Reeves, Thomas; Romine, William; Laffey, James; Sadler, Troy; Goggins, Sean (2020). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED605283
Reviewed: August 2022
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Water Systems Assessment (WSA) |
Mission HydroSci (MHS) vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.50 |
15.70 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Argumentation Assessment (AA) |
Mission HydroSci (MHS) vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
7.70 |
7.29 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 3% | |
| Black | 11% | |
| Native American | 2% | |
| Other or unknown | 18% | |
| White | 66% |
| Hispanic | 6% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 94% |
| Other or unknown | 100% |
The study took place in general education science classrooms in sixth-eighth grades in nine public schools across six districts in a single Midwestern state. Schools with participating teachers were in mid-sized cities and rural communities (p.9).
At the time of random assignment, the initial sample of 1,110 students was 49% female, and included 66% White, 11% Black, 3% Asian, 2% Native American, and 18% other/not specified (4% identified as multi-racial). Six percent of this sample identified as Hispanic. Study authors did not provide information about the characteristics of the analytic sample (861 students).
Mission HydroSci (MHS) provides middle-school science teachers with resources to implement a game-based, 3D virtual learning environment (3D VLE) for teaching about water systems science and scientific argumentation in blended or distance education. The intervention addresses the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and is based on the principles of “transformational play" learning theory. The curriculum lasts for six to eight class periods, in which students participate in virtual learning activities and teachers track student progress using an online dashboard. Student gameplay is designed to increase student engagement, interest, knowledge about water systems and competency in scientific argumentation in order to improve students' broader scientific literacy and interest in science.
Students in the comparison classes used the "Earth's Water Systems" curriculum developed by the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study that covered the same topics in water systems as the curriculum used in the intervention condition. Using an online learning management system, students progressed through a series of lessons that included information, explanations, and activities presented as text, with supporting images, simulations, and video content.
Teachers of students in the intervention were provided with orientation materials, an online "teacher dashboard," and the opportunity to engage in an online teacher community.
Reviewed: May 2021
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Water Systems Assessment (WSA) |
Mission HydroSci (MHS) vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
15.50 |
15.70 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Argumentation Assessment (AA) |
Mission HydroSci (MHS) vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
7.70 |
7.29 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 3% | |
| Black | 11% | |
| Native American | 2% | |
| Other or unknown | 18% | |
| White | 66% |
| Hispanic | 6% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 94% |
The study took place within 9 schools across 6 districts in one Midwestern state. Thirteen teachers participated.
The 13 teachers represented public schools from both mid-sized cities and small rural communities. The student sample in the study (N=1110) included 51% male and 49% female, as well as 66% Caucasian, 11% African American, 6% Hispanic, 4% identifying as multi-racial, 3% Asian, 2% American Indian, and the remaining students self-identifying as other (pg. 9).
The intervention was the Mission HydroSci (MHS), which is an game based learning environment and curriculum to support the development of middle school students' knowledge of water systems science and science argumentation. MHS is designed based on the principles of transformational play learning theory. Students must assume a character role to use subject matter knowledge to make decisions. MHS contains a 6-8 day curriculum with all activities occurring virtually. Teachers observe and support as needed. The content covers 6 units around water systems science.
The comparison condition is a different science curriculum: Earth's Water Systems (EWS). This curriculum is developed to be delivered online through the Canvas platform. The content and lessons are comparable to MHS. EWS lessons start with a chance for students to show their preexisting knowledge before starting content. An investigating activity is embedded with each lesson. These can be performed in the classroom or at home.
No support for implementation was provided, but teachers and their technology coordinators were paid a stipend for their participation.
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