Transition mathematics field study.
Hedges, L.V., Stodolsky, S.S., Mathison, S., & Flores, P.V. (1986). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago School Mathematics Project.
-
examining809Students, grades7-9
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2020
- Single Study Review (findings for University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Transitions/Pre-transitions Math)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- The study does not meet WWC group design standards because the equivalence of the clusters in the analytic intervention and comparison groups is necessary but the requirement was not satisfied.
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.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Multiple Courses Intervention Report - Secondary Mathematics
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2015
- The study is ineligible for review because it is out of scope of the protocol
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 University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Multiple Courses.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Geometry Intervention Report - Secondary Mathematics
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2015
- The study is ineligible for review because it is out of scope of the protocol
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 University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Geometry.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Advanced Algebra Intervention Report - Secondary Mathematics
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2015
- The study is ineligible for review because it is out of scope of the protocol
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 University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Advanced Algebra.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Functions, Statistics, and Trigonometry Intervention Report - Secondary Mathematics
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2015
- The study is ineligible for review because it is out of scope of the protocol
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 University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Functions, Statistics, and Trigonometry.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Precalculus and Discrete Mathematics Intervention Report - Secondary Mathematics
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2015
- The study is ineligible for review because it is out of scope of the protocol
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 University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Precalculus and Discrete Mathematics.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Algebra Intervention Report - Secondary Mathematics
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2015
- The study is ineligible for review because it is out of scope of the protocol
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 University of Chicago School Mathematics Project (UCSMP) Algebra.
Findings
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Study sample characteristics were not reported.Transition Mathematics Intervention Report - Middle School Math
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2007
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations
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 Transition Mathematics.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Geometry Readiness |
Transition Mathematics vs. Expert Mathematician |
Posttest |
Grades 7–9;
|
9.87 |
8.67 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Orleans-Hanna Algebra Prognosis Test |
Transition Mathematics vs. Expert Mathematician |
Posttest |
Grades 7–9;
|
38.91 |
36.66 |
Yes |
|
|
|
High School Subjects Test: General Mathematics |
Transition Mathematics vs. Expert Mathematician |
Posttest |
Grades 7–9;
|
26.17 |
25.12 |
No |
-- |
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Rural, Suburban, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia, Washington
Study Details
Setting
The “all pairs” sample was recruited from 35 schools in rural, suburban, and urban areas in 10 states: Colorado, Florida, Illinois (Chicago and Chicago suburbs), Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, Ohio, Virginia, and Washington. No information was provided on the number of schools and geographical areas from which the conservative sample was recruited.
Study sample
The study included seventh-grade students in the 50th-90th percentile of math ability, eighth-grade students in the 30th-70th percentile, and ninth-grade students in the 15th-50th percentile based on standardized test scores. The participants were enrolled in a pre-algebra class. The original sample (referred to in the study as “all pairs”) included 1,048 students in 41 intervention classrooms and 976 students in 38 comparison classrooms. Based on examination of the statistical significance of pretest differences and class size and composition, the study defined a subset of 20 well-matched pairs of classrooms (7 pairs of seventh grade, 10 pairs of eighth grade, and 3 pairs of ninth grade). This sample was referred to in the study as “the conservative sample.” The sample was diverse in terms of demographic characteristics—for example, socioeconomic status and ethnic minority.
Intervention Group
This study used the first edition of the Transition Mathematics textbook, which addresses pre-algebra, pre-geometry, and applied arithmetic. Compared with traditional curricula, Transition Mathematics emphasizes reading math and using calculators. Lessons ranged 40–60 minutes across grade levels. Teachers were expected to do a lesson a day, but the study reported variations in the number of lessons taught each week. The study reported that lower student math ability made it difficult to implement the intervention as intended.
Comparison Group
The comparison group was taught using curricula that were not Transition Mathematics but provided similar opportunities to learn mathematics content.
Outcome descriptions
Primary outcomes used in this study were the High School Subjects Test: General Mathematics, the Geometry Readiness test, and the Orleans-Hanna Algebra Prognosis test. An additional nonstandardized measure, the Alternative Test, was not reviewed because complete statistical information was not available, so effect sizes could not be computed for this measure. (See Appendix A2 for more detailed descriptions of outcome measures.)
Support for implementation
No information about teacher training was provided.
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).