Differential return on investment: Academic growth in mathematics and reading based on initial performance.

Zone of proximal development academic growth achievement gap elementary schools |hierarchical linear modeling longitudinal modeling mathematics education multilevel modeling reading education return on investment

Journal

The British journal of educational psychology
ISSN: 2044-8279
Titre abrégé: Br J Educ Psychol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0370636

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Historique:
revised: 01 11 2021
received: 16 10 2019
pubmed: 17 12 2021
medline: 17 8 2022
entrez: 16 12 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Students vary in their initial achievement when they enter school and their rate of academic growth as they move through school. These differences have implications for classroom instruction and educational policy. Although previous research has examined initial achievement and growth differences, a gap remains in understanding how initial level of achievement interacts with subsequent growth as children move through school. Using Vygotsky's zone of proximal development (ZPD) and return on investment as theoretical grounding, this registered report examined how students' initial academic performance relative to their school predicts their subsequent academic achievement. The stage 1 accepted registered report is available at https://osf.io/9zmak/. Specifically, we tracked the achievement of a cohort of students who started at or above their school's mean at the beginning of third grade and tested a range of hypotheses regarding their achievement and growth as well as which students showed the greatest gains from their time in school. Using a large database of student academic achievement in the United States, this registered report included de-identified data from all students from fall 2014 to spring 2017 in grades three through five from the ten US states with the highest participation for the Northwest Evaluation Association's Measures of Academic Progress (MAP®) - a computer adaptive test of academic achievement in mathematics and reading. Because the MAP is taken at least twice per school year, up to six scores were included on mathematics and reading achievement for effective samples of approximately 220,000 students. We built separate reading and mathematics three-level piecewise longitudinal hierarchical linear models (student repeated measures, nested within students, nested within schools) to model student growth from the beginning of third grade to the end of fifth grade (i.e., three academic years and two summers). For both mathematics and reading, average student achievement growth slowed as they progressed from third through fifth grade. From there, the findings diverged. In mathematics, student growth was mostly similar across achievement levels and grades from third through fifth. However, in reading, above-average students demonstrated slower growth than average students during the school year but faster growth during the summer. Also of note, at the beginning of third grade, the highest achieving students outscored average students in their school by more than 2 years in mathematics and 3 years in reading. Our results may be able to be explained via a ZPD model, which posits development only occurs when students are placed in appropriately challenging environments. In mathematics, the observed pattern of relatively consistent growth across achievement levels suggests average students were just as likely to be in their ZPD as higher achieving students. In reading, as initial achievement increased, student reading growth slowed, which suggests the higher the initial achievement, the less likely students were to be in their ZPD. If a goal of education is for students to learn new things, our results suggest existing school offerings in reading are not meeting that goal equitably for students across the performance spectrum. Differential growth patterns should be considered when designing learning experiences for students who enter with a wide range of prior mastery.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Students vary in their initial achievement when they enter school and their rate of academic growth as they move through school. These differences have implications for classroom instruction and educational policy. Although previous research has examined initial achievement and growth differences, a gap remains in understanding how initial level of achievement interacts with subsequent growth as children move through school.
AIM OBJECTIVE
Using Vygotsky's zone of proximal development (ZPD) and return on investment as theoretical grounding, this registered report examined how students' initial academic performance relative to their school predicts their subsequent academic achievement. The stage 1 accepted registered report is available at https://osf.io/9zmak/. Specifically, we tracked the achievement of a cohort of students who started at or above their school's mean at the beginning of third grade and tested a range of hypotheses regarding their achievement and growth as well as which students showed the greatest gains from their time in school.
SAMPLE METHODS
Using a large database of student academic achievement in the United States, this registered report included de-identified data from all students from fall 2014 to spring 2017 in grades three through five from the ten US states with the highest participation for the Northwest Evaluation Association's Measures of Academic Progress (MAP®) - a computer adaptive test of academic achievement in mathematics and reading. Because the MAP is taken at least twice per school year, up to six scores were included on mathematics and reading achievement for effective samples of approximately 220,000 students.
METHOD METHODS
We built separate reading and mathematics three-level piecewise longitudinal hierarchical linear models (student repeated measures, nested within students, nested within schools) to model student growth from the beginning of third grade to the end of fifth grade (i.e., three academic years and two summers).
RESULTS RESULTS
For both mathematics and reading, average student achievement growth slowed as they progressed from third through fifth grade. From there, the findings diverged. In mathematics, student growth was mostly similar across achievement levels and grades from third through fifth. However, in reading, above-average students demonstrated slower growth than average students during the school year but faster growth during the summer. Also of note, at the beginning of third grade, the highest achieving students outscored average students in their school by more than 2 years in mathematics and 3 years in reading.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Our results may be able to be explained via a ZPD model, which posits development only occurs when students are placed in appropriately challenging environments. In mathematics, the observed pattern of relatively consistent growth across achievement levels suggests average students were just as likely to be in their ZPD as higher achieving students. In reading, as initial achievement increased, student reading growth slowed, which suggests the higher the initial achievement, the less likely students were to be in their ZPD. If a goal of education is for students to learn new things, our results suggest existing school offerings in reading are not meeting that goal equitably for students across the performance spectrum. Differential growth patterns should be considered when designing learning experiences for students who enter with a wide range of prior mastery.

Identifiants

pubmed: 34913476
doi: 10.1111/bjep.12479
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

817-842

Informations de copyright

© 2021 British Psychological Society.

Références

Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Olson, L. S. (2001). Schools, achievement, and inequality: A seasonal perspective. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 171-191. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737023002171
Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B, 57, 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
Cooper, H., Nye, B., Charlton, K., Lindsay, J., & Greathouse, S. (1996). The effects of summer vacation on achievement test scores: A narrative and meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 66, 227-268. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543066003227
Dewey, J. (1934). Individual psychology and education. The Philosopher, 12. Retrieved from: http://www.the-philosopher.co.uk/2016/08/individual-psychology-and-education-1934.html
Downey, D. B., von Hippel, P. T., & Broh, B. A. (2004). Are schools the great equalizer? Cognitive inequality during the summer months and the school year. American Sociological Review, 69, 613-635. https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240406900501
Downey, D. B., von Hippel, P. T., & Hughes, M. (2008). Are “failing” schools really failing? Removing the influence of non-school factors from measures of school quality. Sociology of Education, 81, 242-270. https://doi.org/10.1177/003804070808100302
Engel, M., Claessens, A., & Finch, M. A. (2012). Teaching students what they already know? The (mis)alignment between mathematics instructional content and student knowledge in kindergarten. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35, 157-178. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373712461850
Farkas, S., & Duffett, A. (2008). High achieving students in the era of NCLB: Results from a national teacher survey. Washington, DC: Thomas E. Fordham Institute.
Grissom, J. A., Redding, C., & Bleiberg, J. F. (2019). Money over Merit? Socioeconomic gaps in receipt of gifted services. Harvard Educational Review, 89, 337-369. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-89.3.337
Herrnstein, R. J. (1971). I.Q. in the meritocracy. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company.
Hofferth, S. L., & Sandberg, J. F. (2001). How American children spend their time. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63, 295-308. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00295.x
Lee, J. (2010). Tripartite growth trajectories of reading and math achievement: Tracking national academic progress at primary, middle, and high school levels. American Educational Research Journal, 47, 800-832. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831210365009
Lohman, D. F., & Korb, K. A. (2006). Gifted today but not tomorrow? Longitudinal changes in ability and achievement during elementary school. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 29, 451-484. https://doi.org/10.4219/jeg-2006-245
McBee, M., Makel, M. C., & Godkin, N. (2018). On the origin of the Matthew Effect: Insights from a quantitative theoretical model. doi: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8a5qs
Mill, J. S. (1873/2017). Autobiography. Retrieved from: https://www.earlymoderntexts.com/assets/pdfs/mill1873e.pdf
Montessori, M. (1917). The advanced Montessori method spontaneous activity in education. New York, NY: Frederick A. Stokes Company.
Morgan, P. L., Farkas, G., Hillemeier, M. M., & Maczuga, S. (2016). Science achievement gaps begin very early, persist, and are largely explained by modifiable factors. Educational Researcher, 45, 18-35. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X16633182
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Schools and staffing survey (SASS). U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/tables/state_2004_11.asp
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA). (2011). Technical manual. Portland, OR: Northwest Evaluation Association.
Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA). (2019). Technical manual. Portland, OR: Northwest Evaluation Association.
Peters, S. J., Rambo-Hernandez, K., Makel, M. C., Matthews, M. S., & Plucker, J. A. (2019). Effect of local norms on racial and ethnic representation in gifted education. AERA Open, 5(2), 233285841984844. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858419848446
Peters, S. J., Matthews, M. T., Rambo-Hernandez, K., Makel, M. C., & Plucker, J. A. (2017). Should millions of students take a gap year? Large numbers of students start the school year above grade level. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61, 229-238. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217701834
Puzio, K., Colby, G. T., & Algeo-Nichols, D. (2020). Differentiated literacy instruction: Boondoggle or best practice? Review of Educational Research, 90, 459-498. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320933536
Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., & McCoach, D. B. (2015). High-achieving and average students’ reading growth: Contrasting school and summer trajectories. Journal of Educational Research, 108, 112-129. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2013.850398
Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., Peters, S. J., & Plucker, J. A. (2019). Quantifying and exploring elementary school excellence gaps across schools and time. Journal of Advanced Academics, 30, 383-415. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X19864116
Rambo-Hernandez, K. E., Peters, S., Plucker, J., Makel, M., & Pedersen, B. (2021). How academically diverse is the “grade-level” classroom? Symposium presented at the national conference of the American Educational Research Association.
Reardon, S. F. (2011). The widening academic achievement gap between the rich and the poor: New evidence and possible explanations. In R. Murnane & G. Duncan (Eds.), Whither opportunity? Rising inequality and the uncertain life chances of low-income children. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Samejima, F. (1994). Estimation of reliability coefficients using the test information function and its modifications. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 229-244. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169401800304
Spybrook, J., Bloom, H., Congdon, R., Hill, C., Martinez, A., & Raudenbush, S. (2011). Optimal design plus empirical evidence: Documentation for the “optimal design” software. Retrieved from http://hlmsoft.net/od/od-manual-20111016-v300.pdf
Steenbergen-Hu, S., Makel, M. C., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2016). What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K-12 students’ academic achievement: Findings from two second-order meta-analyses. Review of Educational Research, 86, 849-899. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316675417
Thum, Y. M., & Hauser, C. H. (2015). NWEA 2015 MAP Norms for Student and School Achievement Status and Growth. NWEA Research Report. Portland, OR: NWEA.
U.S. Congress. (1979). Department of Education Organization Act of 1979 (93 Stat. 668). Retrieved from https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE93/pdf/STATUTE-93-Pg668.pdf#page=1
von Hippel, P. T., & Hamrock, C. (2019). Do test score gaps grow before, during or between the school years? Measurement artifacts and what we can know in spite of them. Sociological Science, 6, 43-80. https://doi.org/10.15195/v6.a3
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
West, J., Flanagan, K. D., & Germino-Hausken, E. (2000). America’s kindergartners: Findings from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, kindergarten class of 1998-99, fall 1998. Jerry West, Kristin Denton, Elvie Germino-Hausken. U.S. Dept. of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2000/2000070.pdf
Zill, N., West, J., & National Center for Education Statistics. (2001). Entering kindergarten: A portrait of American children when they begin school. Findings from the condition of education, 2000. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001035.pdf

Auteurs

Karen E Rambo-Hernandez (KE)

Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.

Matthew C Makel (MC)

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Scott J Peters (SJ)

University of Wisconsin-Whitewater, Wisconsin, USA.

Cristina Worley (C)

Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH