About
Resources
Play-Based Math Learning
Summer Programs
(virtual + in person in NYC area)
Downloadable Resources
Change the text and make it your own. Click here to begin editing.
Comprehensive Online Learning Programs
Downloadable Resources
Latest Science for Parents and Educators
How Does Personalized Learning Affect Young Students? A Long-Term Look at Motivation, Skills, and School Performance
Ackermans et al. (2025) | Lena Gianaris
Personalized learning is often praised as a promising approach for helping students learn in ways that fit their unique needs. Despite its growing popularity, most long-term studies have focused on middle schoolers and older students. But what about younger learners—children in the early elementary grades who are still developing foundational skills and motivation? A new large-scale, three-year study of Dutch elementary schools offers insight into how personalized learning affects motivation, metacognition, and academic performance in students ages 7–12. What Is Personalized Learning? Personalized learning aims to move beyond “one-size-fits-all” instruction. Instead of all students learning the same content in the same way, instruction is adjusted to fit each student’s pace, interests, learning strategies, and areas for growth. This often involves giving students more choice, integrating technology, and encouraging them to understand and manage their own learning. In theory, this approach should boost motivation, metacognitive awareness (students’ ability to plan, monitor, and evaluate their learning), and academic performance. Until now, however, there has been little long-term evidence for young children. The Study Researchers partnered with eight Dutch elementary schools to implement personalized learning into daily instruction over three years. A total of 588 students (ages 7–12) and 82 teachers participated. Each school created its own version of personalized learning, with design teams developing school-specific interventions in subjects such as math, spelling, reading comprehension, and vocabulary. To understand the effects, researchers measured students’: Intrinsic motivation (interest, enjoyment, perceived competence) Metacognitive awareness (planning, monitoring, evaluating learning) Academic performance (national standardized tests in math and language) ICT skills (ability to use technology effectively for learning) Advanced Bayesian statistical models tracked student development over time while accounting for classroom changes, COVID-19 disruptions, and differences between schools. Key Findings 1. Personalized Learning Boosts Performance in Math and Spelling The strongest effects were found in academic performance: Math and spelling scores improved significantly for students in personalized learning classrooms. One school that directly taught metacognitive strategies through a 14-week curriculum saw especially large gains in spelling. There were no significant effects for reading comprehension or vocabulary. 2. Motivation Didn’t Increase—Even Though Theory Predicted It Would Contrary to expectations, personalized learning did not improve intrinsic motivation for younger students. Researchers suggest three explanations: Young children are already highly motivated, leaving little room for improvement. COVID-19 lockdowns occurred during the study and may have lowered motivation. Schools’ interventions did not explicitly target motivation, which may be necessary for meaningful change. 3. Metacognitive Skills Did Not Improve Either The study found no overall increase in metacognitive awareness due to personalized learning. Metacognition naturally develops rapidly between ages 7 and 12, which may have overshadowed any intervention effects. Additionally, many educational technologies used in personalized learning tend to offload decision-making rather than help students learn how to regulate their thinking. 4. ICT Skills Matter—For Students and Teachers Technology played a meaningful role in shaping outcomes: Students with stronger ICT skills showed better: Metacognitive awareness Intrinsic motivation (perceived choice) Math performance Teachers’ ICT skills also made a difference: Higher teacher digital literacy predicted stronger student metacognitive growth. These findings suggest that personalized learning works best when both teachers and students are confident in using digital tools. What Can Educators Learn From This? Personalized learning works best for math and spelling. Clear gains occurred in both subjects, especially when paired with explicit metacognitive instruction. Motivation may not automatically improve. Teachers may need to intentionally support autonomy, competence, and interest rather than assume personalized learning will increase motivation on its own. Metacognitive skills must be taught explicitly. One school’s success with a dedicated metacognition curriculum highlights its importance. Strengthen ICT skills for everyone. Both student and teacher digital literacy supported stronger outcomes, showing that technology is only as effective as the skills behind it. Final Thoughts This study provides a rare long-term look at personalized learning in young children. While personalized learning did not independently increase motivation or metacognitive awareness, it did improve math and spelling performance and worked best when paired with explicit skill-building in metacognition and technology use. For educators and policymakers, the takeaway is clear: personalized learning can support academic success in young students, but it is not a magic solution. Thoughtful implementation, targeted instruction, and strong technological skills are essential for helping students grow.
Playtime Under Pressure
DePascale et al. (2022) | Skylear Wylie
Learning at a young age often develops through play. For children ages four to six, the most common method of teaching mathematics is through math-related games and activities. But does their perception of math affect how they interact with math-related play? A recent study by DePascale and colleagues (2022) examines the relationship between math anxiety and play behaviors among this age group. The researchers asked: What is the relationship between children’s math anxiety (anxiety specific to math performance, such as solving math problems or using math in everyday life) and their play behaviors in math-related activities? They predicted that children with higher math anxiety would show more avoidant behavior toward the toy, be less persistent, and allow anxiety to shape their reasoning about why the toy did not work. They also predicted that girls would show higher levels of math anxiety than boys. The final goal of the study was exploratory: to determine whether there was any relationship between math anxiety and children’s school experience. To investigate these questions, the researchers asked children to engage with a toy created for the experiment. To make the toy work, children had to count the number of dots on a card and then press a button on a cube the corresponding number of times. For example, during the demonstration, researchers showed a card with two dots and pressed the button twice. When the button was pressed the correct number of times, the toy made a doorbell-like chirping noise. After this example trial, the children were given a card with three dots and invited to make the toy work. They practiced until they could successfully press the button three times and activate the toy. In the test trial, children received a card with eight dots and were allowed to play with the toy freely for 90 seconds. During this time, the toy did not activate for any responses, even correct ones. Play behaviors during the 90 seconds were categorized as counting attempts, button-press attempts, and time spent exploring the toy numerically. In addition to the Toy Play Task, the researchers measured children’s math anxiety. Children responded to seven questions related to anxiety and math anxiety using a smiley-face scale: a happy face for “not nervous,” a straight-mouthed face for “a little nervous,” and a nervous face for “very nervous.” Math anxiety scores closer to 1 indicated lower math anxiety, and scores closer to 3 indicated higher math anxiety. The average math anxiety score was 1.7. Regarding gender differences, the researchers found that math anxiety was significantly higher for girls than for boys. Because play is a common method for teaching math, understanding the connection between math anxiety and play can shed light on children’s math learning and help inform new strategies to increase achievement. The researchers found that children with higher math anxiety used fewer math-related statements than children with lower math anxiety. Math anxiety is negatively related to math achievement and is a significant predictor of math knowledge. Thus, based on these findings, it may be important to talk children through the math aspects of play-based activities to support their understanding. However, the researchers also noted that “overall children’s math anxiety did not relate to their play behaviors” (DePascale, 2022). Their observations showed wide variability in the play behaviors measured. Ultimately, they concluded that math anxiety did not predict children’s counting attempts, button attempts, or time spent engaging with the toy mathematically. The researchers’ last question examined the relationship between math anxiety and school experience. They found a significant difference between five-year-olds who had not yet started kindergarten and those who had. Five-year-olds who had begun kindergarten showed higher math anxiety. Possible explanations include aspects of the kindergarten experience, such as a math-anxious teacher or peers who influence children’s developing attitudes toward math.
Early Advantage and Ultimate Draw: The Fade-Out of Redshirting Rewards on Academic Performance
Oshima & Diomaleskli (2006) | Kathryn Krasnoff
Many factors influence how children learn, but when do certain aspects of children’s identities have more impact than others? Oshima and Diomaleskli (2006) examine the long-term and short-term effects of holding a child back from entering kindergarten even when they are eligible to enroll. They found that although a child’s age seems to matter in the early grades, other factors—such as gender or race—may have a stronger impact on overall learning and may more significantly influence later academic performance. These results come from a study on the impact of “redshirting,” or holding children back from entering kindergarten, on long-term development. Data were collected from two groups. First, state-administered standardized test scores from 3,000 U.S. students in grades one through eight were used to assess later development. Second, data from 6,555 kindergarten students across the U.S. were used to examine outcomes for younger children. In this school system, the cut-off date for entering kindergarten is September 1, and children must be five years old to enroll. Therefore, children younger than 5.5 years old, whose birthdays fell in the summer, were compared with children older than 5.5 years old, whose birthdays fell in the fall. The researchers examined differences in math and reading performance, general knowledge, approaches to learning, self-control, social interaction, and height and weight. Student data were analyzed in both the fall and spring of each school year from kindergarten through eighth grade to understand short-term and long-term changes. Regarding math and reading achievement, children who had fall birthdays and were older tended to have higher scores than children who had summer birthdays or were younger. This pattern, in which older children performed better than younger classmates, continued through fifth grade. However, there were no significant differences in reading and math achievement between younger and older children in grades six through eight. The results also suggest that predictive differences between older and younger children in reading and math are expected to lessen over time. In addition to examining associations and predictions for younger and older children, the study also analyzed which factors best predict student achievement. From kindergarten through second grade, the strongest predictors of reading performance were race, age, and then gender. In grades three through five, the order shifted to race, gender, and then age. For students in sixth through eighth grade, race and gender were the only predictors, with race being a stronger indicator than gender. For math achievement, from kindergarten through fifth grade, race and then age were the strongest predictors. From sixth through eighth grade, race was the only predictor of math performance. Practical Implications for Educators, Parents, and Guardians Based on these results, the authors suggest that before deciding whether to hold a child back from entering kindergarten, several questions should be considered. How does the child interact with peers? Do they enjoy learning with those who are older? Do they learn better with older classmates? Does the child thrive in an academically challenging environment? The authors emphasize that these factors are not conclusive. Before making any major decisions about a child’s schooling, guardians and parents should consult school professionals who have interacted with the child and take their advice into account.
Mind Over Math: The Role of Mindfulness in Reducing Math Anxiety
Samuel & Warner (2021) | Danny Curtin
Math anxiety can have a profound impact on academic success and overall well-being. This anxiety is especially prominent in students entering college who are already facing new challenges. But what if a simple, one-minute classroom intervention could significantly reduce the effects of the deep-seated math anxiety faced by students? A pilot study conducted with college students shows that two high-octane psychological components —mindfulness and a growth mindset —can not only alleviate math anxiety but also foster a newfound confidence. The most compelling aspect of this study is its practicality and accessibility, as the intervention is free, brief, and can be implemented by anyone. The study was conducted with students enrolled in a developmental statistics course. One group received a special intervention at the start of each class, while a control group received standard instruction. The intervention began with a one-minute mindfulness session, during which the instructor led deep breathing exercises to calm the nervous system. This was followed by a brief growth mindset exercise in which students recited affirmations such as “I am capable of understanding math” to challenge fixed, negative beliefs about their math ability. Students’ levels of math anxiety and confidence were measured at the beginning of the semester, and again at the end, along with qualitative data gathered from focus groups that provided detailed first-hand accounts of their experiences. Students who received the intervention demonstrated a substantial decrease in math anxiety scores throughout the semester. Those who participated for the entire academic year demonstrated even greater improvement, highlighting the importance of consistency. Confidence measures also showed an overall increase; however, one key indicator rose signficantly, students’ belief that they could earn an A or B in statistics. Data collected from interviews gave deep insights into these psychological shifts, with students saying, “When I’m stressed before an exam, just breathing helps me get through it” about anxiety improvement and “I like saying the positive statements … at first this whole thing was weird because I didn’t believe them, but saying them out loud every day motivated me and built my confidence for the rest of the class” about increased confidence. These post-intervention interviews with focus groups reflect the validity and effectiveness of the study. Since mindfulness and affirmations target anxious anticipation at its core, the intervention was successful and has practical implications for reshaping the math classroom experience. Instructors proved to be the key in altering students’ perceptions and are capable of creating a safer, positive environment by implementing a brief, consistent routine at the start of class. Students gain validation that math is not a personal shortcoming but rather a psychological response that can be managed in a way that fosters mathematical ability. Finally, institutions can address psychosocial barriers, like anxiety, that are as critical to student success as academic support. Embedding low-cost, high-impact interventions like this one into STEM courses could enhance retention and help more students complete their degrees. By tending a classroom culture that values process over outcome, students can shed the weight of their burdening anxieties and discover that they, too, are capable of mathematical ability.
Can praise backfire? How compliments in one subject affect motivation in another.
Ren, Grenell & Gunderson (2025) | Evelyn Pham
When it comes to education, it is widely believed that validation is key to motivating students. However, new research suggests this is more complicated – especially when comparing student’s strengths across subjects. The Role of Dimensional Comparison Students engage in dimensional comparison, a process where they assess their strengths in “opposite domains” like math and english to figure out where they truly excel. This means that while praise in one area might boost their confidence within that domain, it could also change how students perceive their abilities in another. Motivation Shaping at Different Ages The study by Ren, Grenell and Gunderson (2025) revealed a promising first look at how middle schoolers and college students interpret praise differently. Middle schoolers, who are still figuring out who they are academically, may not increase their motivation for a subject just because they are praised. Meanwhile, college students, who have a clearer understanding of their abilities, tend to respond more positively to praise that enhances motivation. The Study To investigate this difference, researchers examined whether praising students in one subject affects their motivation in the other among two age groups: 7th - 9th graders and undergraduate college students. Each group had 109 participants. They were asked to complete both math and language reasoning tests and were randomly assigned to either receive praise in one subject (math or verbal), or not receive praise at all. The researchers then measured how this praise influenced their motivation and confidence in both subjects by comparing their measured math and verbal competence, self-concepts and intrinsic values before completing the tests and after receiving their scores back. Key Findings Verbal Praise Increases Verbal Motivation Across both age groups, students who received praise for their verbal performance were more motivated to engage in verbal activities. For college students, this even increased their intrinsic motivation, meaning their internal drive to do reading tasks is stronger. Math Praise and Self-Perception Although praise in neither math nor verbal domains affected students’ math motivational beliefs, college students who received praise in math reported seeing their math performance as better than their verbal performance. This suggests that math praise strengthened their dimensional comparison and belief in their own numerical abilities. A Surprising Reversal in Middle Schoolers An unexpected finding came from middle schoolers: when they were praised in math, they reported feeling more confident in verbal skills. This opposite dimensional comparison effect suggests they may have interpreted math praise as recognition of effort rather than ability. Therefore, middle school students may downplay their math abilities while emphasizing verbal skills to maintain a balanced self-image. Practical Takeaways for Educators This research provides valuable insights for teachers, parents, and mentors: For middle schoolers: When praising math performance, emphasizing ability rather than just effort may help middle schoolers see themselves as truly competent rather than just hardworking. This is particularly important since math competence is often linked with perceptions of brilliance, which can shape students’ long-term engagement in STEM fields. For college students: Praise can directly enhance confidence, meaning targeted encouragement can be a powerful tool for boosting motivation in specific subjects. Since verbal praise was especially effective in increasing intrinsic motivation for college students, educators may want to use subject-specific praise strategically to foster deeper engagement and interest in particular fields. Final Thoughts Praise is a powerful motivator, but its effects are not always straightforward. While college students may respond to praise with increased confidence in that subject, middle schoolers may engage in more complex comparisons that shift how they see themselves academically. Understanding how praise influences motivation at different stages can help educators and parents use it more effectively and turn well-intended compliments into tools for lasting growth.
Small Moments, Big Impact: How Parents Boost Math Engagement
Wu et al. (2024) | Shreya Patel
Children often start learning math at home before they ever encounter it in school. How parents talk about numbers and interact with their children during math-related activities can have a lasting influence. A recent study by Wu and colleagues (2024) explored how these interactions affect children’s engagement with math, and found that both what parents say and how they say it can shape a child’s learning experience, even from one minute to the next. What the Researchers Wanted to Know The researchers examined whether children are more engaged when parents ask open-ended math questions or when they support their child’s independence rather than taking control. More specifically, researchers investigated whether these two parenting approaches, cognitive (which refers to what is said) and motivational (which refers to how it is said), operate independently or work best together to promote engagement. The Study The study involved 529 families from across the United States, each with a seven-year-old child. In a laboratory setting, parents and children engaged in a 12-minute math activity using a coin-matching game designed to promote different types of mathematical thinking. Every minute of the interaction was recorded and carefully analyzed. The researchers examined two types of parenting behavior: cognitive and motivational. Cognitive behavior was examined by observing whether parents asked questions, or “prompts”, or gave direct information, or “statements”. They also looked at how complex the math content was. Motivational behavior was examined by noting whether parents supported their child’s independence during play or took control by leading the activity themselves. Throughout the activity, researchers tracked how engaged the children were and which math strategies they used, minute by minute. Findings Children showed higher engagement when parents asked more advanced math questions and encouraged deeper problem-solving. In contrast, simply giving answers or stating facts was less effective and sometimes even discouraged engagement, especially when paired with a controlling approach. Letting children explore and solve problems on their own also helped them stay focused. Parents who asked thoughtful questions and gave their children freedom to work on their own helped increase engagement. Even when only one of these approaches was used, children remained more engaged, compared to when parents used neither. Takeaways for Parents and Educators Simple changes in communication can make a meaningful difference in how children learn math. Asking open-ended questions like “What’s another way to solve this?” encourages curiosity and deeper thinking. Giving children time to work through challenges rather than stepping in with the “right answer” helps build problem-solving skills and confidence. When adults combine encouragement with the right amount of challenge, children are more likely to stay motivated and interested. Even minor shifts in how parents interact with their children can have long-term benefits for their child’s learning. Final Thoughts Even brief interactions between parents and children can influence how kids engage with math. By studying these moments closely, researchers found that both the content and tone of what parents say matter. Thoughtful questions and supportive communication can boost children’s confidence and curiosity. In everyday moments, the way parents communicate with their children can strongly influence how children view themselves as learners.
