, Volume 48, Issue 7, pp 1065–1078 | Cite as

Socio-economic status differences in mathematics accuracy, strategy use, and profiles in the early years of schooling

  • Young-Sun Lee
  • Yoon Soo Park
  • Herbert Ginsburg
Original Article


Prior research has shown that students from low socio-economic status (SES) families are at greater risk for mathematics education and achievement, and these factors in turn, may impact their long-term well-being. This paper investigates differences in mathematics achievement by SES, using clinical interview (CI). Students in Kindergarten to Grade 3 were studied using cross-sectional and longitudinal data to examine differences in mathematics accuracy, strategy use, and profiles. Results indicate minor differences in overall accuracy and in overall profile scores. At the subtest level, differences were found for accuracy for all grade levels. There were significant differences in mathematics performance by SES. In particular, larger differences by SES were found in mathematics accuracy than in sensible strategy use. For profile scores, significant differences were found by SES using cross sectional data; moreover, students’ profile scores differed by subtests and sections of the CI. Longitudinal data analysis indicated significant changes in students’ profile scores; however, there were no differences in profile scores by SES over time. Curricular and assessment implications are discussed, with directions for future research.


Clinical interview SES differences Early mathematics assessment 

Supplementary material

11858_2016_783_MOESM1_ESM.docx (420 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 419 kb)


  1. Arias, C. A., Schorr, R. Y., & Warner, L. B. (2010). Using the clinical interview method to examine children’s mathematical thinking. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Denver, CO.Google Scholar
  2. Caro, D. H. (2009). Socio-economic status and academic achievement tracjectories from childhood to adolescence. Canadian Journal of Education, 32(3), 558–590.Google Scholar
  3. Clement, J. (2000). Analysis of clinical interviews: Foundations and model viability. In A. E. Kelly & R. A. Lesh (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 547–589). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
  4. Denton, K., & West, J. (2002). Children’s reading and mathematics achievement in kindergarten and first grade. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.Google Scholar
  5. diSessa, A. A. (2007). An interactional analysis of clinical interviewing. Cognition and Instruction, 25(4), 523–565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C., Klebanov, P., & Japel, C. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1428–1446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Geary, D. C., Hoard, M. K., Byrd-Craven, J., & DeSoto, M. C. (2004). Strategy choices in simple and complex addition: contributions of working memory and counting knowledge for children with mathematical disability. Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 121–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ginsburg, H. P., & Pappas, S. (2004). SES, ethnic, and gender differences in young children’s informal addition and subtraction: a clinical interview investigation. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 171–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ginsburg, H. P., Pappas, S., Lee, Y.-S., & Chiong, C. (2011). How did you get that answer? Computer assessments of young children’s mathematical minds in mCLASS math. In P. E. Noyce & D. T. Hickey (Eds.), New frontiers in formative assessment (pp. 49–67). Cambridge: Harvard Education Press.Google Scholar
  10. Ginsburg, H. P., Pappas, S., & Seo, K.-H. (2001). Everyday mathematical knowledge: Asking young children what is developmentally appropriate. In S. L. Golbeck (Ed.), Psychological perspectives on early childhood education: Reframing dilemmas in research and practice (pp. 181–219). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  11. Ginsburg, H. P., & Russell, R. L. (1981). Social class and racial influences on early mathematical thinking. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 46(Serial No. 193, No. 6).Google Scholar
  12. Graham, T. A., Nash, C., & Paul, K. (1997). Young children’s exposure to mathematics: the child care context. Early Childhood Education Journal, 25(1), 31–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harwell, M., & LeBeau, B. (2010). Student eligibility for a free lunch as an SES measure in education research. Educational Researcher, 39(2), 120–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harwell, M. R., Maeda, Y., & Lee, K. (2004). Replicating and extending Whites (1982) Meta-analysis of the relationship between SES and student achievement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  15. Heckman, J. J. (2000). Policies to foster human capital. Research in Economics, 54(1), 3–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hughes, M. (1986). Children and number: Difficulties in learning mathematics. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Hunting, R. P. (1997). Clinical interview methods in mathematics education research and practice. Journal of Mahtematical Behavior, 16(2), 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hyson, M., & Woods, T. A. (2014). Practices, Knowledge and Beliefs about Professional Development. In H. P. Ginsburg, M. Hyson, & T. A. Woods (Eds.), Preparing Early Childhood Educators to Teach Math: Professional Development that Works (pp. 29–51). Baltimore: Brooks Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Jordan, N. C., Glutting, J., Ramineni, C., & Watkins, M. W. (2010). Validating a number sense screening tool for use in Kindergarten and First Grade: prediction of mathematics proficiency in Third Grade. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 181–195.Google Scholar
  20. Jordan, N. C., Huttenlocher, J., & Levine, S. C. (1992). Differential calculation abilities in young children from middle- and low-income families. Developmental Psychology, 28, 644–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jordan, N. C., Huttenlocher, L., & Levine, S. C. (1994). Assessing early arithmetic abilities: effects of verbal and nonverbal response types on the calculation performance of middle- and low-income children. Learning and Individual Differences, 6, 413–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., Locuniak, M. N., & Ramineni, C. (2007). Predicting first grade math achievement from developmental number sense trajectories. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 22(1), 36–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., Olah, L. N., & Locuniak, M. N. (2006). Number sense growth in Kindergarten: a longitudinal investigation of children at risk for mathematics difficulties. Child Development, 77(1), 153–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., Ramineni, C., & Locuniak, M. N. (2008). Development of number combination skill in the early school years: when do fingers help? Developmental science, 11(5), 662–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kerkman, D. D., & Siegler, R. S. (1993). Individual differences and adaptive flexibility in lower-income children’s strategy choices. Learning and Individual Differences, 5(2), 113–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kirk, G. E., Hunt, J. M., & Volkmar, F. (1975). Social class and preschool language skill: V. Cognitive and semantic mastery of number. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 93, 131–153.Google Scholar
  27. Klein, J. S., & Bisanz, J. (2000). Preschoolers doing arithmetic: the concepts are willing but the working memory is weak. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54(2), 105–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Klibanoff, R. S., Levine, S. C., Huttenlocher, J., Vasilyeva, M., & Hedges, L. V. (2006). Preschool children’s mathematical knowledge: the effect of teacher “math talk”. Developmental Psychology, 42(1), 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kuhn, D. (2000). Metacognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5), 178–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to the education debt: understanding achievement in U.S. Schools. Educational Researcher, 35(7), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: reversing the progress toward equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee, J.-S., & Bowen, N. K. (2006). Parent involvement, cultural capital, and the achievement gap among elementary school children. American Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 193–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Love, J. M., & Xue, Y. (2010). How early care and education programs 0-5 prepare children for Kindergarten: Is it enough? Paper presented at the Head Start’s 10th National Research Conference. DC: Washingon.Google Scholar
  34. Lubienski, S. T., & Lubienski, C. (2006). School sector and academic achievement: a multilevel analysis of NAEP mathematics data. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 651–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Maher, C. A., & Sigley, R. (2014). Task-based interviews in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 579–582). Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  36. Pappas, S., Ginsburg, H. P., & Jiang, M. (2003). SES differences in young children’s metacognition in the context of mathematical problem solving. Cognitive Development, 18(3), 431–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Saxe, G. B., Guberman, S. R., & Gearhart, M. (1987). Social processes in early number development. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 52(2, Serial No. 216).Google Scholar
  38. Siegler, R. S. (1988). Individual differences in strategy choices: good students, not-so-good students, and perfectionists. Child Development, 59, 833–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sirin, S. R. (2005). Socioeconomic status and academic achievement: a meta-analytic review of research. Review of Educational Research, 75, 417–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Starkey, P., & Klein, A. (1992). Economic and cultural influences on early mathematical development. In F. L. Parker, R. Robinson, S. Sombrano, C. Piotrowski, J. Hagen, S. Randolph, & A. Baker (Eds.), New directions in child and family research: Shaping Head Start in the 90s (pp. 440–443). New York: National Council of Jewish Women.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© FIZ Karlsruhe 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Young-Sun Lee
    • 1
  • Yoon Soo Park
    • 1
  • Herbert Ginsburg
    • 1
  1. 1.Teachers CollegeColumbia UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations