Exploring the Impact of a Fraction Sense Intervention in Authentic School Environments: An Initial Investigation
Nancy C. Jordan; Nancy Dyson; Taylor-Paige Guba; Megan Botello; Heather Suchanec-Cooper; Henry May (2024). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED651255
-
examining199Students, grade6
Department-funded evaluation
Review Details
Reviewed: February 2026
- Department-funded evaluation (findings for Fraction sense - Jordan et al. (2024) )
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Measurement |
Fraction sense - Jordan et al. (2024) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
6.86 |
1.63 |
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.
-
- 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
Northeast, South
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 25 sixth-grade mathematics classrooms, taught by certified teachers, in nine middle schools from four school districts located in a Mid-Atlantic state.
Study sample
Students qualified to participate in intervention services if they scored at least 2 years below grade level on a mathematics achievement test (either iReady or Northwest Evaluation Association Measures of Academic Progress). Eleven teachers teaching 14 classrooms with 109 students were assigned to the fractions supplemental intervention and 9 teachers teaching 11 classrooms with 90 students were assigned to business-as-usual control. Demographic data were presented by district for intervention and control conditions. Intervention was approximately 15-20% White, 38-85% Black, or 0-3% Other. In addition, 0-42% of the intervention students were Hispanic and 0-65% were students with disabilities. Control was approximately 0-25% White, 33-75% Black, or 0-7% Other. In addition, 0-44% of students were Hispanic and 0-76% were students with disabilities
Intervention Group
The fraction sense intervention is designed as a supplementary Tier 2 intervention for students at-risk for mathematics difficulties. It includes 24 animated powerpoint lessons related to skills and concepts for fractions. More specifically, the intervention covered fractions as numbers with magnitudes, fraction arithmetic computation, and fractions applied to real-world situations. It is delivered in small groups of 4 for 30 minutes, five days per week, for about 15 weeks. Each lesson is fully scripted.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition received instruction that differed across classrooms, with some using computer-based curricula such as iReady, STMath, and DreamBox. Teachers reported which of the 30 standards from the Common Core State Standards were addressed in each lesson. These consist of whole numbers and operations, fraction concepts and operations with fractions, and addressed measurement and data. The teachers taught their intervention lessons one to five times a week across 15 weeks.
Support for implementation
Teachers delivered the intervention. Training for the teachers included a 3-hour professional development session run by the researchers.
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).