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.” 


 

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.”



I interpreted this to mean the program is focused on conceptual learning, individualization, and logical scaffolding. All of these ideas are important. However, I see no mention of developing procedural or computational fluency, within their marketing material which worries me. However, users do appear to believe the program provides enough fluency work. Unfortunately, the Jump curriculum is not publicly available, nor are there resource samples publicly available, at least not without signing a lengthy contract with the company, which limit my ability to qualitatively review this product. I will update this review in future, if I have access to their materials. 

 

Ultimately, I do not think a qualitative analysis of Jump Math can be easily given, because the program offers so little information online. That being said, I feel comfortable saying the program is conceptually focused.

 

Research:

There have been 13 studies conducted on Jump Math. However, only two of them were of high enough quality to evaluate the efficacy of the program. I as only able to find the results for one of those two studies. 

 

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. 

 

Solomon RCT Results.png

Final Grade: B

 

A RCT of this program, found a mean effect size of between .40 and .49. 

 

Written by Nathaniel Hansford

Last Edited 2022-07-21 *A significant correction was made in the last edit, due to a previously made serious error. 

 

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>.