Abstract:

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate whether Concrete-Representational-Abstract (CRA) teaching practices adopted in teaching mathematical skills to individuals with special needs were evidence-based. Method: In this study, the analysis processes of the studies published in national and international sources between 1980 and 2020 were completed in line with descriptive analysis standards and standards for being evidence-based. As a result of the first search, a total of 52 studies were reached. Of these studies, 21 studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in the descriptive analysis process. Afterward, these studies were evaluated methodologically by considering the quality indicators for single-subject research designs. Seventeen studies that met all the quality indicators were included in the visual and meta-analysis process. Findings: According to the descriptive analysis results, it was observed that studies were mostly conducted between 2011 and 2019 and were often carried out on children with specific learning disabilities. Concerning methodological characteristics, it was seen that the multiple probe design across participants was frequently used as the research design, and subtraction with regrouping problem-solving skills in the field of problem-solving and multiplication skills in the field of four operations skills were included as dependent variables. The CRA strategy is observed to be often presented by the direct instruction method and supported by the RENAME strategy. Graphical analysis was used in all the studies reviewed. However, statistical analyses were not included in all studies. When the findings regarding evidence-based evaluation were examined, a positive effect was observed in 16 out of 17 studies meeting all the quality indicators. In meta-analysis studies, the results of PND and Tau-U effect size analysis are detailed under the Results heading. Discussion: These results demonstrate that CRA instruction is an evidence-based practice. The results obtained were discussed in line with the literature, and recommendations were made to researchers and intervention agents.

Keywords: