ROOTS participation reduced the achievement gap between at-risk and non-at-risk students within intervention classrooms on the TEMA¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? ROOTS intervention students' gains exceeded those of non-ROOTS students in the same intervention classrooms by 3.5 TEMA standard-score points (t = 2.33, df = 27, p = .0273), but not on the EN-CBM (t = −1.45, p = .1579). → Clarke 2016 q3 i? In control classrooms, students selected for small-group instruction made significantly smaller EN-CBM gains (−14.3) than non-selected peers (t = −2.55, df = 27, p = .0169), consistent with a widening gap absent intervention. → Clarke 2016 (2)

Evidence¶

Clarke 2016¶

Clarke, B., Doabler, C. T., Smolkowski, K., Baker, S. K., Fien, H., & Strand Cary, M. (2016). Examining the Efficacy of a Tier 2 Kindergarten Mathematics Intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(2), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414538514

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Second mixed time-by-condition analysis including the complete sample with ROOTS participation as a moderator, testing gains of ROOTS students versus non-participating peers within intervention classrooms. The differential gain was significant on the TEMA only.

"The gains made by ROOTS intervention students exceeded gains by students who did not receive ROOTS by 3.5 on the TEMA standard score (t = 2.33, df = 27, p = .0273) but not on the EN-CBM (t = −1.45, df = 27, p = .1579)."

Clarke 2016 (2)¶

Clarke, B., Doabler, C. T., Smolkowski, K., Baker, S. K., Fien, H., & Strand Cary, M. (2016). Examining the Efficacy of a Tier 2 Kindergarten Mathematics Intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 49(2), 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219414538514

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Unhypothesized secondary analysis within control classrooms comparing selected versus non-selected students on EN-CBM gains. The authors interpret it as consistent with the intervention keeping the gap from widening; the discussion links the widening control gap to the Matthew effect.

"students selected for small-group instruction in control classrooms made statistically significantly smaller gains on the EN-CBM (−14.3) than students not selected in control classrooms (t = −2.55, df = 27, p = .0169)"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• At-risk kindergarten students receiving the ROOTS Tier 2 intervention made significantly greater mathematics gains than at-risk control peers on the TEMA standard score — related
• ROOTS students made greater gains than their not-at-risk peers, reducing the achievement gap — related