Treatment teachers viewed math-irrelevant visuals less favorably than control teachers, suggesting use of the revised curriculum and PD shifted views¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Treatment teachers rated representational visuals and student images less favorably than control teachers, with statistically significant group differences. → Clinton 2015

Evidence¶

Clinton 2015¶

Clinton, V. & Cooper, J.L. (2015, April). Teacher Viewpoints of Instructional Design Principles for Visuals in a Middle School Math Curriculum. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, IL. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574965

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Between-group comparison of treatment (n=22 responding) and control (n=21 responding) teacher survey ratings of math-irrelevant visuals. The article prints t(41) = 3.54, p = .001 for representational visuals and t(41) = 4.88, p < .001 for student images; no effect size reported.

"Treatment teachers viewed math-irrelevant visuals less favorably than did control teachers, t(41) = 3.54, p = .001 (representational visuals) and t(41) = 4.88, p < .001 (student images), respectively."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Control teachers held generally favorable viewpoints toward the visuals in the original CMP2 books, including math-irrelevant visuals — related
• Teacher viewpoints on visuals in the revised and original CMP2 curriculum were generally in line with theory and empirical evidence for the instructional design principles — related
• Treatment teachers generally liked the revisions to CMP2 visuals, especially increased color coding and labeling, and liked the revisions at least as much as control teachers liked the originals — related
• Open-ended responses on representational visuals differed by group, with treatment teachers more likely to see both pros and cons — related