"MyTeachingPartner--Math/Science" Pre-Kindergarten Curricula and Teacher Supports: Associations with Children's Mathematics and Science Learning [MTP-M/S plus teacher supports vs. business-as-usual control ]
Kinzie, Mable B.; Whittaker, Jessica Vick; Williford, Amanda P.; DeCoster, Jamie; McGuire, Patrick; Lee, Youngju; Kilday, Carolyn R. (2014). Early Childhood Research Quarterly v29 p586-599. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED577452
-
examining194Students, gradePK
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2021
- Single Study Review (findings for MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support)
- 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 |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed earth and physical science assessment |
MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
41.03 |
40.51 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed geometry and measurement assessment |
MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
18.09 |
16.69 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed life sciences assessment |
MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
44.00 |
43.55 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Researcher-developed life sciences assessment |
MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support vs. MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
44.07 |
42.94 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed number sense and place value assessment |
MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
31.48 |
29.93 |
No |
-- | |
|
Test of Early Mathematics Ability - 3rd Edition (TEMA-3) |
MyTeachingPartner-Math/Science Plus Teacher Support vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
19.30 |
19.54 |
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: 50%
Male: 50% -
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
District of Columbia, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia
-
Race Black 62% Other or unknown 9% White 29%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 12 full-day preschools in a single school district in a large, Mid-Atlantic city.
Study sample
A total of 194 preschool students were included in the study. The 194 students were in 20 classrooms in 12 schools. Approximately 10 students in each classroom were randomly chosen to participate in the study. Approximately half of the students were male, and 62% were Black, 29% were White, and 9% were another race. The ethnicity of the students in the sample was not reported. English learners and students on Individualized Education Plans were excluded from the study. The researchers randomly assigned eight schools to the intervention group and eight schools to the comparison group (four schools left the study, two from the intervention group and two from the comparison group, after random assignment).
Intervention Group
Teachers in the intervention condition implemented the MyTeachingPartner-Math and Science curricula for prekindergarten instruction and also received enhanced supports for implementing the curricula described under support for implementation below. This intervention is referred to as MyTeachingPartner-Math and Science Plus Teacher Support. MyTeachingPartner-Math and Science are prekindergarten instructional curricula that make use of student-centered, structured inquiry in math and science. Topics addressed in the curricula include numbers, operations, geometry, measurement, life science, earth science, and physical science. Teachers were expected to offer two activities each week from the MyTeachingPartner-Math curriculum and two activities from the MyTeachingPartner-Science curriculum. Each activity had an expected class duration of 15-20 minutes. Each activity also had a four-step inquiry format, and teachers were provided with an activity script, questions, adaptations, and extensions for each activity. These activities were offered for 33 weeks across the school year. Activities were offered in whole-class or small-group format with additional weekly activity centers alternating between a math center and a science center each week. Classroom activities were supplemented with activity manipulatives and with preschool-appropriate books that highlighted math and science topics. The study did not describe whether teachers implemented all the activities for the planned amount of time.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group received business-as-usual preschool instruction in math and science, which was the HighScope preschool curriculum. Other math and science activities in classrooms were informed by the state preschool learning standards. Comparison teachers may have participated in other business-as-usual training and professional development offered by their schools or school districts. Supplemental findings compare the enhanced MyTeachingPartner-Math and Science Plus Teacher Support to the basic version of MyTeachingPartner-Math and Science without additional teacher support.
Support for implementation
Teachers in the intervention condition received enhanced implementation supports that may not be provided with the basic MyTeachingPartner-Math and Science curricula. These included a full day workshop prior to the 2009-10 school year, and seven 2.5 hour professional development workshops. In total, these activities provided up to 24 hours of professional learning for teachers. Teachers could access additional instructional supports online, including demonstration videos and brief teaching tip sheets. Additional materials were also embedded within the curricula and included support for asking open-ended questions, activity scripts, activity extensions, and strategies to differentiate activities for different student ability levels.
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).