Dynamic assessment procedures produce significant effects on mathematics achievement among elementary school students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r1 · q2 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Exposure to dynamic assessment accounted for a significant amount of variance in posttest math performance (R2 = .12, F(1, 48) = 6.82, p < .05). → Nicoleta Laura Popa 2015 q2 i3 The experimental class showed a high practical significance of the pretest-posttest difference (d= .81), versus a small difference (d= .25) in the control class. → Nicoleta Laura Popa 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Nicoleta Laura Popa 2015¶

Nicoleta Laura Popa, Ramona Loredana Păuc. (2015). Dynamic Assessment, Potential Giftedness and Mathematics Achievement in Elementary School. Acta Didactica Napocensia, Volume 8, Number 2. https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN-2065-1430

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Hierarchical regression in the quasi-experiment (N=50, non-random assignment to experimental N=24 and control N=26 classes), with exposure to dynamic assessment coded as a dummy variable; the article reports "R2 = .12, F(1, 48) = 6.82, p < .05" but no standardized effect size for this step.

"exposure to dynamic assessment was included as the predictor of posttest math achievement, and results indicated that it accounted for a significant amount of variance in elementary school students’ math performance, R2 = .12, F(1, 48) = 6.82, p < .05"

Nicoleta Laura Popa 2015 (2)¶

Nicoleta Laura Popa, Ramona Loredana Păuc. (2015). Dynamic Assessment, Potential Giftedness and Mathematics Achievement in Elementary School. Acta Didactica Napocensia, Volume 8, Number 2. https://portal.issn.org/resource/ISSN-2065-1430

q2 · i3 · causal · r1

Within-group pretest-posttest comparisons in the quasi-experiment: posttest means were 95.50 (experimental) versus 89.61 (control); the article reports "a high significance of the pretest-posttest difference for the experimental group (d= .81)".

"Cohen’s effect size values suggest a small practical significance of the difference for the control class ( d= .25), and a high significance of the pretest-posttest difference for the experimental group (d= .81)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Exposure to dynamic assessment and potential giftedness scores each correlate significantly with posttest math scores — a broader claim this one bears on
• Potential giftedness, measured by teacher and parent nomination scores, enhances the effect of dynamic assessment on math achievement — related
• The number of prompts children needed during training predicted mathematics and technical reading achievement, while static pre- and post-test scores did not — related
• The dynamic assessment group showed a statistically significant pretest-to-posttest gain in reading comprehension with a large effect size — related