Math Interactive Learning Experience (MILE)
Study: Kable et al. (2007); Bertrand (2009); Coles et al. (2009)

Summary

The Math Interactive Learning Experience (MILE) program was developed as a supplemental intervention program to implement an effective approach to address deficits in mathematics and learning readiness in children three-to-ten years with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD). The supplemental intervention program is to build children's metacognition within the context of early mathematical skills. These are skills that often are impaired in children with FASD.

Target Grades:
Age 3-5, K, 1, 2, 3, 4
Target Populations:
  • Students with learning disabilities
  • Students with intellectual disabilities
  • Any student at risk for academic failure
  • Other: The study was investigated for use for children with learning problems associated with the effects from prenatal alcohol exposure. Currently, the study is being examined for efficacy working with children with a range of neurodevelopmental delays in Edmonton, Canada. Data is currently being collected.
Area(s) of Focus:
  • Computation
  • Concepts and/or word problems
  • Whole number arithmetic
  • Comprehensive: Includes computation/procedures, problem solving, and mathematical concepts
  • Geometry and measurement
  • Other: MILE is developed address deficits with early number and counting skills (e.g., subitizing, stable order, one-to-one correspondence, cardinality, conservation, magnitude, ordinals/position, unitizing).
Where to Obtain:
Funding provided by the US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Emory Neurodevelopmental Exposure Clinic, 12 Executive Park Northeast, Suite 209, Atlanta, Georgia, 30329
(404) 712-9817
http://msacd.emory.edu/About%20Us/index.html
Initial Cost:
$500.00 per
Replacement Cost:
Contact vendor for pricing details.

The MILE manuals, resource guides, curriculum pages, and material templates are available digitally at no cost. The cost for initial class set up is a rough estimation to purchase a set of manipulatives to conduct small group sessions. Many of the manipulatives used in MILE are used in other mathematics programs. The manipulatives used in MILE can be made or purchased at most school supply, discount, or office supply retailers. On occasions that a school would like printed copies of the manuals sent to them, the cost would vary upon the price for printing the requested number of manuals and shipping. Schools are able to print the digital materials and can use their own vendors.

Staff Qualified to Administer Include:
  • Special Education Teacher
  • General Education Teacher
  • Math Specialist
  • Interventionist
  • Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
  • Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Therapist or Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)
  • Paraprofessional
  • Other: Parents
Training Requirements:
Instructors are recommended to attend a one and one-half day workshop about MILE.

The instructor training is developed to meet the schools or interventionists needs. Approximately one and one-half to two training days are required. The first training day entails discussion of neurodevelopmental delays the impact mathematics learning (including the impact of prenatal alcohol exposure), the basis of the MILE program, as well as video examples and discussion of implementing MILE. The second component of training requires instructors practice implementing the MILE with each other in small groups. The trainers provide feedback and answer questions as instructors practice implementing the program. A pre-test and post-test are administered to assess learning. Additionally, participants in the workshop are asked to complete an instructor survey to let the trainers know how to improve the MILE training. MILE has a "Train the Trainer" component. To become a Trainer an instructor or interventionist would need to take the general MILE workshop. In addition, to become a trainer the instructor would need to find a student or students to implement MILE under supervision of the program developer or approved teacher trainer for approximately 8 to 12 weeks. During the time frame of working with the student, the instructor would need to video sessions sessions at different time points (ex. sessions 1, 6, and 11) for review by the MILE program trainer. The MILE program developer or identified trainer would have supervision sessions to provide feedback on their implementation of the program. The MILE fidelity checklist is used to guide the feedback. After meeting the criteria to be a trainer, the instructor is given a certificate and can train others using MILE.


As part of the evaluation of the MILE program, instructors were required to submit satisfaction surveys to provide information on effectiveness of the training and materials. In 2015, Kable, Taddeo, Strickland, and Coles published the information gained from the instructors satisfaction surveys conducted whether students received the intervention in the community, in the clinical setting, or received parental instruction. It was noted in the article the instructors ratings suggested a high level of satisfaction with the MILE training. The mean of the instructor fidelity ratings had a positive correlation to the changes in student performance in those who receive intervention using MILE. The article indicted that those who only participated in parent instruction reported less satisfaction with MILE when compared to those who received MILE at a clinical setting or at a community setting. Also, those who received MILE intervention at a clinical or community setting demonstrated more positive gains in math skills than those in the Parent Instruction group. There was no difference in gains in math skills in those who received MILE at the clinical setting or at the community setting. The authors summarized that MILE instructor training was well received and produced positive outcomes in both the clinical and community setting. Please refer to the article Kable, JA., Taddeo, E., Strickland, D., & Coles CD. (2015). "Community translation of the Math Interactive Learning Experience Program for children with FASD", Research in Developmental Disabilities, 39, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.031.

Access to Technical Support:
Practitioners can contact Molly N. Millians, D,Ed. at Emory Neurodevelopmental Exposure Clinic, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine by telephone at (404) 712-9817 or by email at molly.n.millians.edu for technical support.
Recommended Administration Formats Include:
  • Individual students
Minimum Number of Minutes Per Session:
40
Minimum Number of Sessions Per Week:
1
Minimum Number of Weeks:
12
Detailed Implementation Manual or Instructions Available:
Yes
Is Technology Required?
No technology is required.

Program Information

Descriptive Information

Please provide a description of program, including intended use:

The Math Interactive Learning Experience (MILE) program was developed as a supplemental intervention program to implement an effective approach to address deficits in mathematics and learning readiness in children three-to-ten years with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD). The supplemental intervention program is to build children's metacognition within the context of early mathematical skills. These are skills that often are impaired in children with FASD.

The program is intended for use in the following age(s) and/or grade(s).

not selected Age 0-3
selected Age 3-5
selected Kindergarten
selected First grade
selected Second grade
selected Third grade
selected Fourth grade
not selected Fifth grade
not selected Sixth grade
not selected Seventh grade
not selected Eighth grade
not selected Ninth grade
not selected Tenth grade
not selected Eleventh grade
not selected Twelth grade


The program is intended for use with the following groups.

not selected Students with disabilities only
selected Students with learning disabilities
selected Students with intellectual disabilities
not selected Students with emotional or behavioral disabilities
not selected English language learners
selected Any student at risk for academic failure
not selected Any student at risk for emotional and/or behavioral difficulties
selected Other
If other, please describe:
The study was investigated for use for children with learning problems associated with the effects from prenatal alcohol exposure. Currently, the study is being examined for efficacy working with children with a range of neurodevelopmental delays in Edmonton, Canada. Data is currently being collected.

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: Please indicate the academic area of focus.

Early Literacy

not selected Print knowledge/awareness
not selected Alphabet knowledge
not selected Phonological awareness
not selected Phonological awarenessEarly writing
not selected Early decoding abilities
not selected Other

If other, please describe:

Language

not selected Expressive and receptive vocabulary
not selected Grammar
not selected Syntax
not selected Listening comprehension
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Reading

not selected Phonological awareness
not selected Phonics/word study
not selected Comprehension
not selected Fluency
not selected Vocabulary
not selected Spelling
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Mathematics

selected Computation
selected Concepts and/or word problems
selected Whole number arithmetic
selected Comprehensive: Includes computation/procedures, problem solving, and mathematical concepts
not selected Algebra
not selected Fractions, decimals (rational number)
selected Geometry and measurement
selected Other
If other, please describe:
MILE is developed address deficits with early number and counting skills (e.g., subitizing, stable order, one-to-one correspondence, cardinality, conservation, magnitude, ordinals/position, unitizing).

Writing

not selected Handwriting
not selected Spelling
not selected Sentence construction
not selected Planning and revising
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Please indicate the behavior area of focus.

Externalizing Behavior

not selected Physical Aggression
not selected Verbal Threats
not selected Property Destruction
not selected Noncompliance
not selected High Levels of Disengagement
not selected Disruptive Behavior
not selected Social Behavior (e.g., Peer interactions, Adult interactions)
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Internalizing Behavior

not selected Depression
not selected Anxiety
not selected Social Difficulties (e.g., withdrawal)
not selected School Phobia
not selected Other
If other, please describe:

Acquisition and cost information

Where to obtain:

Address
Emory Neurodevelopmental Exposure Clinic, 12 Executive Park Northeast, Suite 209, Atlanta, Georgia, 30329
Phone Number
(404) 712-9817
Website
http://msacd.emory.edu/About%20Us/index.html

Initial cost for implementing program:

Cost
$500.00
Unit of cost

Replacement cost per unit for subsequent use:

Cost
Unit of cost
Duration of license
No license is required.

Additional cost information:

Describe basic pricing plan and structure of the program. Also, provide information on what is included in the published program, as well as what is not included but required for implementation (e.g., computer and/or internet access)

The MILE manuals, resource guides, curriculum pages, and material templates are available digitally at no cost. The cost for initial class set up is a rough estimation to purchase a set of manipulatives to conduct small group sessions. Many of the manipulatives used in MILE are used in other mathematics programs. The manipulatives used in MILE can be made or purchased at most school supply, discount, or office supply retailers. On occasions that a school would like printed copies of the manuals sent to them, the cost would vary upon the price for printing the requested number of manuals and shipping. Schools are able to print the digital materials and can use their own vendors.

Program Specifications

Setting for which the program is designed.

selected Individual students
not selected Small group of students
not selected BI ONLY: A classroom of students

If group-delivered, how many students compose a small group?

  

Program administration time

Minimum number of minutes per session
40
Minimum number of sessions per week
1
Minimum number of weeks
12
not selected N/A (implemented until effective)

If intervention program is intended to occur over less frequently than 60 minutes a week for approximately 8 weeks, justify the level of intensity:
Depending upon the child's age and the involvement of a caregiver, parent, or adult working with the child daily at home using MILE activities as prescribed by the interventionist, once a week for 30 minutes may be feasible.

Does the program include highly specified teacher manuals or step by step instructions for implementation?
Yes

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: Is the program affiliated with a broad school- or class-wide management program?
No

If yes, please identify and describe the broader school- or class-wide management program:

Does the program require technology?
No

If yes, what technology is required to implement your program?
not selected Computer or tablet
not selected Internet connection
not selected Other technology (please specify)

If your program requires additional technology not listed above, please describe the required technology and the extent to which it is combined with teacher small-group instruction/intervention:

Training

How many people are needed to implement the program ?
1

Is training for the instructor or interventionist required?
Yes
If yes, is the necessary training free or at-cost?
At-cost

Describe the time required for instructor or interventionist training:
Instructors are recommended to attend a one and one-half day workshop about MILE.

Describe the format and content of the instructor or interventionist training:
The instructor training is developed to meet the schools or interventionists needs. Approximately one and one-half to two training days are required. The first training day entails discussion of neurodevelopmental delays the impact mathematics learning (including the impact of prenatal alcohol exposure), the basis of the MILE program, as well as video examples and discussion of implementing MILE. The second component of training requires instructors practice implementing the MILE with each other in small groups. The trainers provide feedback and answer questions as instructors practice implementing the program. A pre-test and post-test are administered to assess learning. Additionally, participants in the workshop are asked to complete an instructor survey to let the trainers know how to improve the MILE training. MILE has a "Train the Trainer" component. To become a Trainer an instructor or interventionist would need to take the general MILE workshop. In addition, to become a trainer the instructor would need to find a student or students to implement MILE under supervision of the program developer or approved teacher trainer for approximately 8 to 12 weeks. During the time frame of working with the student, the instructor would need to video sessions sessions at different time points (ex. sessions 1, 6, and 11) for review by the MILE program trainer. The MILE program developer or identified trainer would have supervision sessions to provide feedback on their implementation of the program. The MILE fidelity checklist is used to guide the feedback. After meeting the criteria to be a trainer, the instructor is given a certificate and can train others using MILE.

What types or professionals are qualified to administer your program?

selected Special Education Teacher
selected General Education Teacher
not selected Reading Specialist
selected Math Specialist
not selected EL Specialist
selected Interventionist
selected Student Support Services Personnel (e.g., counselor, social worker, school psychologist, etc.)
selected Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) Therapist or Board Certified Behavior Analyst (BCBA)
selected Paraprofessional
selected Other

If other, please describe:

Parents
Does the program assume that the instructor or interventionist has expertise in a given area?
No   

If yes, please describe: 


Are training manuals and materials available?
Yes

Describe how the training manuals or materials were field-tested with the target population of instructors or interventionist and students:
As part of the evaluation of the MILE program, instructors were required to submit satisfaction surveys to provide information on effectiveness of the training and materials. In 2015, Kable, Taddeo, Strickland, and Coles published the information gained from the instructors satisfaction surveys conducted whether students received the intervention in the community, in the clinical setting, or received parental instruction. It was noted in the article the instructors ratings suggested a high level of satisfaction with the MILE training. The mean of the instructor fidelity ratings had a positive correlation to the changes in student performance in those who receive intervention using MILE. The article indicted that those who only participated in parent instruction reported less satisfaction with MILE when compared to those who received MILE at a clinical setting or at a community setting. Also, those who received MILE intervention at a clinical or community setting demonstrated more positive gains in math skills than those in the Parent Instruction group. There was no difference in gains in math skills in those who received MILE at the clinical setting or at the community setting. The authors summarized that MILE instructor training was well received and produced positive outcomes in both the clinical and community setting. Please refer to the article Kable, JA., Taddeo, E., Strickland, D., & Coles CD. (2015). "Community translation of the Math Interactive Learning Experience Program for children with FASD", Research in Developmental Disabilities, 39, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.031.

Do you provide fidelity of implementation guidance such as a checklist for implementation in your manual?
Yes

Can practitioners obtain ongoing professional and technical support?
Yes

If yes, please specify where/how practitioners can obtain support:

Practitioners can contact Molly N. Millians, D,Ed. at Emory Neurodevelopmental Exposure Clinic, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Emory University School of Medicine by telephone at (404) 712-9817 or by email at molly.n.millians.edu for technical support.

Summary of Evidence Base

Please identify, to the best of your knowledge, all the research studies that have been conducted to date supporting the efficacy of your program, including studies currently or previously submitted to NCII for review. Please provide citations only (in APA format); do not include any descriptive information on these studies. NCII staff will also conduct a search to confirm that the list you provide is accurate.

Bertrand, J., & Interventions for Children with Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Research, CDC. (2009). Interventions for children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs): overview of findings for five innovative research projects. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(5), 986-1006. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19327965. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2009.02.003

 

Coles, C. D., Kable, J. A., & Taddeo, E. (2009). Math performance and behavior problems in children affected by prenatal alcohol exposure: Intervention and follow-up. Journal of Developmental Pediatrics, 30(7), 7-15.

 

Kable, J. A., Coles, C. D., & Taddeo, E. (2007). Socio-cognitive habilitation using the math interactive learning experience program for alcohol-affected children. Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, , 31(8), 1425-1434. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17550365. doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2007.00431.x

 

Kable, J.A., Taddeo, E., Strickland, D., & Coles, C.D.(2015). Community translation of the Math Interactive Learning Experience Program for children with FASD. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 39, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.031

 

Kully-Martens, K., Pei, J., Kable, J., Coles, C. D., Andrew, G., & Rasmussen, C. (2018). Mathematics intervention for children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: A replication and extension of the math interactive learning experience (MILE) program. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 78, 55-65. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422218300945. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2018.04.018

 

Petrenko, C. L.,M. & Alto, M. E. (2017). Interventions in fetal alcohol spectrum disorders: An international perspective. European Journal of Medical Genetics, 60(1), 79-91. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27742482. doi:10.1016/j.ejmg.2016.10.005

 

Study Information

Study Citations

1) Kable, J. A., Coles, C. D. & Taddeo, E. (2007). Socio-cognitive Habilitation Using the Math Interactive Learning Experience Program for Alcohol-Affected Children . Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research , 31(8) 1425-1434; 2) Bertrand, J. (2009). Interventions for children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorders (FASDs): overview of findings for five innovative research projects. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(5) 986-1006; 3) Coles , C. D., Kable , J. a. & Taddeo, E. (2009). Math performance and behavioral problems in children affected by prenatal alcohol exposure: Intervention and follow-up. Journal of Developmental Pediatrics, 30(7) 7-15.

Participants Full Bobble

Describe how students were selected to participate in the study:
To partake in the MILE study, students ages three-to-ten years of age were recruited from a medical clinic that provided diagnostics and interventions for children affected by prenatal exposures to alcohol and other substances. Students also were recruited from the community through advertisements in the local newspaper, mailings to school systems, pediatricians, and medical care providers. Children who participated in the initial MILE study (see Kable, Coles, & Taddeo, 2007; Coles, Kable, & Taddeo, 2009) were recruited from a multidisciplinary clinic that evaluated children to rule out the effects from prenatal alcohol and other exposures and from the larger community. To be considered for participation in the study, children had to be with the current caregiver for at least sixth months prior to enrollment and expected to remain with their current caregiver for the following sixth months. Children were excluded from the study if their cognitive abilities fell within the moderately intellectually impaired range (Intellectual Quotient <50) or if they exhibited significant mental health or other clinical or behavioral diagnoses (e.g., autism) that would interfere with benefitting from the intervention. However, children who had a dual diagnosis of Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) were included in the study. After the initial screening and consenting of the caregivers, all possible participants received a physical examination by a pediatric geneticist to assess for the physical characteristics associated with the effects from prenatal alcohol exposure. Also, all children received a neurobehavioral evaluation assessing cognitive abilities, visual-motor skills. visual attention, and a mathematics pre-test. To assess children’s behavior at home and at school, caregivers and children’s teachers completed behavioral checklists. All children enrolled in the study had a diagnosis of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS), Partial Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (pFAS), or significant alcohol-related dysmorphia.

Describe how students were identified as being at risk for academic failure (AI) or as having emotional or behavioral difficulties (BI):
Many children affected by prenatal alcohol exposure exhibit impairments in mathematics. Students were considered at risk for problems if they had a medical diagnosis of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS), Partial Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (pFAS), or significant levels of alcohol-related dysmorphia or changes to physical features associated with the effects from prenatal alcohol exposure. An interdisciplinary team consisting of a geneticist, clinical and pediatric psychologists, and an educational specialist conducted the evaluation to determine if physical abnormalities, cognitive impairments, learning problems, behavioral challenges, and difficulties with arousal regulation were due to the effects from prenatal exposure to alcohol. The interdisciplinary team followed the criteria established by the Institute of Medicine to confer a medical diagnosis of FAS, or pFAS. See Stratton K, Howe C, Battaglia F (Eds.) (1996) Fetal Alcohol Syndrome: Diagnosis, Epidemiology, Prevention and Treatment. National Academy Press, Washington, DC. for a complete discussion on the diagnostic criteria used at the time of the 2007 MILE study. In Kable et al., 2007 it stated that children who received the math intervention had cognitive scores as measured by Differential Ability Scales, Second Edition, General Conceptual Ability standard score (mean of 100, standard deviation of 15 points) of 81.1 (SEM: 12.4) which would fall near the 10th percentile, when compared to the national standardization sample of children the same age. As noted in the Coles et al., 2009 article submitted with this document, the pre-test raw scores on the Test of Early Mathematics indicated that children in the math group answered on average 23 (SEM: 14.6) items correctly. On the Key Math pre-test, children in the math group answered on average 24.2 (SEM: 11.8) items correctly. The children in the control condition who received standard level of care had an average of cognitive scores as measured by the General Conceptual Ability from Differential Ability Scales, Second Edition, standard score (mean of 100, standard deviation of 15 points) of 83.1 (SEM: 14.9) which would fall at the 13th percentile when compared to age-matched peers.

ACADEMIC INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:
  • below the 30th percentile on local or national norm, or
  • identified disability related to the focus of the intervention?
50.0%

BEHAVIORAL INTERVENTION: What percentage of participants were at risk, as measured by one or more of the following criteria:
  • emotional disability label,
  • placed in an alternative school/classroom,
  • non-responsive to Tiers 1 and 2, or
  • designation of severe problem behaviors on a validated scale or through observation?
%

Specify which condition is the submitted intervention:
The intervention or math group, consisted of children with a diagnosis of FAS, pFAS, or evidence of significant levels of physical anomalies related to the effects from prenatal alcohol exposure as determined by a trained geneticist. They participated in six weeks of one-on-one math intervention using MILE. Also, they received a neurodevelopmental evaluation, assistance with educational placement, and support to develop their Individualized Education Program (IEP) at their home school.

Specify which condition is the control condition:
The children with a diagnosis of FAS, pFAS, or had significant levels of alcohol-related dysmorphia who were not randomly assigned to the math intervention group, were assigned to the psychoeducational contrast group, or control group. The participants in the psychoeducational contrast group received the general standard of care (no math intervention using MILE). Similar to the children in the intervention group, the children in the psychoeducational contrast group received a neurodevelopmental evaluation, :assistance with educational placement, and support for the development of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) at their home school.

If you have a third, competing condition, in addition to your control and intervention condition, identify what the competing condition is (data from this competing condition will not be used):
N/A

Using the tables that follow, provide data demonstrating comparability of the program group and control group in terms of demographics.

Grade Level

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Age less than 1
Age 1
Age 2
Age 3 9.7 % 6.7 % 0.24
Age 4 12.9 % 13.3 % 0.00
Age 5 12.9 % 16.7 % 0.19
Kindergarten 19.4 % 10.0 % 0.45
Grade 1 12.9 % 23.3 % 0.42
Grade 2 9.7 % 10.0 % 0.00
Grade 3 9.7 % 10.0 % 0.00
Grade 4
Grade 5
Grade 6
Grade 7
Grade 8
Grade 9
Grade 10
Grade 11
Grade 12

Race–Ethnicity

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
African American 38.7 % 30.0 % 0.24
American Indian
Asian/Pacific Islander
Hispanic
White 54.8 % 53.3 % 0.05
Other 6.5 % 0.0 % 2.52

Socioeconomic Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Subsidized Lunch
No Subsidized Lunch

Disability Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Speech-Language Impairments
Learning Disabilities
Behavior Disorders
Emotional Disturbance
Intellectual Disabilities
Other 93.5 % 90.0 % 0.34
Not Identified With a Disability

ELL Status

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
English Language Learner
Not English Language Learner

Gender

Demographic Program
Number
Control
Number
Effect Size: Cox Index
for Binary Differences
Female 48.4 % 30.0 % 0.47
Male 45.2 % 60.0 % 0.37

Mean Effect Size

0.41

For any substantively (e.g., effect size ≥ 0.25 for pretest or demographic differences) or statistically significant (e.g., p < 0.05) pretest differences between groups in the descriptions below, please describe the extent to which these differences are related to the impact of the treatment. For example, if analyses were conducted to determine that outcomes from this study are due to the intervention and not demographic characteristics, please describe the results of those analyses here.

As indicated in the 2007 article by Kable, Coles, and Taddeo, an analysis was conducted to determine if there were differences in the characteristics of the participants. Results indicated that there were no differences between the Math intervention group and the Psychoeducational Contrast group regarding age, sex, race, socio-economic status, and cognitive functioning. There was a difference between the Math intervention group and the Psychoeducational Contrast Group on weight at birth [Math group birthweight 2084.4 grams, SD = 785 grams; Psychoeducation Contrast group birthweight 2677.7, SD = 818, p = .024].

Design Half Bobble

What method was used to determine students' placement in treatment/control groups?
Random
Please describe the assignment method or the process for defining treatment/comparison groups.
Prior to random group assignment of either the treatment group or standard care group, all caregivers attended two workshops/trainings: 1) the first training covered the impact of prenatal alcohol exposure on development and learning, special education services, and advocating for their children, and 2) the second training covered building positive behavioral regulation skills in children. After the caregivers completed the two trainings, participants were randomly assigned to either the math intervention group or a psychoeducational contrast group who received the standard level of care and did not receive the MILE intervention.

What was the unit of assignment?
Other
If other, please specify:
Children. After caregivers attended the two trainings, children were randomly assigned either to the mathematical intervention group or to the psychoeducational contrast group representing a control group that did not receive the mathematical intervention.

Please describe the unit of assignment:

What unit(s) were used for primary data analysis?
not selected Schools
not selected Teachers
not selected Students
not selected Classes
selected Other
If other, please specify:
Children. Children with FAS, pFAS, or significant alcohol-related dysmorphia who received the math intervention as compared to children who received the standard level of care.

Please describe the unit(s) used for primary data analysis:

Fidelity of Implementation Empty Bobble

How was the program delivered?
selected Individually
not selected Small Group
not selected Classroom

If small group, answer the following:

Average group size
Minimum group size
Maximum group size

What was the duration of the intervention (If duration differed across participants, settings, or behaviors, describe for each.)?

Weeks
6.00
Sessions per week
1.00
Duration of sessions in minutes
60.00
What were the background, experience, training, and ongoing support of the instructors or interventionists?
The initial instructors for the MILE training were teachers who had completed at least a masters degree in special education or psychology, and post-doctoral fellows in psychology. Each instructor attended a two-day MILE workshop. Each instructor was observed by the trainer over three sessions using the MILE Fidelity Checklist to provide feedback regarding implementation of MILE.

Describe when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained.
Using the MILE Fidelity Checklist , the program developers or MILE trainer would observe the instructors to provide information on areas needed to be improved or adjusted to maintain program fidelity. MILE instructors were observed working with a student over three sessions at different time points over the course of implementing the MILE program. During each observation, the trainer used the MILE Fidelity Checklist to rate the instructor in areas of preparedness for the session, use of the defined MILE instructional approaches, adherence to the MILE protocols, and positive interactions with the students. The trainer would assign 2 points for the instructor consistently demonstrating the protocol correctly, 1 point for partially or sometimes demonstrating the behavior during the session, and no points if the instructor did not demonstrate the behavior during the session. A total of 30 points would be obtained for each session. The objective was to have the instructor reach 30 points by the end of the last training observation.

What were the results on the fidelity-of-treatment implementation measure?
MILE instructors were trained by the developers of the program. Instructors were observed using the thirty-item Instructor Fidelity and Observation Checklist. Instructors were considered prepared to implement MILE when they exhibited all the teaching behaviors indicated on the Instructor Fidelity and Observation Checklist. A copy of the Instructor Fidelity and Observation Checklist can be provided upon request.

Was the fidelity measure also used in control classrooms?
N/A

Measures and Results

Measures Targeted : Dash
Measures Broader : Full Bobble

Study measures are classified as targeted, broader, or administrative data according to the following definitions:

  • Targeted measures
    Assess outcomes, such as competencies or skills that the program was directly targeted to improve.
    • In the academic domain, targeted measures typically are not the very items taught but rather novel items structured similarly to the content addressed in the program. For example, if a program taught word-attack skills, a targeted measure would be decoding of pseudo words. If a program taught comprehension of cause-effect passages, a targeted measure would be answering questions about cause-effect passages structured similarly to those used during intervention, but not including the very passages used for intervention.
    • In the behavioral domain, targeted measures evaluate aspects of external or internal behavior the program was directly targeted to improve and are operationally defined.
  • Broader measures
    Assess outcomes that are related to the competencies or skills targeted by the program but not directly taught in the program.
    • In the academic domain, if a program taught word-level reading skill, a broader measure would be answering questions about passages the student reads. If a program taught calculation skill, a broader measure would be solving word problems that require the same kinds of calculation skill taught in the program.
    • In the behavioral domain, if a program taught a specific skill like on-task behavior in one classroom, a broader measure would be academic performance in that setting or on-task behavior in another setting.
  • Administrative data measures apply only to behavioral intervention tools and are measures such as office discipline referrals (ODRs) and graduation rates which do not have psychometric properties as do other, more traditional targeted or broader measures.

Click here for more information on effect size.


What populations are you submitting outcome data for?
selected Full sample
selected Students at or below the 20th percentile
not selected English language learners
not selected Racial/ethnic subgroups
not selected Economically disadvantaged students (low socioeconomic status)
Targeted Measure Reverse Coded? Reliability Relevance Exposure
Broader Measure Reverse Coded? Reliability Relevance Exposure
Administrative Data Measure Reverse Coded? Relevance

Posttest Data

Targeted Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Broader Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Administrative Measures (Full Sample)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Targeted Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Broader Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P

Administrative Measures (Subgroups)

Measure Sample Type Effect Size P
For any substantively (e.g., effect size ≥ 0.25 for pretest or demographic differences) or statistically significant (e.g., p < 0.05) pretest differences, please describe the extent to which these differences are related to the impact of the treatment. For example, if analyses were conducted to determine that outcomes from this study are due to the intervention and not pretest characteristics, please describe the results of those analyses here.
As indicated in the 2007 article by Kable, Coles, and Taddeo, an analysis was conducted to determine if there were differences in characteristics of groups that might influence the results. The analysis indicated that that there were no differences between the Math intervention group and the Psychoeducational Contrast group, who did not receive the MILE intervention, regarding age, sex, race, socio-economic status, cognitive functioning. There was a difference regarding birth weight with the Math intervention group having significantly lower birth weight when compared to the Psychoeducational Contrast group [Math group birthweight 2084.4 grams, SD = 785 grams; Psychoeducation Contrast group birthweight 2677.7, SD = 818, p = .024]. Birth weight was not included in statistical analysis.
Please explain any missing data or instances of measures with incomplete pre- or post-test data.
N/A
If you have excluded a variable or data that are reported in the study being submitted, explain the rationale for exclusion:
The MILE study used an investigator created task to assess number writing skills called the Number Writing Task. Interrater reliability is unavailable for the Number Writing Task.
Describe the analyses used to determine whether the intervention produced changes in student outcomes:
MILE was designed to improve thinking skills embedded within the context of mathematics, an area often impaired in children affected by prenatal alcohol exposure. The program focused on basic mathematical skills such as counting, cardinality, number magnitude, basic arithmetic, and shape and size comparisons. This is reflected the test measures used to assess the effectiveness of the program. As stated in the article by Kable , Coles, and Taddeo (2007) To examine outcomes, the statistical analysis combined raw scores on the components from TEMA-2, Bracken, and the Key Math Revised -NU and conducted a principal component analysis with a varimax rotation. This gave a math development factor for the pretest that accounted for 92.7% of the variance between math measures. It also accounted for 90.2% of the variance for the post-test. A multivariate analysis of covariance was conducted on the post-math functioning scores while controlling for the pre-math functioning scores. The results indicated that a significant treatment effect was found for post-math functioning [F(3, 43)= 5.34, p = 0 .003] Children who did not receive the MILE intervention showed gains in mathematics; but less than those who received the MILE intervention [F(3, 43) = 2.97, p < 0.04, partial eta-squared = 0.17, medium effect size]. Additionally, students' pre-and-post test performance were coded as either "yes" to indicate a clinically significant gain defined as an increase of at least one standard deviation from the mean from pre-to-post test performance on any of the mathematical outcomes, or "no" indicating no statistically significant gain on any of the outcomes. A clinically significant gain was defined as a gain of >1 standard deviation on the post-test when compared to the pre-test on at least one of the mathematics outcome measures. Results showed that the children who received the MILE intervention were more likely to exhibit a clinically significant gain on the post-test after receiving intervention [ 58.6 vs 23.1%, X (1,55) = 7.1, p < 0.0008]. This finding suggests that MILE was an effective approach to improve mathematical skills in children affected by prenatal alcohol exposure.

Additional Research

Is the program reviewed by WWC or E-ESSA?
No
Summary of WWC / E-ESSA Findings :

What Works Clearinghouse Review

This program was not reviewed by the What Works Clearinghouse.

 

Evidence for ESSA

This program was not reviewed by Evidence for ESSA.

How many additional research studies are potentially eligible for NCII review?
1
Citations for Additional Research Studies :

­   Kully-Martens, K., Pei, J., Kable, J., Coles, C. D., Andrew, G., & Rasmussen, C. (2018). Mathematics intervention for children with fetal alcohol spectrum disorder: A replication and extension of the math interactive learning experience (MILE) program. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 78, 55-65. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891422218300945. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2018.04.018

Data Collection Practices

Most tools and programs evaluated by the NCII are branded products which have been submitted by the companies, organizations, or individuals that disseminate these products. These entities supply the textual information shown above, but not the ratings accompanying the text. NCII administrators and members of our Technical Review Committees have reviewed the content on this page, but NCII cannot guarantee that this information is free from error or reflective of recent changes to the product. Tools and programs have the opportunity to be updated annually or upon request.