An Evaluation Report: i3 Development Grant Dev07--Sammamish High School. "Re-Imagining Career and College Readiness: STEM, Rigor, and Equity in a Comprehensive High School"
Knuth, Randy; Sutton, Paul S.; Levias, Sheldon; Kuo, Annie Camey; Callison, Matthew (2016). Grantee Submission. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED564713
-
examining190Students, grades10-12
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2023
- Practice Guide (findings for Starting Strong: PBL-based career and readiness workshops)
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it uses a quasi-experimental design in which the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
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
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Campus Ready |
Starting Strong: PBL-based career and readiness workshops vs. Business as usual |
7 Months |
Full sample;
|
3.73 |
3.56 |
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.
-
Other or unknown: 100% -
- 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
Washington
-
Race Other or unknown 100% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
This study took place in a single public high school in the Bellevue, Washington, school district. The authors describe the site as characterized by an increasingly linguistically, socioeconomically, racially, and ethnically diverse student body.
Study sample
A total of 190 students in grades 10, 11, and 12, were included in the study. The study does not provide any information on socioeconomic or demographic characteristics of the sample studied.
Intervention Group
The intervention, Starting Strong, consisted of a seven to nine-day summer program that used a problem-based learning (PBL) instructional model embedded within college and career readiness workshops. The program is based on a model that holds that students who engage in authentic and collaborative problem solving through partnerships with local businesses and community organizations will have improved measures of college and career readiness. The intervention group consists of those students who participated in Starting Strong following the 2012-13 or 2013-14 school years.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition participated in business-as-usual activities over the summer.
Support for implementation
The study does not specify supports for implementation that were provided.
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2023
- Practice Guide (findings for Problem Based Learning (PBL))
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Does not meet WWC standards because the analysis does not provide a credible measure of the effectiveness of the intervention.
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.Department-funded evaluation
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2017
- Department-funded evaluation (findings for Problem Based Learning (PBL))
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Does not meet WWC standards because it uses a quasi-experimental design in which the analytic intervention and comparison groups do not satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
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.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).