Fusion produced no statistically significant gains on proximal procedural fluency (EN-CBM) or distal (SAT-10) measures, though effect sizes were small and positive¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Differences between Fusion and control gains were not statistically significant on EN-CBM (g = 0.14) or SAT-10 (g = 0.11). → Ben Clarke 2014

q3 i? Differences between Fusion and control gains were not statistically significant on EN-CBM (g = 0.14) or SAT-10 (g = 0.11). → Clarke 2014

Evidence¶

Ben Clarke 2014¶

Ben Clarke, Christian T. Doabler, Mari Strand Cary, Derek Kosty, Scott Baker, Hank Fien, and Keith Smolkowski. (2014). Preliminary Evaluation of a Tier 2 Mathematics Intervention for First-Grade Students: Using a Theory of Change to Guide Formative Evaluation Activities. School Psychology Review, 43(2), 160-177. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED567775

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Same randomized pilot trial, random-effects models of pretest-to-posttest gains. Both nonsignificant results showed small positive effect sizes ("Hedges's g = 0.14" and "Hedges's g = 0.11"); equivalence was not tested.

"The difference between groups was not statistically signifi- cant with respect to gains on our proximal measure of procedural fluency, EN-CBM (es- timate = 7.8,/7 = .667, Hedges's g = 0.14), or on scores on our distal measure of conceptual understanding, SAT-10 (estimate = 1.1,;? = .590, Hedges's g = 0.11)."

Clarke 2014¶

Clarke, B., Doabler, C. T., Strand Cary, M., Kosty, D., Baker, S., Fien, H., & Smolkowski, K. (2014). Preliminary Evaluation of a Tier 2 Mathematics Intervention for First-Grade Students. School Psychology Review, 43(2), 160-177. https://www.nasponline.org/journals/spr

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Same randomized pilot trial; random-effects Condition-by-Time tests on EN-CBM and SAT-10. The article prints "Hedges'sg /H110050.14" and "Hedges's g /H110050.11" with nonsignificant p values; equivalence was not tested.

"The difference between groups was not statistically significant with respect to gains on our proximal measure of procedural fluency, EN-CBM (estimate /H110057.8, p /H11005.667, Hedges'sg /H110050.14), or on scores on our distal measure of conceptual understanding, SAT-10 (estimate /H110051.1, p /H11005 .590, Hedges's g /H110050.11)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• At-risk first graders receiving Fusion showed significantly greater gains than control peers on the proximal conceptual-understanding measure ProFusion, with a large effect — related
• An earlier preliminary investigation of ROOTS found small-to-medium positive effects on kindergarten mathematics achievement measures — related
• In a large RCT (n = 871), Fusion Reading produced a small significant effect on word reading efficiency (Glass Δ = 0.11) but no significant differences on reading comprehension measures — related