Grade level, number of sessions, group size, and study quality did not significantly predict intervention effectiveness in this corpus¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Grade (elementary versus middle and high school), number of treatment sessions (30 or less versus more than 30), and group size (less than 8 versus 8 or more) did not significantly predict intervention effectiveness. → Stevens 2018

Evidence¶

Stevens 2018¶

Stevens, E. A., Rodgers, M. A., & Powell, S. R. (2018). Intensive interventions in mathematics for upper elementary and secondary students: A meta-analysis of research. Remedial and Special Education, 39(6), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932517731887

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r3

Moderator analyses across the 25-study corpus. The article reports these three moderators "did not significantly predict intervention effectiveness"; no effect sizes are printed, so no magnitude is asserted. Study quality also did not significantly predict effect size.

"Grade (elementary versus middle and high school), number of treatment sessions (30 or less versus more than 30), and group size (less than 8 versus 8 or more), did not significantly predict intervention effectiveness."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interventions providing more than 15 total hours significantly moderate mathematics outcomes for students with MD in grades 4–12 — reports the opposite
• No moderator variable (intervention type, group size, grade level, implementer, hours of intervention) significantly explained variance in intervention effects, though moderator analyses were underpowered. — related