Zucker, Andrew A.; Tinker, Robert; Staudt, Carolyn; Mansfield, Amie; Metcalf, Shari (2008). Journal of Science Education and Technology, v17 n1 p42-48. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ804927
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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Technology Enhanced Elementary and Middle School Science (TEEMSS).
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Sound unit test |
Technology Enhanced Elementary and Middle School Science (TEEMSS) vs. Business as usual |
Posttest |
Grades 3-4;
|
14.78 |
12.81 |
Yes |
|
|
The study took place in more than 100 elementary and middle school classrooms in over a dozen school districts in three states during the 2004–05 and 2005–06 school years.
In this quasi-experimental study, the treatment group included students of teachers who used the TEEMSS curriculum during the 2005–06 school year. The comparison group included students from the prior school year (2004–05) of the same teachers, who taught the same topics but used their regular teaching methods. For this review, the analysis sample consisted of 181 students in grades 3–4 (97 treatment and 84 comparison) who received instruction on the topic of sound.
The curriculum received by the treatment group was Technology Enhanced Elementary and Middle School Science (TEEMSS) for grades 3–8. The curriculum included 15 units that were customized to grade levels. Of the 15-unit TEEMSS curriculum, the study examined eight science units, including three units for grades 3–4 (sound, electricity, and sensing), three units for grades 5–6 (water and air temperature, levers and machines, and monitoring a living plant), and two units for grades 7–8 (air pressure and motion). Among the eight unit outcomes, the only findings that met WWC evidence standards with reservations were those for the sound unit test for grades 3–4. The unit contained two one-week investigations of sound and vibrations with the sound grapher, a software program that is used with a microphone to record the pattern of sound vibrations, and included a discovery question, several trials, analysis, and ideas for further investigations.
The comparison group included students who were taught the same science unit topics using current teaching practices. The authors indicated to the WWC that there was no single comparison curriculum, and the comparison group curricula addressed science education standards. Authors did not state if the comparison curricula were inquiry-based or used technology.
For the pretest and posttest, students completed the sound unit test. The pretest was given to students before the teacher taught the unit, and the posttest was given upon the completion of the teaching of the unit. The posttest differed slightly from the pretest in the order of the response options and the values of the prompts (e.g., temperature) in the questions. For a more detailed description of these outcome measures, see Appendix B.
Teachers had access to an online training course that provided information about the TEEMSS curriculum and technology. The study did not discuss additional support or training for teachers.
In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.
Zucker, A. A., Tinker, R., Staudt, C., Mansfield, A., & Metcalf, S. (2007, April). Increasing science learning in grades 3–8 using computers and probes: Findings from the TEEMSS II project. Proceedings of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching 2007 Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA.
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