An Efficacy Trial of Research-Based Curriculum Materials with Curriculum-Based Professional Development
Taylor, Joseph A.; Getty, Stephen R.; Kowalski, Susan M.; Wilson, Christopher D.; Carlson, Janet; Van Scotter, Pamela (2015). American Educational Research Journal, v52 n5 p984-1017 Oct 2015. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1074631
-
examining3,052Students, grade10
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2023
- Single Study Review (findings for BSCS Science: An Inquiry Approach)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Washington State High School Proficiency Exam: Science Grade 10 (WA HSPE-Science 10) |
BSCS Science: An Inquiry Approach vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
384.52 |
380.84 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) |
BSCS Science: An Inquiry Approach vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
71.40 |
55.00 |
Yes |
|
|
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.
-
5% English language learners -
Female: 48%
Other or unknown: 52% -
Rural, Suburban
-
- 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 Asian 8% Black 7% Native American 2% Other or unknown 27% Pacific Islander 1% Two or more races 3% White 52% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 27% Other or unknown 73% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 46% Other or unknown 54%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 18 rural or suburban schools in public secondary schools in Washington state during general education science classes.
Study sample
The researchers randomly assigned 9 schools to the intervention group and 9 schools to the comparison group. The study included 3,052 students in grade 10 and 53 teachers. Approximately 48% of the students were female, 46% were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 5% were English learners, and 10% had a special education designation. Fifty-two percent were White, 8% were Asian, 7% were Black, 3% were two or more races, 2% were Native American, 1% were Pacific Islander, and 27% did not report race. Twenty-seven percent were Hispanic or Latino.
Intervention Group
BSCS Science: An Inquiry Approach is a research-based, multi-disciplinary science curriculum and associated professional development for high school teachers that was designed to improve student achievement in science. This product was designed to be used every day during each of three school years in grades 9 through 11 in whole classrooms. In this study, students were exposed to two years of the curriculum in grades 9 and 10 before outcome data were collected. The curriculum included units that covered topics in physical science, life science, earth science, and science and society. Each unit consisted of four chapters that included: (a) opportunities for students to state what they already know, (b) laboratory explorations, (c) interactive readings, (d) formative assessments, (e) opportunities for students to use evidence to develop explanations, and (f) an end-of-chapter project or lesson that served as a summative assessment. Teachers received professional development and support materials that accompanied the curriculum.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison group received business-as-usual grade 9 and grade 10 science instruction. In grade 9, more than half of the teachers in the comparison group used Prentice Hall's Physical Science and Earth Science textbooks. In grade 10, most schools used their business-as-usual biology curriculum and textbooks. Teachers supplemented the district-supplied textbook with other curricular materials. Comparison teachers may have participated in other business-as-usual training and professional development offered by their schools or school districts.
Support for implementation
Teachers in the intervention group participated in a 3-day summer institute and four 1-day sessions during the school year. The BSCS Science: An Inquiry Approach curriculum developers provided this professional development in each of the two years of the study. At these professional development sessions, the curriculum developers modeled the pedagogical techniques that teachers were supposed to use in their classrooms. Intervention teachers also received support materials that included a discussion of the philosophy behind the instructional approach presented in the curriculum, strategies for implementing the curriculum and helping students monitor their own learning, and additional content material, along with tips for addressing common student misconceptions. These support materials also included ideas for formative and summative assessments.
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).