Students close to college ready in science on the PLAN reached college ready on the ACT at 46% and 52% in the treatment groups versus one-third in the baseline group¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr1·q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? The percentage of close-to-college-ready students reaching college ready improved from a third in the baseline to roughly half in the treatment groups. → Dye 2013
Evidence¶
Dye 2013¶
Dye, J., Cheatham, T., Rowell, G. H., Barlow, A. T., & Carlton, R. (2013). The Impact of Modeling Instruction within the Inverted Curriculum on Student Achievement in Science. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 17(2). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1188400
q2 · i? · causal · r1
Categorical movement analysis (Table 9) for students within two points of the PLAN science benchmark; the article also reports regression from college ready to not college ready fell from 22% in the baseline to 11% and 12% in the treatment groups. Descriptive percentages only.
"one -third of the baseline group who tested ―close to college ready‖ in science on the PLAN were college ready when they completed the ACT. For the treatment groups the percentages were 46% and 52%, respectively"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- The increase in the percentage of students testing college ready in science from PLAN to ACT was 17.8% (inverted curriculum) and 20.8% (modeling within inverted curriculum), versus 2.5% in the traditional context — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
- Students off-target in science on the PLAN moved to college ready on the ACT at 18% and 21% in the treatment groups versus 8% in the traditional group — related
- Students taught with modeling instruction within the inverted curriculum scored highest on the ACT science subscore (M=24.3) compared with the inverted-curriculum-alone (M=23.7) and traditional (M=23.1) contexts — related
- PLAN-to-ACT science score gains were larger under both non-traditional contexts (4.1 and 4.3 points) than under the traditional context (2.8 points) — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.