SRI-Teknisk rapport-sen.v13 - DPU

104
not an intervention
E.5 Duration of the intervention Not stated
not an intervention
E.6 Person providing the intervention (tick as many
as appropriate)
E.7 Number of people recruited to provide the
intervention (and comparison condition) (e.g.
teachers or health professionals)
E.8 How were the people providing the intervention
recruited? (Write in) Also, give information on
the providers involved in the comparison group(s),
as appropriate.
E.9 Was special training given to people providing
the intervention?
Section F: Results and conclusions
Not stated
not an intervention
Not stated
not an intervention
Not stated
not an intervention
Not stated
not an intervention
F.1 How are the results of the study presented? Details
chi square and tabels
F.2 What are the results of the study as reported
by the authors?
Details
Table 1 summarizes the mean MSPAP performance
across schools (elementary and middle schools
combined) in the sample. As can be seen, the
general trend indicated one of increasing mean
performance with time. Except in the case of
writing, there appeared to be larger gains in the
early years, followed by a leveling of the scores
during 1995–1996, at which point there was again
an increase in mean performance for schools. In
addition, a decrease in mean performance was
noted for science and social studies from the 1995
administration to the 1996 administration of the
MSPAP.
TABLE 1 Means and Standard Deviations of MSPAP
Scale Scores Across Schools (1993–1998)
Math Writing Reading Science Social
tudies Adm. M SD M SD M SD M
SD M SD
1993 510.6 24.1 504.6 19.3 503.8 20.6 509.6 25.3
503.3 18.5
1994 513.9 23.0 503.8 18.8 505.6 19.5 514.6 23.0
508.4 18.7