Seethaler and Fuchs (2010) administered a single proficiency measure, a magnitude comparison (Chard et al.
Desoete, Ceulemans, Roeyers, & Huylebroeck, 2009; Geary, 2004) observe that, in addition to problems with magnitude comparison, counting strategies, and computational strategies, these students often display deficits in working memory (Geary, Hoard, Byrd-Craven, Nugent, & Numtee, 2007; Swanson & Beebe-Frankenberger, 2004) and problems with visual-spatial memory and elaboration (e.
Both of these are far more comprehensive than measures of one component of number sense, such as magnitude comparison.
TABLE 1 Predictive Validity of Screening Measures for the Primary Grades Study Screening Measure (a) Grade Nh Magnitude Comparison Baglici, Codding, & Test of Early K 61 Tryon (2010) Numeracy (TEN).
Berch (2005) captures the complexities of articulating a working definition of number sense, remarking, "Possessing number sense ostensibly permits one to achieve everything from understanding the meaning of numbers to developing strategies for solving complex math problems; from making simple magnitude comparisons to inventing procedures for conducting numerical operations" (p.
standard deviation; TEMI-PM = Texas Early Mathematics Inventories-Progress Monitoring; MC = Magnitude Comparisons
subtest; PV = Place Value subtest; ASC = Addition/Subtraction Combinations subtest; NS = Number Sequences subtest; TS = Total Score; TEMI-O = Texas Early Mathematics Inventories-Outcome; MPS = Mathematics Problem Solving subtest; MComp = Mathematics Computation subtest.