SRI-Teknisk rapport-sen.v13 - DPU

H.3 Number of groups Two
H.4 If prospective allocation into more than one
group, what was the unit of allocation?
H.5 If prospective allocation into more than one
group, which method was used to generate the
allocation sequence?
H.6 If prospective allocation into more than one
group, was the allocation sequence concealed?
H.7 Study design summary Details
Section I: Methods - Sampling strategy
I.1 Are the authors trying to produce findings that
are representative of a given population?
108
The strata were defined by three levels for each of
two variables:
(a) the percentage of free or reduced-price lunches
according to the 1994–1995 classification
used by the Maryland State Department of Education
(MSDE) and
(b) the MSPAP performance gains (the MSDE’s 1993–
1995 change index).
Teachers completed questionnaires prior to administering
the MSPAP, whereas students completed
questionnaires within 2 weeks following the administration
of the MSPAP.
Not applicable (no prospective allocation)
Not applicable (no prospective allocation)
Not applicable (no prospective allocation)
Elementary and middle schools are compared with
each other. The divisions are made across following
subjects mathematics, language arts (reading
and writing), science and social studies. Furthermore
the following variables are also considered: In
this study, changes in MSPAP scale scores for
schools were examined in relation to classroom
instruction and assessment practices, student
learning and motivation, beliefs about the impact
of and attitudes toward the MSPAP, and the school
characteristic of percentage of free or reducedprice
lunches, which served as a proxy for SES. The
MSDE also provided school data on the percentage
of free or
reduced-price lunches.
Implicit (please specify)
Is not explicitly mentioned though this study is
trying to build on the existing research about
assessments: