, Volume 59, Issue 2, pp 32–39 | Cite as

Using Math Apps for Improving Student Learning: An Exploratory Study in an Inclusive Fourth Grade Classroom

  • Meilan Zhang
  • Robert P. Trussell
  • Benjamin Gallegos
  • Rasmiyeh R. Asam


Recent years have seen a quick expansion of tablet computers in households and schools. One of the educational affordances of tablet computers is using math apps to engage students in mathematics learning. However, given the short history of the mobile devices, little research exists on the effectiveness of math apps, particularly for struggling students. To fill in the gap, an exploratory study was conducted in an inclusive fourth grade classroom, in which about half of the students were either at-risk or had disabilities. The students used three math apps that employed different scaffolding strategies to support learning of decimals and multiplication. Pre- and post-tests showed that use of the math apps improved student learning in mathematics and reduced the achievement gap between struggling students and typical students. More studies should be conducted to identify effective math apps.


Elementary school mathematics Math Apps Tablet Computers Number Operations 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Apple Press. (2013, May 16). Apple’s App Store marks historic 50 billionth download. Retrieved from
  2. Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D.-S. (2002). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to lowachieving students. The Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51-73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barringer, M.-D., Pohlman, C., & Robinson, M. (2010). Schools for all kinds of minds: Boosting student success by embracing learning variation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brosvic, G. M., Dihoff, R. E., Epstein, M. L., & Cook, M. L. (2006). Feedback facilitates the acquisition and retention of numerical fact series by elementary school students with mathematics learning disabilities. Psychological Record, 56(1), 35.Google Scholar
  5. Burns, M. K., Kanive, R., & DeGrande, M. (2012). Effect of a computer-delivered math fact intervention as a supplemental intervention for math in third and fourth grades. Remedial and Special Education, 33(3), 184-191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carpenter, T. P., Levi, L., Berman, P., & Pligge, M. (2005). Developing algebraic reasoning in the elementary school. In T. A. Romberg, T. P. Carpenter & F. Dremock (Eds.), Understanding mathematics and science matters (pp. 81-98). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Chang, W.-L., Yuan, Y., Lee, C.-Y., Chen, M.-H., & Huang, W.-G. (2013). Using Magic Board as a teaching aid in third grader learning of area concepts. Educational Technology & Society, 16(2), 163-173.Google Scholar
  8. Cheung, A., & Slavin, R. E. (2013). The effectiveness of educational technology applications on mathematics achievement in K-12 classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 9, 88-113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Geist, E. A. (2012). A qualitative examination of two yearolds interaction with tablet based interactive technology. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 39(1), 26-35.Google Scholar
  10. Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77, 81-112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Haydon, T., Hawkins, R., Denune, H., Kimener, L., McCoy, D., & Basham, J. (2012). A comparison of iPads and worksheets on math skills of high school students with emotional disturbance. Behavioral Disorders, 37(4), 232-243.Google Scholar
  12. Hill, D. (2008, October 31). Android Market, Unleashed. Retrieved from
  13. iDevBooks. (2012). Long Multiplication (Version 2.3) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from
  14. Kirby, K. D. d. (2013, April). The development of an idealized number line: Differentiating physical inscription from mathematical object. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  15. Li, Q., & Ma, X. (2010). A meta-analysis of the effects of computer technology on school students’ mathematics learning. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 215-243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Martinie, S. (2013, April). Decimal fractions: An important point. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
  17. Motion Math. (2012). Motion Math: Zoom Pro (Version 1.0) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from
  18. National Center for Education Statistics. (2013). National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), various years, 1990-2013 Mathematics Assessments. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.Google Scholar
  19. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for mathematics education. Reston: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  20. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, D. C.: Authors.Google Scholar
  21. Paek, S., Saravanos, A., & Black, J. B. (2012, April). Studying the impact of input method on the modality principle. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  22. Peluso, D. C. C. (2012). The fast-paced iPad revolution: Can educators stay up to date and relevant about these ubiquitous devices? British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), E125-E127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pilli, O., & Aksu, M. (2013). The effects of computer-assisted instruction on the achievement, attitudes and retention of fourth grade mathematics students in North Cyprus. Computers & Education, 62(0), 62-71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rathouz, M. M. (2011). Making sense of decimal multiplication. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 16(7), 430-437.Google Scholar
  25. Saxe, G. B. (2012, April). Learning mathematics through representations: Overview. Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  26. Segal, A. (2011). Do gestural interfaces promote thinking? Embodied interaction: Congruent gestures and direct touch promote performance in math. Unpublished dissertation, Columbia University, New York.Google Scholar
  27. Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 427-515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steckroth, J. J. (2010). From calculating to calculus. Teaching Children Mathematics, 16(5), 292-299.Google Scholar
  29. StudyPad. (2012). 4th Grade Math: Splash Math WorksheetsGoogle Scholar
  30. Game for Kids (Version 2.4.0) [Mobile application software]. Retrieved from
  31. Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C. S., & Roberts, G. (2012). Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading and mathematics: A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.Google Scholar
  32. Yeh, S. S. (2010). The cost effectiveness of 22 approaches for raising student achievement. Journal of Education Finance, 36(1), 38-75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zisimopoulos, D. A. (2010). Enhancing multiplication performance in students with moderate intellectual disabilities using Pegword mnemonics paired with a picture fading technique. Journal of Behavioral Education, 19(2), 117-133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association for Educational Communications and Technology 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Meilan Zhang
    • 1
  • Robert P. Trussell
    • 1
  • Benjamin Gallegos
    • 1
  • Rasmiyeh R. Asam
    • 1
  1. 1.University of TexasEl PasoUSA

Personalised recommendations