorting

28. Jolly Roger Review

29. Jolly Roger Review

30. Average Gain: All Students

31. Average Gain: Girls Only

32. Average Gain: Girls versus Boys

33. Effect Sizes

34. Discussion Extends previous research on schemas and problem solving
Provides justification for the use of schemas
Confirms importance of teaching students to use schemas
Validates need for explicit, intensive instruction
Benefitted girls slightly more than boys
Improved math reasoning skills through schema instruction
Increased word-problem competency and confidence
Greater access to STEM subjects
Holds implications for teacher training
Informs curriculum development
(Fuchs & Fuchs, 2002; Jordan & Hanich, 2000)

35. Limitations School and teacher scheduling Student absences Testing
Time restrictions
English proficiency

36. Questions Kate Berry kberry@austin.utexas.edu
Sarah R. Powell:
@sarahpowellphd