Evaluating and comparing three variations of cover, copy, and compare on multiplication fact fluency

A longitudinal randomized design was used with a sample of 57 third-grade students to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of three variations of cover, copy, and compare (CCC; traditional CCC, CCC-answer only, and CCC-paired responding) on multiplication fluency in third-grade students. Traditional CCC requires students to write the problem and answer as a response, CCC-answer only requires students only to write the answer, and CCC-paired responding requires students to write the answer only, then verbally state the problem and answer twice. The interventions occurred for 4 min per day, 5 days per week, across 11 calendar weeks (minus 1 week during a school break). Digits correct per minute (DCPM) level and trend data were significantly higher for each of the CCC variations when compared to control probes, with a posttest unstandardized effect of 7.22 [5.39, 9.10] DCPM. However, there were no significant differences in learning across the three CCC variations. Overall, these results provide additional evidence that all three forms of CCC can enhance math fact fluency and suggest that educators could choose which version to apply based on idiosyncratic or contextual factors. The discussion focuses on future theoretical research designed to investigate these findings and the advantages of studies that evaluate multiple interventions and compare their effectiveness. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).