Mokher, Christine G.; Park-Gaghan, Toby; Hu, Shouping (2021). Grantee Submission. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED611562
Reviewed: January 2024
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Completion of an advanced math course |
Florida's developmental math education program before the 2014 reform—Mokher et al. (2021) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Students near the threshold of being assigned to upper developmental education or college-level business-as-usual education;
|
14.10 |
22.60 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Completion of Intermediate Algebra |
Florida's developmental math education program before the 2014 reform—Mokher et al. (2021) vs. Other intervention |
1 Year |
Students near the threshold of being assigned to lower developmental education or upper-level developmental education;
|
8.40 |
17.50 |
Yes |
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 20% | |
| Other or unknown | 39% | |
| White | 41% |
| Hispanic | 32% |
The study took place in all 28 institutions of the Florida College System.
A total of 11,300 first-time-in-college students in Florida were included in the study. Specifically, the data are from the 2012 and 2013 entering cohorts in all 28 institutions of the Florida College System. The sample consists of students who were eligible for the Florida developmental education program according to eligibility requirements as they existed in 2014 and later. In particular, students must have met at least one of three eligibility criteria to be included in the analysis: (1) not have a transcript record from a Florida public high school, (2) not have completed a standard high school diploma, or (3) have a standard high school diploma prior to 2006-2007. The study excluded students who did not have placement scores on the Postsecondary Education Readiness Test (PERT) or had incomplete high school administrative records. Sample characteristics were not available for the analytic sample. Among all non-exempt students across four student cohorts, 53% were female. Forty-one percent were White, 20% were Black, and 39% did not report race. Thirty-two percent were Hispanic or Latino, and the rest did not report ethnicity.
This study examines Florida's developmental math education program, which required entering college students to take developmental math courses if they scored below college-ready in a placement exam. This review focuses on the findings for the pre-reform version of the program that was in place until 2014. The pre-reform version of the program assigned students to take either lower- or upper- developmental education courses for one semester depending on one's placement score. The lower-level course is the first course in a college-preparatory two-course sequence highlighting basic operations with applications to beginning algebra. The upper-level course is the second course in the college preparatory sequence which provides background on topics including basic operations with polynomials, linear equalities, factoring, and an introduction to radicals. Students assigned to the intervention were required to take these development courses before they could take college-level math courses. The outcomes were measured after students' first year in college. The manuscript also includes findings that measure the impact of the post-reform version of the program, and another set of findings that compare the post-reform version of the program to the pre-reform version. The WWC examined these findings and reported its conclusions in two other separate reviews of this manuscript. The WWC reviewed them separately because they focus on measuring the impact of a different intervention or use a different study design and analysis method.
The comparison condition differed for the two levels of the developmental education intervention: (1) students assigned to upper-developmental education courses were compared to students who were placed into the business-as-usual college-level curriculum without developmental education courses, and (2) students assigned to lower-developmental education courses were compared to students who were assigned to upper-developmental education courses.
The study does not describe any support for implementation for the pre-reform version of the program.
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