Effectiveness

Findings

The WWC review of interventions for middle school math addresses student outcomes in one domain: math achievement.

The Ridgway, Zawojewski, Hoover, & Lambdin (2002) study examined students' scores on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) and reported a statistically significant negative effect, favoring the comparison group; however, the WWC analysis did not confirm the statistical significance of this outcome. The study also examined total scores on the Balanced Assessment Test and reported statistically significant positive effects; which, however, was not confirmed by the WWC. The average effect size for math achievement across study findings was not large enough to be considered substantively important. So, in this study, CMP had an indeterminate effect on math achievement, according to WWC criteria.

The Riordan & Noyce (2001) study examined total scores on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) and reported a statistically significant positive effect.

The Schneider (2000) study examined passing rates and students' scores on the Texas Learning Index using the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) and found no statistically significant effects. In addition, the average effect size across all outcomes for this study was neither statistically significant nor substantively important (that is, at least 0.25). So, in this study, CMP had an indeterminate effect on math achievement, according to WWC criteria.

Rating of effectiveness

The WWC rates the effects of an intervention in a given outcome domain as: positive, potentially positive, mixed, no discernible effects, potentially negative, or negative. The rating of effectiveness takes into account four factors: the quality of the research design, the statistical significance of the findings (as calculated by the WWC⁵ ), the size of the difference between participants in the intervention and the comparison conditions, and the consistency in findings across studies (see the WWC Intervention Rating Scheme).