Measuring the Average Impact of an iPad Algebra Program A Report of Findings from an RCT in Four School Districts Considering One as a Special Case

Jaciw, Andrew P.; Toby, Megan; Ma, Boya; Lai, Garrett; Лин, Ли

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2509490

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Often teachers reported low-dose implementation due to difficulties with timing (see above) or with program delivery, such as not having required resources. For instance, two different programs that aimed to integrate technology in the classroom (Jaciw et al, 2012; Worth et al, 2017) reported challenges with timely equipment delivery, software updates, and stable Internet connections. Both reports echoed that the “effect was dependent on local conditions” (Jaciw et al, 2012, p. ii).…”

Section: Reported Reasons For Null Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, two different programs that aimed to integrate technology in the classroom (Jaciw et al, 2012; Worth et al, 2017) reported challenges with timely equipment delivery, software updates, and stable Internet connections. Both reports echoed that the “effect was dependent on local conditions” (Jaciw et al, 2012, p. ii). These discrepancies between the design and implementation are sometimes described as “program drift” and can drastically decrease the benefits of a program (Vaden-Kiernan et al, 2018).…”

Section: Reported Reasons For Null Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Toward a Science of Failure Analysis: A Narrative Review

Allen-Platt

Gerstner

Boruch

et al. 2021

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When a researcher tests an educational program, product, or policy in a randomized controlled trial and detects a significant effect on an outcome, the intervention is usually classified as something that “works.” When expected effects are not found, there is seldom an orderly and transparent analysis of plausible reasons why. Accumulating and learning from possible failure mechanisms is not standard practice in education research, and it is not common to design interventions with causes of failure in mind. This chapter develops Boruch and Ruby’s proposition that the education sciences would benefit from a systematic approach to the study of failure. We review and taxonomize recent reports of large-scale randomized controlled trials in K–12 schooling that yielded at least one null or negative major outcome, including the nature of the event and reasons (if provided) for why it occurred. Our purpose is to introduce a broad framework for thinking about educational interventions that do not produce expected effects and seed a cumulative knowledge base on when, how, and why interventions do not reach expectations. The reasons why an individual intervention fails to elicit an outcome are not straightforward, but themes emerge when researchers’ reports are synthesized.

show abstract

Section: Reported Reasons For Null Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Reported Reasons For Null Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Toward a Science of Failure Analysis: A Narrative Review

Allen-Platt

Gerstner

Boruch

et al. 2021

Review of Research in Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…b Results based on an impact study that the publisher refused to release. c Results based on the study of the impact of HMH Fuse Algebra Program (Jaciw, Toby, Ma, Lai, & Lin, 2012).…”

Section: Empirical Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%