Rittle-Johnson, Bethany; Star, Jon R. (2007). Journal of Educational Psychology, v99 n3 p561-574. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ772031
Reviewed: October 2019
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Conceptual knowledge subtest of study generated test |
Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
67.06 |
67.10 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Procedural flexibility subtest of study generated test |
Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
56.00 |
55.90 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Procedural flexibility subtest (shortcut solution methods) of study generated test |
Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.17 |
0.10 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Procedural knowledge subtest of study generated test |
Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
46.48 |
46.40 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 10% | |
| Other or unknown | 9% | |
| White | 81% |
The study includes all 7th grade students at a "selective, private, urban school" in the United States.
Eighty-one percent were Caucasian and ten percent were African-American. About ten percent received financial aid. The students were located in four separate classes, all of which were taught by the same (single) teacher. Eighteen pairs (36 students) were in in the treatment condition and 17 pairs (34 students) were in the control condition.
Students worked with partners to study 24 solved problems presented in pairs on the same page. The solved problems were linear equations with one unknown. Each page displayed the same problems solved in two different ways. Students studied problems over a 2-day period. A separate set of problems was used on each day.
Students worked with partners to study 12 solved problems presented in pairs on the same page. The solved problems were linear equations with one unknown. Each page displayed 2 problems of similar structure solved with the same method. Half of the problems illustrated the conventional solution method, and half illustrated a shortcut method. At the end of each day, students received 4 problems and were asked to solve each problem using a single method of their choice.
On days two and three of the study, two members of the study team circulated in each class to answer student questions and ensure that students were complying with directions. All whole-class lessons were scripted and a member of the study team followed the script during each lesson to ensure that each key idea was presented and that the teacher did not present additional information. The observations conducted by the study team showed the study guidelines were followed.
Reviewed: April 2015
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 3% | |
| Black | 10% | |
| Native American | 3% | |
| White | 84% |
Reviewed: May 2012
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 3% | |
| Black | 10% | |
| Native American | 3% | |
| White | 84% |
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students Practice Guide