WWC review of this study

A comparison of the effects of the Accelerated Math program and the Delaware Procedural Fluency Workbook program on academic growth in grade six at X middle school (Unpublished doctoral dissertation)

Caputo, M. T. (2007). Wilmington University, DE

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    70
     Students
    , grade
    6
No statistically significant positive
findings
Meets WWC standards without reservations

Reviewed: December 2017

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

Delaware state test: Math

Accelerated Math® vs. Delaware Procedural Fluency Workbook Program

1 Year

Full sample;
70 students

N/A

477.81

No

--
More Outcomes

Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) Measures of Academic Progress (MAP): Mathematics

Accelerated Math® vs. Delaware Procedural Fluency Workbook Program

1 Year

Full sample;
70 students

N/A

221.09

No

--

STAR Math scale scores

Accelerated Math® vs. Delaware Procedural Fluency Workbook Program

1 Year

Full sample;
70 students

N/A

744.5

No

--

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 0% English language learners

  • 62% Free or reduced price lunch

  • Female: 54%
    Male: 46%
  • Race
    Black
    43%
    White
    21%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic
    33%
    Not Hispanic
    67%

  • 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Delaware

Setting

The study was conducted in four “regular paced” sixth-grade math classes in a suburban middle school located in Wilmington, Delaware. The study occurred in the 2006–07 school year.

Study sample

Sample characteristics are only reported for the randomized sample. Approximately 62% of this sample qualified for free or reduced-price meals, approximately 54% were female, 43% were Black, 33% were Hispanic, and 21% were White. No students were classified as special education students or English language learners. The analytic sample included 38 Accelerated Math® students and 32 DPFW students.

Intervention Group

Intervention students used Accelerated Math® as a supplement to their class’s existing math curriculum for an entire school year. Students typically worked on pencil-and-paper math assignments generated by Accelerated Math® for the first 15–20 minutes of class each day. Accelerated Math® generated a list of problems for each student based on their prior assignment performance. In addition to the daily practice problems, teachers provided mini-review lessons and administered in-depth exercises and tests produced by Accelerated Math® as needed. The study did not specify which version of Accelerated Math® was used.

Comparison Group

Comparison students used DPFW as a supplement to their class’s existing math curriculum for an entire school year. Students typically worked on DPFW math assignments selected by the teacher for the first 15–20 minutes of class each day. Assignments were completed with pencil and paper in a workbook. All students worked on the same problems, which were posted on the board by the teacher each day. Teachers selected problems for the class to reinforce previously worked on concepts, or to complement concepts students were currently learning. Students worked individually or in groups on math problems, and students presented their solutions to problem sets in the last 5 minutes of the assigned time.

Support for implementation

According to the study author, one of the study teachers used Accelerated Math® prior to the study, while the other had not. Neither teacher had previously used DPFW. The teachers received training on each program prior to the study pretest; however, no details about the training were provided. A substitute teacher took over one teacher’s classrooms for 2 months during the study. The substitute was supported by the regular classroom teacher via daily telephone calls and weekly class visits.

Reviewed: July 2017

Study sample characteristics were not reported.
 

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

loading
back to top