There is a dearth of research comparing the effects of iPad technology and paper-and-pencil-delivered interventions on student mathematics outcomes. Nine studies have compared intervention modalities such as computer-mediated instruction and teacher-mediated instruction to examine differences in student performance, but only two of these have used iPad technology to do so and neither examined student fact fluency as the outcome. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an iPad-based versus a paper-and-pencil-based flashcard intervention on the basic fact fluency of four second-grade boys within a Midwestern US charter school. Using an adapted alternating treatments design, three conditions were compared: iPad-delivered flashcards, paper-and-pencil-based flashcards, and a control condition. The results suggest that for three of four students, there was no difference in gains between treatment conditions, and both were more successful than the no-treatment control. Descriptive data on the acceptability and number of opportunities to respond between intervention modalities are described.

缺乏比较 iPad 技术和纸笔提供的干预措施对学生数学成绩的影响的研究。九项研究比较了干预方式，例如计算机介导的教学和教师介导的教学，以检查学生表现的差异，但其中只有两项使用 iPad 技术来这样做，并且都没有检查学生对事实的流畅性作为结果。本研究的目的是检查基于 iPad 与基于纸和铅笔的抽认卡干预对美国中西部特许学校四名二年级男孩基本事实流畅性的影响。使用经过调整的交替治疗设计，比较了三种条件：iPad 提供的抽认卡、基于纸和铅笔的抽认卡和对照条件。结果表明，对于四名学生中的三名，治疗条件之间的收益没有差异，并且两者都比未治疗的对照组更成功。描述了关于干预模式之间响应的可接受性和机会数量的描述性数据。