Claims

SBI shows no treatment effects on the Process and Applications subtest of the GMADE

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q4
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q4 i? There were no treatment effects on the GMADE Process and Applications subtest, a norm-referenced standardized measure of overall mathematical problem solving. → Jitendra 2015

Evidence

Jitendra 2015

Jitendra, A. K., Harwell, M. R., Dupuis, D. N., Karl, S. R., Lein, A. E., Simonson, G., & Slater, S. C. (2015). Effects of a research-based intervention to improve seventh-grade students’ proportional problem solving: A cluster randomized trial. Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000039

q4 · i? · causal · r3

The GMADE Process and Applications subtest (30 multiple-choice items) measured overall problem solving across multiple content areas. The authors hypothesized comparable performance because "67% of the items on this test are based on concepts not taught in the study". No effect size is printed for this null result.

"There were no treatment effects on the Process and Applications subtest of the Group Mathematics Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation"

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.