2007-08 Mathematics Intervention Program Research Results

RESEARCH DESIGN
The mathematics intervention program was introduced in two Boston public schools, the Timilty Middle School and the Curley K-8. With the assistance of a research consultant from The Donahue Institute at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst a control group was established at the Timilty School while both schools participated in the intervention program. The research design was as follows:
  • 5 certified math teachers who taught 4 math classes each day. 1 sixth grade, 2 seventh and 2 eighth grade classes.
  • Of the four classes taught by each teacher, two received supplemental math instruction dubbed “specialty math class” while the other students were placed in an art and music class.
  • Students in the specialty math class had weaker math scores %80 of the time compared to their peers not receiving supplemental instruction.
  • Instructors began using the mathematics intervention approach following the first semester of school in the specialty classrooms.

RESULTS
At the end of the first semester the students in the experimental groups did not reflect significant differences in outcomes with one exception. In one section not receiving supplemental instruction during the first semester scores were significantly higher than those in the intervention program on the BPS midyear exam. This suggests that the students in the specialty classes were indeed weaker in math than those in regular classes.

Following the first semester of classes the specialty math classes began utilizing the mathematics intervention approach after the teachers had adequate time to learn and develop the new techniques. At the end of the school year indicators showed that students participating in the mathematics intervention program had shown further positive gains than their peers receiving regular instruction. Some positive indicators resulting from the program were:

  • Students in specialty math scored better than those not receiving instruction on questions related to material taught after January on the BPS-generated final exam
  • By the close of the school year, the achievement gap between students in the higher achieving section on the BPS midterm and those in specialty math had closed.
  • Two of the four sections participating in the intervention program outscored those who received regular instruction on the BPS final exam
  • In the other two sections, student performance on the final exam was statistically even to those not receiving instruction. Coupled with the fact that students with weaker math skills were in the specialty classes, this result implies that the learning gap had been thinned between the two sections.

Overall, students participating in the mathematics intervention program showed significant gains. It may be expected that additional time studying math without differences in pedagogy would increase students performance, however the results from the BPS midterm showed that supplemental instruction alone did not increase students math skills %80 of the time. It is our firm belief at MathPOWER that without specifically targeted intervention programs students will not benefit or show progress simply by doing more of the same work even with more time on a task.

Home