Week 4: Dyscalculia Flashcards
(23 cards)
Are all areas of mathematics impacted? (Roulstone et al., 2024)
group differences are larger for open-ended than MCQ’s.
Estimated of prevalence:
- dyscalculia: 3.6-6.5% (Butterworth, 2010)
- similar to dyslexia, between 3.5-6.5% (von Aster & Shalev, 2007)
5.7% (based on the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria; Morsanyi et al., 2018
Some issues around diagnosis (aka why different studies of prevalence say different things)
- researchers use their own diagnostic methods (usually, based on simple psychometric cut-offs – cf., Mammarella et al., 2021) – it is difficult to compare results from different studies
dyscalculia is notoriously underdiagnosed in the UK and in other countries; in the UK, dyslexia is about 100 times more likely to be diagnosed (e.g., Morsanyi et al., 2018)
why is diagnosing dyscalculia important?
- with no official diagnosis, students are not eligible for specialist support, reasonable adjustments or any recognition of their disability
- because this group does not appear in official statistics, there are no specific government-funded programmes aimed at supporting them
- once pupils are officially diagnosed, they can meet and share their experiences. This could lead to improved self-esteem, and a potential to learn about effective intervention methods
- dyscalculia is often associated with anxiety and depression, and these problems may be alleviated if students feel part of a dyscalculic community
increased diagnosis rates could accelerate research into the remediation and, potentially, the prevention of dyscalculia
Are there gender differences?
Whilst research suggests specific learning disabilities are more common in males, no info is given about dyscalculia (according to DSM-5)
* Most studies on dyscalculia report no gender differences (e.g., Desoete, et al., 2004; Devine et al., 2013; Gross-Tsur et al., 1996; Hein et al., 2000; Koumoula et al., 2004; Lewis et al., 1994; Mazzocco & Myers, 2003) * In a UK population-based study, we found an equal proportion of male and female pupils with dyscalculia (i.e., 6% of male pupils and 5.5%; Morsanyi et al., 2018) * The proportion of male and female students with extremely high maths performance (upper 5-6% of the population) also did not differ (Morsanyi et al., 2018)
Is dyscalculia a specific condition?
- Morsanyi et al. (2018): 81% of children with dyscalculia had some kind of co-occurring condition
- Some examples:
○ 45.3% had general cognitive and learning difficulties (7 times more likely than in children without dyscalculia)
○ 11.5% had speech and language difficulties (5 times more likely than in children without dyscalculia)
○ 5.6% had dyslexia (1.3 times higher than in children without dyscalculia)
- Some examples:
The modularity of mind (Fodor, 1983)
- Domain-specificity
- Mandatory operation
- Limited central accessibility
- Fast processing
- Informational encapsulation (can function independently of other cognitive systems)
- ‘Shallow’ outputs (i.e., the output is very simple)
- Fixed neural architecture
- Characteristic and specific breakdown patterns
Characteristic ontogenetic pace and sequencing (the mechanism emerges and develops at predictable developmental stages and in a predictable order)
Does dyscalculia only affect number skills?
- The defective number module hypothesis of dyscalculia (e.g., Butterworth, 1999):
- Selective deficits in magnitude processing arise when the specialised number module fails to develop normally
- We are born with a capacity for recognising and mentally manipulating discrete quantities
Understanding numbers is largely independent of language
Dyscalculia and the brain
The role of the IPS (Intrapareiral sulcus) and Angular gyrus
(sulcus = depression or fissure)
(gyrus = ridge)
What does the Intraparietal sulcus (IPS) do?
- The IPS is active in numerical processing, arithmetic (e.g., Dehaene et al., 2003) and numerical magnitude judgments (Ansari, 2007)
The right IPS is specialised in simple numerical tasks, such as the estimation of the numerosity of small sets (e.g., Piazza et al., 2002)
Studies of brain-lesioned patients have found the left IPS and the angular gyrus to be critical in normal numerical performance (Cipolotti & van Harskamp, 2001)
* The IPS is part of the dorsal visual pathway (the “where” system), and has a role in spatial perception and visually guided action (e.g., Freud et al., 2016). * It is also involved in orienting attention, sustained attention and in suppressing task-irrelevant information (e.g., Lee et al., 2013) It is also part of a parieto-frontal network, associated with intelligence and reasoning (Jung et al., 2006)
The “number sense” approach (e.g., Dehaene, 1997)
- We are born with a capacity for representing continuous quantities
- Close links between the representations of numbers, space and time in the brain
- Also important links with language: we need the knowledge of the integer list (number words) – e.g., Gallistel and Gelman (2000)
THE ACCES DEFICIT HYPOTHESIS OF DYSCALCULIA: dyscalculic learners struggle to link magnitudes to symbolic numbers (e.g.,De Smedt & Gilmore, 2011 Rouselle & Noel, 2007)
e.g. we use space to percieve the magnitue of time.
Space, time and numbers closely connected in our mind
Evidence for the role of domain-general skills in dyscalculia
Problems with:
- verbal and visual working memory (e.g., Attout & Majerus, 2015; Bull & Scerif, 2001; Swanson, 2011; Szucs et al., 2013)
- inhibitory function (e.g., Blair & Razza, 2007; Szucs et al., 2013)
- attentional function (Ashkenazi et al., 2009)
- ordering/sequencing skills, including temporal order and learning movement sequences (Morsanyi et al., 2018)
- reasoning skills/transitive inferences (Morsanyi et al., 2013) ○ Dogs are stronger than gorillas. ○ Rabbits are stronger than dogs. ○ Are rabbits stronger than gorillas?
Multiple neural components of dyscalculia (Fias et al., 2013)
- Mathematical problem solving is built on multiple neurocognitive components that are implemented by distinct and overlapping brain systems.
- HETEROGENEITY and comorbidities observed in dyscalculia are a natural consequence of such a multicomponent system
Maths anxiety separate to dyscalulia
80% of students with very high levels of maths anxiety still perform in the average range. (Devine et al., 2018)
How should we diagnose dyscalculia?
- DSM-5: a combination of standardised, curriculum-based tests and clinical background information
- a standard score of 78 or lower (ideally on more than one standardized maths tests)
- consider evidence for persistent difficulties in maths (even in the presence of targeted interventions - if these were provided)
- check for any already existing diagnoses (note that children with neurological or sensory impairments or chronic health issues may also have difficulties with maths)
- consider the cognitive profile of the child (deficits in working memory, attention, inhibition, sequencing, reasoning skills)
- consider everyday problems outside of the classroom (for example, time estimation, order of days of the week or months within the calendar year, learning movement sequences, etc.)
- any history of learning difficulties in the family
- low SES, English as an additional language
Roulstone et al., 2025 - How much do UK educators know about dyscalculia? Details of study
Participants
- 582 educational professionals from across the UK (mean age: 44 years, 93% female; from early years, primary, secondary and further education settings and various job roles)
- 30 international research experts in dyscalculia (14 males and 16 females from 14 different countries; they have researched dyscalculia for between 5-41 years, with an average of 15 years of experience).
Materials
- Online survey with 24 statements about dyscalculia (5-point scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree)
- Scores were summed to obtain a total dyscalculia awareness score (highest possible score = 120)
- Educators were also asked about any training related to dyscalculia
Roulstone et al., 2025
Much higher awareness and training of dyslexia than dyscalculia for teachers
Years of service was not related to knowledge of dyscalculia
Experts underestimated dyscalculia prevalence
Is dyscalculia resistant to interventions?
- Some researchers suggested that resistance to interventions may be a hallmark of dyscalculia (e.g., Re et al., 2014)
- This is in line with the concept that neurodevelopmental disorders are lifelong conditions
- The DSM-5 describes dyscalculia as persistent difficulties with mathematics, but gives different estimates for the overall prevalence of SLDs in children and adults (about 5-15% in children and 4% in adults)
- Dyscalculia is the very low end of the mathematics skills continuum: no evidence that interventions for dyscalculic pupils should be different from interventions for other pupils (Peters & Ansari, 2019)
The number worlds program (Griffin, 2007)
- Core set of instructional principles (Griffin, 2007):
- Teach specific math concepts and skills – ones that are foundational for later learning
- Expose children to the major ways number is represented and talked about in modern cultures
- Ensure that children acquire the rich set of interconnected knowledge that underlies number sense
- Lead children through a developmental sequence that conforms to the natural developmental progression
- Provide hands-on games and activities that encourage children to construct their own mathematical meanings
- Provide plenty of opportunity for children to communicate mathematically, both orally and in writing
- Ensure that activities capture children’s emotions and imaginations as well as their minds
- Ensure that activities are appropriate for children from a wide range of cultural backgrounds
Teaching strategies to help children learn (Number Worlds)
- Begin instruction in the world of real quantities
- Provide ample opportunities for oral language
- Gradually and systematically introduce students to the world of formal symbols
- Start at students’ level of understanding and teach concepts in the order naturally acquired
Let students use natural strategies, but expose them to other problem-solving strategies
Every child counts (Edge Hill University)
- UK-based intervention programme developed at Edge Hill University
- Children can catch up after just a few weeks of daily 1-1 specialist teaching.
- The children taught – the very lowest achieving children in their age group - make over four times the normal rate of progress – 14 months progress in ‘Number Age’ over just 20 hours of 1-1 teaching over a three month period.
- An average gain of 15 standardised score points on a standardised test of numeracy skills.
- A 21% improvement in confidence and attitudes to learning.
- Follow-up six months after the end of the 1-1 teaching shows that the children taught made an average seven month gain in Number Age – in other words, they continue to make an above average rate of progress when back in class.
Kucial et al., 2011 research
Training children with dyscalculia across 5 weeks
Found reduced activation in parietal cortex after training: maybe some functions became automatised
Extra notes to consider:
- Consider the heterogeneity of dyscalculia, co-occuring difficulties and cognitive profile (i.e., processing speed, memory, attentional problems, etc.)
- The lowest achieving pupils’ knowledge will lag several years behind their school grades (e.g., OECD, 2015): assessment and intervention should focus on basic/foundational skills
- Early diagnosis and intervention is key to bridge the gap
- Provide plenty of opportunity for children to communicate mathematically, both orally and in writing, including basic terms relating to magnitudes, and spatial and temporal relations (e.g., Purpura et al., 2017)
- Involve and educate parents as well (including avoidance of passing on negative attitudes)
