Jump Math
Description:
The Jump program is described by its creators as, “JUMP Math’s distinctive, agile approach focuses not only on what students learn, but how they learn it. It has been developed through extensive research and experience working with children. Unlike teaching methods that rely on textbooks, rote learning or memorization, our approach helps children overcome “math anxiety” by building their confidence and resilience through tackling incrementally more challenging concepts at each stage of learning. This leads to success at understanding math – not just memorizing concepts.”
Jump Math was written and created by John Mighton. John Mighton developed Jump Math as a non-profit initiative in Canada.His program is based on principles of explicit instruction and seeks to balance both procedural and conceptual Math demands.
Principles:
The Jump website lists the following principles as being key to their program:
“Teachers guide students to discover math concepts in gradual, scaffolded lessons.
Students gain confidence by engaging with & mastering concepts throughout each lesson.
This process helps teachers assess each student’s learning.
And prepares students to move on to the next connected lesson.”
Research:
There have been 13 studies conducted on Jump Math. However, only one of them met the inclusion criteria of Teaching by Science. A randomized control trial, conducted by Solomon T, Dupuis, Et al, and published in 2019. This study was sponsored by Sick Kids Hospital. This study had 273 grade 5 students, lasted 5 months and used a WJ-III assessment. The results of which can be seen in the below graph.
Final Grade: B
According to the Teaching by Science criterion, this study gets a rating of B: A RCT of this program, found a mean effect size of between .40 and .49. That said, there are several factors that make this study distinctive and its effect size more significant. It has a sample size above 100, was independently conducted, and used a standardized measurement. This type of study could be classified as causal. A causal study typically produces a much lower effect size (Kraft, 2020). Typically, a study of this design would produce an effect size below .10. I therefore think these results of this study suggest strong evidence of efficacy. Having met John Mighton personally, I can also say that he presents a strong commitment to evidence based Math instruction.
Disclaimer: Please note that this review is not peer reviewed content. These reviews are independently conducted. Pedagogy Non Grata, does not take profit from conducting any program review found on this website.
Written by Nathaniel Hansford: teacher and lead writer for Pedagogy Non Grata
Last Edited 2026-08-22
*Conflict of Interest note. I have met John in person on multiple occasions and revised my review, after listening to his philosophy of instruction. John and I own and sell competing Math programs in the same domestic market. We are therefore technically competitors of each other.
References:
Solomon T, Dupuis A, O’Hara A, Hockenberry M-N, Lam J, Goco G, et al. (2019) A cluster-randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of the JUMP Math program of math instruction for improving elementary math achievement. PLoS ONE 14(10): e0223049. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223049
Solomon T, Dupuis A, O’Hara A, Hockenberry M-N, Lam J, Goco G, et al. (2019) A cluster-randomized controlled trial of the effectiveness of the JUMP Math program of math instruction for improving elementary math achievement. PLoS ONE 14(10): e0223049. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223049
Mathematics & Cognitive Science. (2020). Math Minds Research. University of Calgary. Retrieved from <https://www.structuringinquiry.com/>.
Jump Math. (2020). Jump National Book Fund School Studies. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/04/JUMP-Math-National-Book-Fund-School-StudiesV2.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2019). Brooklyn Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/05/Brooklyn-Case-Study.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2018). Manhattan Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/05/Manhattan-Case-Study_Big-Math-Gains-at-NYC-School-2016.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2013). Barcelona Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/05/Automomous-University-of-Barcelona.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2010). Toronto Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/05/Toronto-Case-Study.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2009). Lambeth Case Study. <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/04/The-Impact-of-JUMP-Math-in-England-Lambeth-2009.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2007). Lambeth Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/04/JUMP-Lambeth-2007.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2007). Vancouver Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/04/Vancouver-School-Board-2007.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2006). Lambeth Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/04/JUMP-Lambeth-2006.pdf>.
Jump Math. (2004). Ontario Case Study. Retrieved from <https://jumpmath.org/ca/wp-content/uploads/sites/1/2021/05/JUMP-for-Joy-OISE-UofT-Study-2004.pdf>.
Kraft, M. (2020). Interpreting Effect Sizes of Education Interventions. Educational Researcher