BackHome
Refresh: OffView Personal Schedule
Paper Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Efficacy Study of Ninth-Grade READI Biology: Design, Assessment Strategy, and Findings

Sat, April 9, 12:25 to 1:55pm, Convention Center, Floor: Level One, Room 152 B

Abstract

Purpose: This presentation presents the efficacy study design, assessment plan and impacts on teachers and students of implementing the READI 9th grade biology intervention.
Design: The study is a randomized control trial of a semester - long intervention tested against normal educational practice (control group). We conceptualized teachers as mediators of student learning and therefore assessed their knowledge, attitudes, and practices using surveys and classroom observation. For all teachers, the “pre” assessment occurred before professional development began for intervention teachers and the “post” at the conclusion of the classroom intervention. Student “pre” data were collected within the first four weeks of school and within two weeks of concluding the intervention. Figure 2 shows the overall design.
Teacher Assessments. We developed and administered a self-report survey that tapped teacher knowledge, attitudes, and practices related to teaching science, science literacy, and their student populations. We did two classroom observations with a 6 - construct observation protocol adapted from Greenleaf et al. (2011), augmented to reflect READI science goals. Observations occurred between the 4th and 7th weeks of the progression (Table 2) and 8 to 10 weeks later.
Student Assessments. In addition to the assessments discussed in Presentation 2, prior to intervention, we administered RISE, a general reading skill assessment (Sabatini, et al., 2013) to look at impact of the intervention as related to basic reading skills (e.g., word recognition, efficiency, vocabulary). Post intervention, the GISA, developed specifically to tap reading for understanding, was administered (Sabatini & O’Reilly, 2015).
Participants. Schools were recruited from 6 urban and suburban districts; six stratified groups were created based on achievement levels and socioeconomic status but all served diverse populations. Within strata, schools were randomly assigned to Intervention or Control, producing 12 schools and 24 teachers of 9th grade biology in each condition (Figure 2.) After consenting students, approximately 1400 students contributed analyzable data (60% Intervention).
Findings for Teachers: Survey data pre-PD indicated that there were no differences on any of the items between the two groups of teachers. Surveys after intervention showed significant differences on items most closely aligned with READI instructional practices. Observations showed significant differences between control and READI teachers on time-1 observations; on time-2, these differences were larger.
Findings for Students: To date, the multiple choice data have been scored and show no differences at pre but significant differences at post with READI students scoring higher than control. On the epistemology scale associated with beliefs about the utility of multiple texts, READI students scored significantly higher than control at post but not at pre. Confidence in reading science remained stable for both groups.
We are exploring multi-level statistical models and scoring other student data, expecting that we will be able to report impact that reflects greater sensitivity to sources of variation among teachers and students.

Significance. Shifts in positioning of texts, tasks, and students’ roles as agentive learners are needed to enhance science literacy practices needed for explanatory modeling. These shifts are possible but require time and learning opportunities for teachers as well as students.

Authors