Learning trajectories towards strategy proficiency in multi-digit division – A latent transition analysis of strategy and error profiles

Conceptualizing and Measuring Appetite Self-Regulation Phenotypes and Trajectories in Childhood: A Review of Person-Centered Strategies

This review uses person-centered research and data analysis strategies to discuss the conceptualization and measurement of appetite self-regulation (ASR) phenotypes and trajectories in childhood (from infancy to about ages 6 or 7 years). Research that is person-centered provides strategies that increase the possibilities for investigating ASR phenotypes. We first examine the utility of examining underlying phenotypes using latent profile/class analysis drawing on cross-sectional data. The use of trajectory analysis to investigate developmental change is then discussed, with attention to phenotypes using trajectories of individual behaviors as well as phenotypes based on multi-trajectory modeling. Data analysis strategies and measurement approaches from recent examples of these person-centered approaches to the conceptualization and investigation of appetite self-regulation and its development in childhood are examined. Where relevant, examples from older children as well as developmental, clinical and educational psychology are drawn on to discuss when and how person-centered approaches can be used. We argue that there is scope to incorporate recent advances in biological and psychoneurological knowledge about appetite self-regulation as well as fundamental processes in the development of general self-regulation to enhance the examination of phenotypes and their trajectories across childhood (and beyond). The discussion and conclusion suggest directions for future research and highlight the potential of person-centered approaches to progress knowledge about the development of appetite self-regulation in childhood.

Training Can Increase Students' Choices for Written Solution Strategies and Performance in Solving Multi-Digit Division Problems

Making adaptive choices between solution strategies is a central element of contemporary mathematics education. However, previous studies signal that students make suboptimal choices between mental and written strategies to solve division problems. In particular, some students of a lower math ability level appear inclined to use mental strategies that lead to lower performance. The current study uses a pretest-training-posttest design to investigate the extent to which these students' choices for written strategies and performance may be increased. Sixth graders of below-average mathematics level (n = 147) participated in one of two training conditions: an explicit-scaffolding training designed to promote writing down calculations or a practice-only training where strategy use was not explicitly targeted. Written strategy choices and performance increased considerably from pretest to posttest for students in both training conditions, but not in different amounts. Exploratory results suggest that students' strategy choices may also be affected by their attitudes and beliefs and the sociocultural context regarding strategy use.