Pre and post tests, Mathematics II EOCT, student surveys, and an administrative interview were examined in the application of this approach to student learning. Table 3.3 shows the overall alignment of data collection methods with the study’s focus questions. Table 3.3: Data Shell In examining the success of this study’s teaching strategies on increasing student Focus Question Literature Sources Type: Method, How are data Rationale Data, Validity analyzed How does the Department of Method: Quantitative: Quantitative: integration of Education and determine if there Pre / Post Dependent t-test vocabulary Skills (2004). are significant Benchmark Effect size r strategies into the differences Pearson’s corr mathematics Standardized U.S. Dept of Educ. curriculum Math 2 EOCT Independent (2007). increase low socio-economic Type of Data: National Math Cohen’s d students’ Advisory Panel. Interval proficiency in Type of (2008). mathematics? Validity: Skrla, L. (2009). Content What are the H. (1999). Method: Quantitative: Quantitative: attitudes and determine if there Survey Chi Square test opinions of the are significant Ganser, T. (2001). adopted Type of Data: differences Cronbach curriculum Nominal, learners? Qualitative Adams, T. (2003) Type of Mvududu, N. Validity: (2005). Construct What was the Draper, R. (2002). Method: Qualitative: Qualitative: level of success look for Interview Coded for themes of change in the categorical and Friere, P. (2005). process strategies Type of Data: repeating data as viewed by an Nominal, National Council administrator to Qualitative of Teachers of encourage the use Math (2006). of looping cards Type of in classrooms for Validity: Skrla, L. (2009). achievement Construct equity? performance from focus question one, the quantitative data for Groups A through are of a pre-
Pre and post tests, Mathematics II EOCT, student surveys, and an administrative interview were examined in the application of this approach to student learning. Table 3.3 shows the overall alignment of data collection methods with the study’s focus questions. Table 3.3: Data Shell Focus Question Literature Sources Type: Method, Data, Validity How are data analyzed Rationale How does the integration of vocabulary strategies into the mathematics curriculum increase low socio-economic students’ proficiency in mathematics? Department of Education and Skills (2004). U.S. Dept of Educ. (2007). National Math Advisory Panel. (2008). Skrla, L. (2009). Method: Pre / Post Benchmark Standardized Math 2 EOCT Type of Data: Interval Type of Validity: Content Quantitative: Dependent t-test Effect size r Pearson’s corr Independent Cohen’s d Quantitative: determine if there are significant differences What are the attitudes and opinions of the adopted curriculum learners? H. (1999). Ganser, T. (2001). Adams, T. (2003) Mvududu, N. (2005). Method: Survey Type of Data: Nominal, Qualitative Type of Validity: Construct Quantitative: Chi Square test Cronbach Quantitative: determine if there are significant differences What was the level of success of change in the process strategies as viewed by an administrator to encourage the use of looping cards in classrooms for achievement equity? Draper, R. (2002). Friere, P. (2005). National Council of Teachers of Math (2006). Skrla, L. (2009). Method: Interview Type of Data: Nominal, Qualitative Type of Validity: Construct Qualitative: Coded for themes Qualitative: look for categorical and repeating data In examining the success of this study’s teaching strategies on increasing student performance from focus question one, the quantitative data for Groups A through are of a pre-
Tatom%20FINAL%20final.docx