Lesson ratings showed no statistically significant differences between lessons observed earlier versus later in the initiative on any dimension¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2022: local conditions change quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Across all six observation periods, ratings did not differ significantly between earlier and later phases of the initiative on any of the eight dimensions. → Chu 2019

Evidence¶

Chu 2019¶

Chu, H., Perry, R., Reade, F., & Marple, S. (2019). Understanding complex instructional change: Classroom observations of Math in Common districts. San Francisco, CA: WestEd. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED601889

q2 · i? · associational · r1

Analysis of rating patterns across the full 201-lesson sample over six observation periods. The report found "no statistically significant differences" between earlier and later lessons; equivalence was not tested.

"However, when we examined data for the full sample across all six observation periods, there were no statistically significant differences in lessons that were observed earlier in the initiative, versus those observed later in the initiative, on any of the dimensions."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Across 201 observed K–8 math lessons, the majority (108, or 54 percent) did not receive a High/Expert rating on any of the eight observation dimensions — related
• No significant difference between virtual simulation and authentic video on the basic observation dimension of assignments — related
• Challenge based lessons scored significantly higher than NGSS practices-aligned lessons on three of six deeper learning dimensions and equivalent on the other three — related
• Mathematical sense-making received High ratings most frequently among the MQI dimensions, while linking representations and multiple solutions/procedures were most often rated Not Present — related