数学和阅读能力会影响学生的科学成果吗?

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SPECIAL
Christian T Doabler, Megan Rojo, Jenna A Gersib, Anna-Maria Fall, Maria A Longhi, Gail E Lovette, Greg Roberts, Jasmine Uy, Katharina Johnson, Shadi Ghafghazi, Jason B Phelps, Sarah R Powell, William J Therrien
{"title":"数学和阅读能力会影响学生的科学成果吗?","authors":"Christian T Doabler, Megan Rojo, Jenna A Gersib, Anna-Maria Fall, Maria A Longhi, Gail E Lovette, Greg Roberts, Jasmine Uy, Katharina Johnson, Shadi Ghafghazi, Jason B Phelps, Sarah R Powell, William J Therrien","doi":"10.1177/00222194241263646","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Establishing validated science programs for students with or at risk for learning disabilities requires testing treatment effects and exploring differential response patterns. This study explored whether students' initial mathematics and reading skills influenced their treatment response to a whole-class, second-grade science program called Scientific Explorers (Sci2). The original Sci2 study employed a cluster randomized controlled design and included 294 students from 18 second-grade classrooms. Differential effects of the program by initial mathematics and reading skill levels were not observed for an interactive science assessment and a distal science outcome measure. However, based on initial reading skill levels, moderation results were found on a science vocabulary measure, suggesting the effects of Sci2 were greatest for students with higher initial reading skills. Similar results were found using initial mathematics skill levels as a predictor of differential response such that students with higher mathematics skills reaped stronger treatment effects on the vocabulary measure. Further, we found initial mathematics skills also influenced outcomes on the proximal science content assessment, where students with higher initial mathematics skills led to higher outcomes. Overall, findings suggest Sci2 produced robust effects for all students (<i>g</i> = 0.24-1.23), regardless of initial skill proficiencies. Implications for exploring differential response in science intervention research are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","volume":" ","pages":"222194241263646"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Mathematics and Reading Skills Impact Student Science Outcomes?\",\"authors\":\"Christian T Doabler, Megan Rojo, Jenna A Gersib, Anna-Maria Fall, Maria A Longhi, Gail E Lovette, Greg Roberts, Jasmine Uy, Katharina Johnson, Shadi Ghafghazi, Jason B Phelps, Sarah R Powell, William J Therrien\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00222194241263646\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Establishing validated science programs for students with or at risk for learning disabilities requires testing treatment effects and exploring differential response patterns. This study explored whether students' initial mathematics and reading skills influenced their treatment response to a whole-class, second-grade science program called Scientific Explorers (Sci2). The original Sci2 study employed a cluster randomized controlled design and included 294 students from 18 second-grade classrooms. Differential effects of the program by initial mathematics and reading skill levels were not observed for an interactive science assessment and a distal science outcome measure. However, based on initial reading skill levels, moderation results were found on a science vocabulary measure, suggesting the effects of Sci2 were greatest for students with higher initial reading skills. Similar results were found using initial mathematics skill levels as a predictor of differential response such that students with higher mathematics skills reaped stronger treatment effects on the vocabulary measure. Further, we found initial mathematics skills also influenced outcomes on the proximal science content assessment, where students with higher initial mathematics skills led to higher outcomes. Overall, findings suggest Sci2 produced robust effects for all students (<i>g</i> = 0.24-1.23), regardless of initial skill proficiencies. Implications for exploring differential response in science intervention research are discussed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48189,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"222194241263646\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Learning Disabilities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241263646\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SPECIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Learning Disabilities","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194241263646","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SPECIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

要为有学习障碍或有学习障碍风险的学生制定有效的科学课程,需要测试治疗效果并探索不同的反应模式。本研究探讨了学生最初的数学和阅读技能是否会影响他们对名为 "科学探索者"(Sci2)的二年级全班科学课程的治疗反应。最初的 Sci2 研究采用了分组随机对照设计,包括来自 18 个二年级班级的 294 名学生。在互动式科学评估和远距离科学结果测量中,没有观察到该课程对初始数学和阅读技能水平的不同影响。然而,根据最初的阅读技能水平,在科学词汇量测量中发现了调节结果,表明 Sci2 对最初阅读技能较高的学生的影响最大。使用初始数学技能水平作为差异反应的预测因子也发现了类似的结果,即数学技能较高的学生在词汇量测量上获得了更强的治疗效果。此外,我们还发现,初始数学技能也会影响近似科学内容评估的结果,初始数学技能较高的学生会获得更高的结果。总之,研究结果表明,无论初始技能熟练程度如何,Sci2 对所有学生都产生了强有力的效果(g = 0.24-1.23)。本文讨论了在科学干预研究中探索差异反应的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do Mathematics and Reading Skills Impact Student Science Outcomes?

Establishing validated science programs for students with or at risk for learning disabilities requires testing treatment effects and exploring differential response patterns. This study explored whether students' initial mathematics and reading skills influenced their treatment response to a whole-class, second-grade science program called Scientific Explorers (Sci2). The original Sci2 study employed a cluster randomized controlled design and included 294 students from 18 second-grade classrooms. Differential effects of the program by initial mathematics and reading skill levels were not observed for an interactive science assessment and a distal science outcome measure. However, based on initial reading skill levels, moderation results were found on a science vocabulary measure, suggesting the effects of Sci2 were greatest for students with higher initial reading skills. Similar results were found using initial mathematics skill levels as a predictor of differential response such that students with higher mathematics skills reaped stronger treatment effects on the vocabulary measure. Further, we found initial mathematics skills also influenced outcomes on the proximal science content assessment, where students with higher initial mathematics skills led to higher outcomes. Overall, findings suggest Sci2 produced robust effects for all students (g = 0.24-1.23), regardless of initial skill proficiencies. Implications for exploring differential response in science intervention research are discussed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
3.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Journal of Learning Disabilities (JLD), a multidisciplinary, international publication, presents work and comments related to learning disabilities. Initial consideration of a manuscript depends upon (a) the relevance and usefulness of the content to the readership; (b) how the manuscript compares to other articles dealing with similar content on pertinent variables (e.g., sample size, research design, review of literature); (c) clarity of writing style; and (d) the author"s adherence to APA guidelines. Articles cover such fields as education, psychology, neurology, medicine, law, and counseling.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信