Cornelius, Annette Sargent (2013). ProQuest LLC. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED554983
Reviewed: January 2017
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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Odyssey® Math.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
STAR Math scale scores |
Odyssey® Math vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
673.72 |
640.22 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 66% | |
| Other or unknown | 6% | |
| White | 28% |
The study was conducted in seventh- and eighth-grade classrooms in five schools located in one rural west Tennessee school district. The study occurred in the 2010–11 school year.
The study sample consisted of seventh- and eighth-grade students with low performance based on their scores on the STAR® Math Assessment, with students scoring at or below the 10th percentile (based on the national norming sample) identified as “at risk”. These students were assigned to receive either teacher-directed math instruction or Odyssey Math as a supplemental program to their core math curriculum. The analysis compared the STAR scores of 60 students who were taught using Odyssey® Math to 45 students who were taught using teacher-directed instruction. Among the 105 students in the analytic sample, 66% were African American and 28% were Caucasian.
Students in the intervention group received 30 minutes of supplemental instruction using Odyssey Math computer-assisted instruction in addition to their core math curriculum. The core mathematics curricula differed across the study schools and included Accelerated Math, Glencoe, and SRA Corrective Math.
Students in the comparison group received 30 minutes of supplemental teacher-directed instruction in addition to their core math curriculum. The core math curricula differed across the study schools and included Accelerated Math, Glencoe, and SRA Corrective Math. The teacher-directed instruction was based on the core math curricula used in the schools.
The report did not describe teacher training or implementation support.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube