Efficacy Study of the Science Notebook in a Universal Design for Learning Environment: Preliminary Findings
Yu, Jennifer W.; Fikes, Annie E.; Ferguson, Kate; Wei, Xin; Tiruke, Tejaswini; Hall, Tracey E.; Blackorby, Jose (2019). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Toronto, Canada,. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED605911
-
examining614Students, grade4
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: June 2021
- Grant Competition (findings for Science Notebook in a Universal Design for Learning Environment (SNUDLE))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with high attrition, but 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Measure of Academic Progress (MAP) Science |
Science Notebook in a Universal Design for Learning Environment (SNUDLE) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
198.09 |
198.70 |
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.
-
26% English language learners -
Female: 52%
Male: 48% -
Urban
-
Race Asian 13% Black 35% Native American 1% Other or unknown 46% White 5% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 46% Not Hispanic or Latino 54%
Study Details
Setting
The study included fourth-grade students participating in inclusive general education science classes from seven elementary schools in a large, urban school district.
Study sample
The sample was comprised of a diverse group of students: 35% Black, 46% Hispanic, 13% Asian, 5% White, and 1% American Indian. The sample included a large percentage of students who qualified for free or reduced-price lunch (82%). The sample also included dual language learners (26%) and a small percentage of students with IEPs (6%) and 504 plans (3%).
Intervention Group
Teachers and students in the intervention group used the Science Notebook in a Universal Design for Learning Environment (SNUDLE). SNUDLE is a digital notebook that aims to support active science learning among elementary school students. It is similar to traditional science notebooks, in that it provides students space to collect, organize, and display observations and data; space to reflect and make sense of inquiry experiences; and opportunities to demonstrate understanding at each stage of the investigation. Through the program, teachers can provide feedback on their students' work. SNUDLE was designed to target students with reading and writing difficulties, especially those with learning disabilities. SNUDLE is designed with accessibility features such as test-to-speech technology with real time highlighting, word-by-word English to Spanish translation, keyboard accessible actions, and a multi-media glossary. SNUDLE guides students and teachers in the process of active science learning and the effective use of science notebooks.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison classrooms used traditional paper-based science notebooks, which is business-as-usual.
Support for implementation
The teacher's interface in SNUDLE facilitates active science learning in their students by prompting and supporting teachers to provide feedback that may include corrective information, alternative strategies, information to clarify ideas, or encouragement to engage in the scientific process.
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).