Meaning before order: Cardinal principle knowledge predicts improvement in understanding the successor principle and exact ordering

What the Science of Learning Teaches Us About Arithmetic Fluency

High-quality mathematics education not only improves life outcomes for individuals but also drives innovation and progress across society. But what exactly constitutes high-quality mathematics education? In this article, we contribute to this discussion by focusing on arithmetic fluency. The debate over how best to teach arithmetic has been long and fierce. Should we emphasize memorization techniques such as flashcards and timed drills or promote "thinking strategies" via play and authentic problem solving? Too often, recommendations for a "balanced" approach lack the depth and specificity needed to effectively guide educators or inform public understanding. Here, we draw on developmental cognitive science, particularly Sfard's process-object duality and Karmiloff-Smith's implicit-explicit knowledge continuum, to present memorization and thinking strategies not as opposing methods but as complementary forces. This framework enables us to offer specific recommendations for fostering arithmetic fluency based on the science of learning. We define arithmetic fluency, provide evidence on its importance, describe the cognitive structures and processes supporting it, and share evidence-based guidance for promoting it. Our recommendations include progress monitoring for early numeracy, providing explicit instruction to teach important strategies and concepts, implementing well-structured retrieval practice, introducing time-limited practice only after students demonstrate accuracy, and allocating sufficient time for discussion and cognitive reflection. By blending theory, evidence, and practical advice, we equip educators and policymakers with the knowledge needed to ensure all children have access to the opportunities needed to achieve arithmetic fluency.

The influence of language on the formation of number concepts: Evidence from preschool children who are bilingual in English and Arabic

We asked whether grammatical number marking has specific influence on the formation of early number concepts. In particular, does comprehension of dual case marking support young children's understanding of cardinality? We assessed number knowledge in 77 3-year-old Arabic-English bilingual children using the Give-a-Number task in both languages. Given recent concerns around the administration and scoring of the Give-a-Number task, we used two complementary approaches: one based on conceptual levels and the other based on overall test scores. We also tested comprehension of dual case marking in Arabic and number sequence knowledge in both languages. Regression analyses showed that dual case comprehension exerts a strong influence on cardinality tested in Arabic independent of age, general language skills, and number sequence knowledge. No such influence was found for cardinality tested in English, indicating a language-specific effect. Further analyses tested for transfer of cardinality knowledge between languages. These revealed, in addition to the findings outlined above, a powerful cross-linguistic transfer effect. Our findings are consistent with a model in which the direct effect of dual case marking is language specific, but concepts, once acquired, may be represented abstractly and transferred between languages.

Features in children's counting books that lead dyads to both count and label sets during shared book reading

This study examined how book features influence talk during shared book reading. We used data from a study in which parent-child dyads (n = 157; child's M_age  = 43.99 months; 88 girls, 69 boys; 91.72% of parents self-reported as white) were randomly assigned to read two number books. The focus was comparison talk (i.e., talk in which dyads count a set and also label its total), as this type of talk has been shown to promote children's understanding of cardinality. Replicating previous findings, dyads produced relatively low levels of comparison talk. However, book features influenced the talk. Books containing a greater number of numerical representations (e.g., number word, numeral, and non-symbolic set) and a greater word count elicited more comparison talk.

The plural counts: Inconsistent grammatical number hinders numerical development in preschoolers - A cross-linguistic study

The role of grammar in numerical development, and particularly the role of grammatical number inflection, has already been well-documented in toddlerhood. It is unclear, however, whether the influence of grammatical language structure further extends to more complex later stages of numerical development. Here, we addressed this question by exploiting differences between Polish, which has a complex grammatical number paradigm, leading to a partially inconsistent mapping between numerical quantities and grammatical number, and German, which has a comparatively easy verbal paradigm: 151 Polish-speaking and 123 German-speaking kindergarten children were tested using a symbolic numerical comparison task. Additionally, counting skills (Give-a-Number and count-list), and mapping between non-symbolic (dot sets) and symbolic representations of numbers, as well as working memory (Corsi blocks and Digit span) were assessed. Based on the Give-a-Number and mapping tasks, the children were divided into subset-knowers, CP-knowers-non-mappers, and CP-knowers-mappers. Linguistic background was related to performance in several ways: Polish-speaking children expectedly progressed to the CP-knowers stage later than German children, despite comparable non-numerical capabilities, and even after this stage was achieved, they fared worse in the numerical comparison task. There were also meaningful differences in spatial-numerical mapping between the Polish and German groups. Our findings are in line with the theory that grammatical number paradigms influence. the development of representations and processing of numbers, not only at the stage of acquiring the meaning of the first number-words but at later stages as well, when dealing with symbolic numbers.

Constructing Counting and Arithmetic Learning Trajectories for Kindergarteners: A Preliminary Investigation in Taiwan

Mathematics learning trajectories (LTs) for students above elementary school level are widely investigated. Recently, LTs for kindergarteners have also attracted attention, but in those studies the LTs were based on Western samples, and it is unclear whether they also involved culture and gender differences. Therefore, the purposes of this study were twofold: (1) construct a counting and arithmetic LT based on an Eastern sample and (2) show its similarities and differences by gender. The constructed LT contains 13 hypothesized levels of mathematical concepts according to previous research, and 59 kindergarteners (26 boys and 33 girls) participated in this study and completed a counting and arithmetic test to examine empirically the theoretical LT. The results showed that empirically, there were eight and nine conceptual levels for boys and girls, respectively, and boys and girls mastered concepts in a similar order (basic arithmetic→basic counting→advanced counting→mediocre arithmetic→advanced arithmetic), with the first part differing from the hypothesized LT. Within this developmental progression, girls showed a different path from advanced counting to mediocre arithmetic. The findings show gender and culture differences for the LTs for kindergarteners, which contradicts most previous research based on Western samples.

Assessing the knower-level framework: How reliable is the Give-a-Number task?

The Give-a-Number task has become a gold standard of children's number word comprehension in developmental psychology. Recently, researchers have begun to use the task as a predictor of other developmental milestones. This raises the question of how reliable the task is, since test-retest reliability of any measure places an upper bound on the size of reliable correlations that can be found between it and other measures. In Experiment 1, we presented 81 2- to 5-year-old children with Wynn (1992) titrated version of the Give-a-Number task twice within a single session. We found that the reliability of this version of the task was high overall, but varied importantly across different assigned knower levels, and was very low for some knower levels. In Experiment 2, we assessed the test-retest reliability of the non-titrated version of the Give-a-Number task with another group of 81 children and found a similar pattern of results. Finally, in Experiment 3, we asked whether the two versions of Give-a-Number generated different knower levels within-subjects, by testing 75 children with both tasks. Also, we asked how both tasks relate to another commonly used test of number knowledge, the "What's-On-This-Card" task. We found that overall, the titrated and non-titrated versions of Give-a-Number yielded similar knower levels, though the non-titrated version was slightly more conservative than the titrated version, which produced modestly higher knower levels. Neither was more closely related to "What's-On-This-Card" than the other. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results.

Extending ideas of numerical order beyond the count-list from kindergarten to first grade

Ordinal processing plays a fundamental role in both the representation and manipulation of symbolic numbers. As such, it is important to understand how children come to develop a sense of ordinality in the first place. The current study examines the role of the count-list in the development of ordinal knowledge through the investigation of two research questions: (1) Do K-1 children struggle to extend the notion of numerical order beyond the count-list, and if so (2) does this extension develop incrementally or manifest as a qualitative re-organization of how children recognize the ordinality of numerical sequences. Overall, we observed that although young children reliably identified adjacent ordered sequences (i.e., those that match the count-list; '2-3-4') as being in the correct ascending order, they performed significantly below chance on non-adjacent ordered trials (i.e., those that do not match the count-list but are in the correct order; '2-4-6') from the beginning of kindergarten to the end of first grade. Further, both qualitative and quantitative analyses supported the conclusion that the ability to extend notions of ordinality beyond the count-list emerged as a conceptual shift in ordinal understanding rather than through incremental improvements. These findings are the first to suggest that the ability to extend notions of ordinality beyond the count-list to include non-adjacent numbers is non-trivial and reflects a significant developmental hurdle that most children must overcome in order to develop a mature sense of ordinality.

The neural basis of number word processing in children and adults

The ability to map number words to their corresponding quantity representations is a gatekeeper for children's future math success (Spaepen et al., 2018). Without number word knowledge at school entry, children are at greater risk for developing math learning difficulties (Chu et al., 2019). In the present study, we used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine the neural basis for processing the meaning of spoken number words and its developmental trajectory in 4- to 10-year-old children, and in adults. In a number word-quantity mapping paradigm, participants listened to number words while simultaneously viewing quantities that were congruent or incongruent to the number word they heard. Whole brain analyses revealed that adults showed a neural congruity effect with greater neural activation for incongruent relative to congruent trials in anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and left intraparietal sulcus (LIPS). In contrast, children did not show a significant neural congruity effect. However, a region of interest analysis in the child sample demonstrated age-related increases in the neural congruity effect, specifically in the LIPS. The positive correlation between neural congruity in LIPS and age was stronger in children who were already attending school, suggesting that developmental changes in LIPS function are experience-dependent.

Children's understanding of the abstract logic of counting

When children learn to count, do they understand its logic independent of the number list that they learned to count with? Here we tested CP-knowers' (ages three to five) understanding of how counting reveals a set's cardinality, even when non-numerical lists are used to count. Participants watched an agent count unobservable objects in two boxes and were asked to identify the larger set. Participants successfully identified the box with more objects when the agent counted using their familiar number list (Experiment 1) and when the agent counted using a non-numeric ordered list, as long as the items in the list were not linguistically used as number words (Experiments 2-3). Additionally, children's performance was strongly influenced by visual cues that helped them link the list's order to representations of magnitude (Experiment 4). Our findings suggest that three- to six-year-olds who can count also understand how counting reveals a set's cardinality, but they require additional time to understand how symbols on any arbitrary ordered list can be used as numerals.

Starting small: exploring the origins of successor function knowledge

Although most U. S. children can accurately count sets by 4 years of age, many fail to understand the structural analogy between counting and number - that adding 1 to a set corresponds to counting up 1 word in the count list. While children are theorized to establish this Structure Mapping coincident with learning how counting is used to generate sets, they initially have an item-based understanding of this relationship, and can infer that, e.g, adding 1 to "five" is "six", while failing to infer that, e.g., adding 1 to "twenty-five" is "twenty-six" despite being able to recite these numbers when counting aloud. The item-specific nature of children's successes in reasoning about the relationship between changes in cardinality and the count list raises the possibility that such a Structure Mapping emerges later in development, and that this ability does not initially depend on learning to count. We test this hypothesis in two experiments and find evidence that children can perform item-based addition operations before they become competent counters. Even after children learn to count, we find that their ability to perform addition operations remains item-based and restricted to very small numbers, rather than drawing on generalized knowledge of how the count list represents number. We discuss how these early item-based associations between number words and sets might play a role in constructing a generalized Structure Mapping between counting and quantity.

What Counts? Sources of Knowledge in Children's Acquisition of the Successor Function

Although many U.S. children can count sets by 4 years, it is not until 5½-6 years that they understand how counting relates to number-that is, that adding 1 to a set necessitates counting up one number. This study examined two knowledge sources that 3½- to 6-year-olds (N = 136) may leverage to acquire this "successor function": (a) mastery of productive rules governing count list generation; and (b) training with "+1" math facts. Both productive counting and "+1" math facts were related to understanding that adding 1 to sets entails counting up one number in the count list; however, even children with robust successor knowledge struggled with its arithmetic expression, suggesting they do not generalize the successor function from "+1" math facts.

Longitudinally adaptive assessment and instruction increase numerical skills of preschool children

Social inequality in mathematical skill is apparent at kindergarten entry and persists during elementary school. To level the playing field, we trained teachers to assess children's numerical and spatial skills every 10 wk. Each assessment provided teachers with information about a child's growth trajectory on each skill, information designed to help them evaluate their students' progress, reflect on past instruction, and strategize for the next phase of instruction. A key constraint is that teachers have limited time to assess individual students. To maximize the information provided by an assessment, we adapted the difficulty of each assessment based on each child's age and accumulated evidence about the child's skills. Children in classrooms of 24 trained teachers scored 0.29 SD higher on numerical skills at posttest than children in 25 randomly assigned control classrooms (P = 0.005). We observed no effect on spatial skills. The intervention also positively influenced children's verbal comprehension skills (0.28 SD higher at posttest, P < 0.001), but did not affect their print-literacy skills. We consider the potential contribution of this approach, in combination with similar regimes of assessment and instruction in elementary schools, to the reduction of social inequality in numerical skill and discuss possible explanations for the absence of an effect on spatial skills.

Counting to Infinity: Does Learning the Syntax of the Count List Predict Knowledge That Numbers Are Infinite?

By around the age of 5½, many children in the United States judge that numbers never end, and that it is always possible to add 1 to a set. These same children also generally perform well when asked to label the quantity of a set after one object is added (e.g., judging that a set labeled "five" should now be "six"). These findings suggest that children have implicit knowledge of the "successor function": Every natural number, n, has a successor, n + 1. Here, we explored how children discover this recursive function, and whether it might be related to discovering productive morphological rules that govern language-specific counting routines (e.g., the rules in English that represent base-10 structure). We tested 4- and 5-year-old children's knowledge of counting with three tasks, which we then related to (a) children's belief that 1 can always be added to any number (the successor function) and (b) their belief that numbers never end (infinity). Children who exhibited knowledge of a productive counting rule were significantly more likely to believe that numbers are infinite (i.e., there is no largest number), though such counting knowledge was not directly linked to knowledge of the successor function, per se. Also, our findings suggest that children as young as 4 years of age are able to implement rules defined over their verbal count list to generate number words beyond their spontaneous counting range, an insight which may support reasoning over their acquired verbal count sequence to infer that numbers never end.

Is thirty-two three tens and two ones? The embedded structure of cardinal numbers

The acquisition and representation of natural numbers have been a central topic in cognitive science. However, a key question in this topic about how humans acquire the capacity to understand that numbers make 'infinite use of finite means' (or that numbers are generative) has been left unanswered. While previous theories rely on the idea of the successor principle, we propose an alternative hypothesis that children's understanding of the syntactic rules for building complex numerals-or numerical syntax-is a crucial foundation for the acquisition of number concepts. In two independent studies, we assessed children's understanding of numerical syntax by probing their knowledge about the embedded structure of cardinal numbers using a novel task called Give-a-number Base-10 (Give-N10). In Give-N10, children were asked to give a large number of items (e.g., 32 items) from a pool that is organized in sets of ten items. Children's knowledge about the embedded structure of numbers (e.g., knowing that thirty-two items are composed of three tens and two ones) was assessed from their ability to use those sets. Study 1 tested English-speaking 4- to 10-year-olds and revealed that children's understanding of the embedded structure of numbers emerges relatively late in development (several months into kindergarten), beyond when they are capable of making a semantic induction over a local sequence of numbers. Moreover, performance in Give-N10 was predicted by other task measures that assessed children's knowledge about the syntactic rules that govern numerals (such as counting fluency), demonstrating the validity of the measure. In Study 2, this association was tested again in monolingual Korean kindergarteners (5-6 years), as we aimed to test the same effect in a language with a highly regular numeral system. It replicated the association between Give-N10 performance and counting fluency, and it also demonstrated that Korean-speaking children understand the embedded structure of cardinal numbers earlier in the acquisition path than English-speaking peers, suggesting that regularity in numerical syntax facilitates the acquisition of generative properties of numbers. Based on these observations and our theoretical analysis of the literature, we propose that the syntax for building complex numerals, not the successor principle, represents a structural platform for numerical thinking in young children.

Do children use language structure to discover the recursive rules of counting?

We test the hypothesis that children acquire knowledge of the successor function - a foundational principle stating that every natural number n has a successor n + 1 - by learning the productive linguistic rules that govern verbal counting. Previous studies report that speakers of languages with less complex count list morphology have greater counting and mathematical knowledge at earlier ages in comparison to speakers of more complex languages (e.g., Miller & Stigler, 1987). Here, we tested whether differences in count list transparency affected children's acquisition of the successor function in three languages with relatively transparent count lists (Cantonese, Slovenian, and English) and two languages with relatively opaque count lists (Hindi and Gujarati). We measured 3.5- to 6.5-year-old children's mastery of their count list's recursive structure with two tasks assessing productive counting, which we then related to a measure of successor function knowledge. While the more opaque languages were associated with lower counting proficiency and successor function task performance in comparison to the more transparent languages, a unique within-language analytic approach revealed a robust relationship between measures of productive counting and successor knowledge in almost every language. We conclude that learning productive rules of counting is a critical step in acquiring knowledge of recursive successor function across languages, and that the timeline for this learning varies as a function of count list transparency.

Preschool deficits in cardinal knowledge and executive function contribute to longer-term mathematical learning disability

In a preschool through first grade longitudinal study, we identified groups of children with persistently low mathematics achievement (n = 14) and children with low achievement in preschool but average achievement in first grade (n = 23). The preschool quantitative developments of these respective groups of children with mathematical learning disability (MLD) and recovered children and a group of typically achieving peers (n = 35) were contrasted, as were their intelligence, executive function, and parental education levels. The core characteristics of the children with MLD were poor executive function and delayed understanding of the cardinal value of number words throughout preschool. These compounded into even more substantive deficits in number and arithmetic at the beginning of first grade. The recovered group had poor executive function and cardinal knowledge during the first year of preschool but showed significant gains during the second year. Despite these gains and average mathematics achievement, the recovered children had subtle deficits with accessing magnitudes associated with numerals and addition combinations (e.g., 5 + 6 = ?) in first grade. The study provides unique insight into domain-general and quantitative deficits in preschool that increase risk for long-term mathematical difficulties.

Ontogenetic Origins of Human Integer Representations

Do children learn number words by associating them with perceptual magnitudes? Recent studies argue that approximate numerical magnitudes play a foundational role in the development of integer concepts. Against this, we argue that approximate number representations fail both empirically and in principle to provide the content required of integer concepts. Instead, we suggest that children's understanding of integer concepts proceeds in two phases. In the first phase, children learn small exact number word meanings by associating words with small sets. In the second phase, children learn the meanings of larger number words by mastering the logic of exact counting algorithms, which implement the successor function and Hume's principle (that one-to-one correspondence guarantees exact equality). In neither phase do approximate number representations play a foundational role.

Number gestures predict learning of number words

When asked to explain their solutions to a problem, children often gesture and, at times, these gestures convey information that is different from the information conveyed in speech. Children who produce these gesture-speech "mismatches" on a particular task have been found to profit from instruction on that task. We have recently found that some children produce gesture-speech mismatches when identifying numbers at the cusp of their knowledge, for example, a child incorrectly labels a set of two objects with the word "three" and simultaneously holds up two fingers. These mismatches differ from previously studied mismatches (where the information conveyed in gesture has the potential to be integrated with the information conveyed in speech) in that the gestured response contradicts the spoken response. Here, we ask whether these contradictory number mismatches predict which learners will profit from number-word instruction. We used the Give-a-Number task to measure number knowledge in 47 children (Mage  = 4.1 years, SD = 0.58), and used the What's on this Card task to assess whether children produced gesture-speech mismatches above their knower level. Children who were early in their number learning trajectories ("one-knowers" and "two-knowers") were then randomly assigned, within knower level, to one of two training conditions: a Counting condition in which children practiced counting objects; or an Enriched Number Talk condition containing counting, labeling set sizes, spatial alignment of neighboring sets, and comparison of these sets. Controlling for counting ability, we found that children were more likely to learn the meaning of new number words in the Enriched Number Talk condition than in the Counting condition, but only if they had produced gesture-speech mismatches at pretest. The findings suggest that numerical gesture-speech mismatches are a reliable signal that a child is ready to profit from rich number instruction and provide evidence, for the first time, that cardinal number gestures have a role to play in number-learning.

Improved set-size labeling mediates the effect of a counting intervention on children's understanding of cardinality

How does improving children's ability to label set sizes without counting affect the development of understanding of the cardinality principle? It may accelerate development by facilitating subsequent alignment and comparison of the cardinal label for a given set and the last word counted when counting that set (Mix et al., 2012). Alternatively, it may delay development by decreasing the need for a comprehensive abstract principle to understand and label exact numerosities (Piantadosi et al., 2012). In this study, preschoolers (N = 106, M_age   = 4;8) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: (a) count-and-label, wherein children spent 6 weeks both counting and labeling sets arranged in canonical patterns like pips on a die; (b) label-first,wherein children spent the first 3 weeks learning to label the set sizes without counting before spending 3 weeks identical to the count-and-label condition; (c) print referencing control. Both counting conditions improved understanding of cardinality through increases in children's ability to label set sizes without counting. In addition to this indirect effect, there was a direct effect of the count-and-label condition on progress toward understanding of cardinality. Results highlight the roles of set labeling and equifinality in the development of children's understanding of number concepts.

Contrast and entailment: Abstract logical relations constrain how 2- and 3-year-old children interpret unknown numbers

Do children understand how different numbers are related before they associate them with specific cardinalities? We explored how children rely on two abstract relations - contrast and entailment - to reason about the meanings of 'unknown' number words. Previous studies argue that, because children give variable amounts when asked to give an unknown number, all unknown numbers begin with an existential meaning akin to some. In Experiment 1, we tested an alternative hypothesis, that because numbers belong to a scale of contrasting alternatives, children assign them a meaning distinct from some. In the "Don't Give-a-Number task", children were shown three kinds of fruit (apples, bananas, strawberries), and asked to not give either some or a number of one kind (e.g. Give everything, but not [some/five] bananas). While children tended to give zero bananas when asked to not give some, they gave positive amounts when asked to not give numbers. This suggests that contrast - plus knowledge of a number's membership in a count list - enables children to differentiate the meanings of unknown number words from the meaning of some. Experiment 2 tested whether children's interpretation of unknown numbers is further constrained by understanding numerical entailment relations - that if someone, e.g. has three, they thereby also have two, but if they do not have three, they also do not have four. On critical trials, children saw two characters with different quantities of fish, two apart (e.g. 2 vs. 4), and were asked about the number in-between - who either has or doesn't have, e.g. three. Children picked the larger quantity for the affirmative, and the smaller for the negative prompts even when all the numbers were unknown, suggesting that they understood that, whatever three means, a larger quantity is more likely to contain that many, and a smaller quantity is more likely not to. We conclude by discussing how contrast and entailment could help children scaffold the exact meanings of unknown number words.

Meaning before order: Cardinal principle knowledge predicts improvement in understanding the successor principle and exact ordering

Learning the cardinal principle (the last word reached when counting a set represents the size of the whole set) is a major milestone in early mathematics. But researchers disagree about the relationship between cardinal principle knowledge and other concepts, including how counting implements the successor function (for each number word N representing a cardinal value, the next word in the count list represents the cardinal value N + 1) and exact ordering (cardinal values can be ordered such that each is one more than the value before it and one less than the value after it). No studies have investigated acquisition of the successor principle and exact ordering over time, and in relation to cardinal principle knowledge. An open question thus remains: Is the cardinal principle a "gatekeeper" concept children must acquire before learning about succession and exact ordering, or can these concepts develop separately? Preschoolers (N = 127) who knew the cardinal principle (CP-knowers) or who knew the cardinal meanings of number words up to "three" or "four" (3-4-knowers) completed succession and exact ordering tasks at pretest and posttest. In between, children completed one of two trainings: counting only versus counting, cardinal labeling, and comparison. CP-knowers started out better than 3-4-knowers on succession and exact ordering. Controlling for this disparity, we found that CP-knowers improved over time on succession and exact ordering; 3-4-knowers did not. Improvement did not differ between the two training conditions. We conclude that children can learn the cardinal principle without understanding succession or exact ordering and hypothesize that children must understand the cardinal principle before learning these concepts.