Hardiman, Mariale; JohnBull, Ranjini Mahinda; Carran, Deborah (2017). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED576190
Reviewed: August 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed astronomy assessment |
Arts-Integrated Instruction vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Astronomy, Session 1 ;
|
53.72 |
53.95 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed life sciences assessment |
Arts-Integrated Instruction vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Life Sciences, Session 1;
|
46.59 |
49.94 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed chemistry assessment |
Arts-Integrated Instruction vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Chemistry, Session 1;
|
53.46 |
52.41 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Researcher-developed chemistry assessment |
Arts-Integrated Instruction vs. Business as usual |
10 Weeks |
Chemistry, Session 1;
|
50.12 |
43.91 |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
The study was conducted in six middle schools in an urban, Mid-Atlantic school district in the United States.
The researchers randomly assigned 374 students in 16 middle school grade 5 classrooms to receive arts-integrated instruction or business-as-usual instruction in science. Each student took courses in two of four science content areas: astronomy, life sciences, chemistry, and environmental sciences. Students assigned to receive arts-integrated instruction were compared to those receiving business-as-usual instruction in the same science content area. The final student sample included 276 students. The authors did not describe the characteristics of the student sample.
The intervention condition consisted of a researcher-designed, arts-integrated curriculum for each of four science content areas (astronomy, life sciences, chemistry, and environmental sciences) which was presented as whole-class instruction in 15 lessons. These lessons were provided over 15 days for 3 to 4 weeks of instructional time. Teachers incorporated visual and performing arts into the delivery of curricular content, and students demonstrated acquired knowledge via these arts. For example, whereas students in a business-as-usual condition might display acquired knowledge by presenting information through a table or graph, students in the arts-integrated intervention condition demonstrated their understanding of content through a variety of arts-based activities such as dance, tableaux, singing, or drawing.
Students in the comparison condition received business-as-usual instruction in each science content area for the same length as the intervention (15 days). Teachers in the comparison group did not incorporate visual and performing arts into the delivery of curricular content, and students displayed their acquired knowledge through more traditional oral and written activities.
The intervention was delivered by classroom teachers. All intervention teachers received 10 hours of formal training in professional development, which occurred several weeks before the study started. The training included reviewing activities that were designed for each day of instruction. The training also included simulation activities for targeted arts-integrated activities and science experiments. In addition to the training, intervention teachers received one-on-one coaching from the research team throughout the study. Intervention teachers received lesson plan guidebooks, student workbooks, and all materials needed to implement the sciences and arts-based activities. Laptops, PowerPoint presentations, videos, and music were also provided to intervention teachers as necessary.
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