WWC review of this study

Use of a progress monitoring system to enable teachers to differentiate mathematics instruction.

Ysseldyke, J., & Tardrew, S. (2007). Journal of Applied School Psychology, 24(1), 1–28. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ783511

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    2,006
     Students
    , grades
    3-6
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations

Reviewed: December 2017

Mathematics achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
index

STAR Math normal curve equivalent scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Full sample (NCE);
2,006 students

61.08

54.96

Yes

 
 
11
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings

STAR Math normal curve equivalent scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Gifted and talented;
101 students

82.07

75

Yes

 
 
17

STAR Math scale scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Grade: 4;
614 students

686.52

665.22

No

--

STAR Math normal curve equivalent scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Grade: 4;
614 students

62.46

57.32

No

--

STAR Math scale scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Full sample (Scale);
2,006 students

699.55

674.72

No

--

STAR Math normal curve equivalent scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Grade: 3;
476 students

N/A

N/A

Yes

N/A

STAR Math normal curve equivalent scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Grade: 5;
590 students

N/A

N/A

Yes

N/A

STAR Math normal curve equivalent scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Business as usual

4 Months

Grade: 6;
326 students

N/A

N/A

Yes

N/A

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 3% English language learners

  • 17% Free or reduced price lunch

  • Female: 49%
    Male: 51%
  • Race
    Asian
    0%
    Black
    3%
    Native American
    0%
    Not specified
    68%
    White
    28%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic
    6%
    • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Alabama, Arkansas, California, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin

Setting

The study was conducted in 47 schools in 24 states. The eligible sample of students which is reviewed in this report includes grades 3–6. The study did not report the number of schools in this sample.15 The study occurred in the second semester of the 2001–02 school year.

Study sample

Among all students in the analytic sample in grades 3–6, approximately 17% qualified for free or reduced-price meals, 49% were female, 5% were learning disabled or in special education, and 3% were English language learners.

Intervention Group

Intervention students used Accelerated Math® as a supplement to the existing math curriculum in the second semester of the school year (between January and May). The authors did not specify which version of Accelerated Math® was used.

Comparison Group

Comparison students were taught using their school’s existing math curriculum. The authors did not describe or name the curriculum.

Support for implementation

Intervention teachers participated in a 1-day training session conducted by Renaissance Learning. The training was designed to familiarize teachers with Accelerated Math® and to guide them in integrating it into the curriculum and instruction. Of the 68 Accelerated Math® teachers in the full sample of grades 3–10, 66 attended the training. Teachers faxed weekly reports generated by Accelerated Math® to Renaissance Learning which were used by the publisher to assess integrity of implementation. Analyses of these reports were used to guide phone consultations with teachers to support implementation during the school year. The study does not indicate how often these consultations occurred or whether all intervention group teachers participated.

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

  • Renaissance Learning. (2003). Use of an instructional management system to enhance math instruction of gifted and talented students. Madison, WI: Author.

  • Ysseldyke, J., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to improve mathematics skills for students in Title I programs. Preventing School Failure, 48(4), 10-14.

  • Ysseldyke, J. E., & Tardrew, S. P. (2002). Differentiating math instruction: A large scale study of Accelerated Math (Final report). Madison, WI: Renaissance Learning, Inc.

  • Ysseldyke, J., Tardrew, S., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to enhance math instruction of gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(4), 293-310.

Does not meet WWC standards

Reviewed: July 2017

Study sample characteristics were not reported.

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

  • Renaissance Learning. (2003). Use of an instructional management system to enhance math instruction of gifted and talented students. Madison, WI: Author.

  • Ysseldyke, J. E., & Tardrew, S. P. (2002). Differentiating math instruction: A large scale study of Accelerated Math (Final report). Madison, WI: Renaissance Learning, Inc.

  • Ysseldyke, J., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to improve mathematics skills for students in Title I programs. Preventing School Failure, 48(4), 10-14.

  • Ysseldyke, J., Tardrew, S., Betts, J., Thill, T., & Hannigan, E. (2004). Use of an instructional management system to enhance math instruction of gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(4), 293-310.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

newsflash icon contact icon facebook icon twitter icon
loading
back to top