X hits on this document

29 views

0 shares

6 / 8

10

Figure 5—Pre- and Posttest MAT8 Concepts and Problem Solving for enVisionMATH and Students Using Other Math Programs

680

678.7

670

670.6

660

### MAT8 Scale Score

650

640

630

620

610

• 619.2

Surpasses

• 615.9

other programs

enVisionMATH Other Math Programs

Pretest 1

Posttest 2

(Fall 2007)

(Spring 2009)

MAT8 Scale Score

610

Surpasses

600

other programs

Pretest 1

Posttest 2

(Fall 2007)

(Spring 2009)

Figure 6—Pre- and Posttest MAT8 Computation for enVisionMATH and Students Using Other Math Programs

680

670

660

650

640

630

620

enVisionMATH Other Math Programs

590

580

678.8

669.3

594.7

585.1

## Figure 7—Posttest BAM for enVisionMATH and Students Using Other Math Programs

100

90

80

70

BAM Scale Score Percent Correct Posttest (2009)

60

50

40

30

20

10

58.53%

69.68%

enVisionMATH Other Math Programs

0

Note that only comparison of posttest results for the BAM can be used for purposes of the outcomes analysis. The BAM is not vertically scaled, and results are not comparable on the same scale across different grade levels. Consequently, only a comparison among Spring 2009 results is presented.

## Subgroup Results: enVisionMATH vs. Other Math Programs

Evaluators also analyzed subgroup differences between enVisionMATH and other math programs. Results showed a significant difference between enVisionMATH students and students using other math programs in the following subgroups: 3rd graders and females. Specifically, enVisionMATH students who were females showed greater gains on the MAT8 Math Computation and GMADE tests as compared to students using other math programs, t-ratio=14.06, p=0.03 and t-ratio=6.79, p=0.04. Program effects were also found for third- grade students on the MAT8 Math Computation in that the enVisionMATH program had a more positive impact on 3rd graders as compared to other math programs, t-ratio=12.78, p=0.03.