An Efficacy Study of a Digital Core Curriculum for Grade 5 Mathematics
Shechtman, Nicole; Roschelle, Jeremy; Feng, Mingyu; Singleton, Corinne (2019). Grantee Submission. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED595114
-
examining46Schools, grade5
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2024
- Single Study Review (findings for Reasoning Mind)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
West Virginia General Student Assessment (WSGVA)- Grade 5 Mathematics |
Reasoning Mind vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
2478.00 |
2483.10 |
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.
-
Female: 51%
Other or unknown: 49% -
Rural, Suburban, Town, 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
West Virginia
-
Race Asian 0% Black 3% Native American 0% Other or unknown 2% White 94% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 1% Other or unknown 99% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 50% No FRPL 50%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in fifth-grade mathematics classrooms from 46 West Virginia public schools. Most of the schools were a mix of elementary and middle levels, while some schools were middle and high school levels.
Study sample
Schools were randomly assigned to the intervention or comparison group. A total of 940 intervention students and 979 comparison students participated. The sample consisted of Grade 5 students in public schools in West Virginia. Over 94% of students were White, 51% were female, and 50% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. About three-fourths (74%) of the schools were classified as rural, 13% were located in towns, 9% were suburban, and 4% were urban. The overwhelming majority of teachers were female and had about 10 years of teaching experience. A quarter to a third held Master's degrees.
Intervention Group
Reasoning Mind’s Grade 5 Common Core Curriculum (RM-CC5) is a comprehensive, adaptive, blended learning approach. This curriculum replaced all other mathematics curricula and textbooks. Teachers were instructed to provide 90 minutes of math instruction to students each day. While some students worked individually with the adaptive curriculum, teachers would work individually or in small groups with the rest of the class. The curriculum provided teachers with data via a dashboard along with recommendations for instruction. Teacher logs and self-reports indicate a fairly high degree of fidelity. The curriculum was implemented over 1 school year.
Comparison Group
The comparison schools implemented their business-as-usual mathematics curriculum.
Support for implementation
The intervention was implemented for a full year as practice, allowing teachers to gain confidence and competency on delivering the curriculum. Intervention teachers received significant support from the developers, including 60 hours of required professional development over a 2-year period, a dedicated Implementation Coordinator (IC) to provide support during the school year as needed, and individual coaching by the ICs. The intervention schools also received the curriculum free of cost.
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, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, 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).