Using assessment to individualize early mathematics instruction.

Accumulating evidence suggests that assessment-informed personalized instruction, tailored to students' individual skills and abilities, is more effective than more one-size-fits-all approaches. In this study, we evaluate the efficacy of Individualizing Student Instruction in Mathematics (ISI-Math) compared to Reading (ISI-Reading) where classrooms were randomly assigned to ISI-Math or ISI-Reading. The literature on child characteristics X instruction or skill X treatment interaction effects point to the complexities of tailoring instruction for individual students who present with constellations of skills. Second graders received mathematics instruction in small flexible learning groups based on their assessed learning needs. Results of the study (n=32 teachers, 370 students) revealed significant treatment effects on standardized mathematics assessments. With effect sizes (d) of 0.41-0.60, we show that we can significantly improve 2nd graders' mathematics achievement, including for children living in poverty, by using assessment data to individualize the mathematics instruction they receive. The instructional regime, ISI-Math, was implemented by regular classroom teachers and it led to about a 4-month achievement advantage on standardized mathematics tests when compared to students in control classrooms. These results were realized within one school year. Moreover, treatment effects were the same regardless of school-level poverty and students' gender, initial mathematics or vocabulary scores.

Tools to investigate how interprofessional education activities link to competencies.

Integrating interprofessional education (IPE) activities and curricular components in health professions education has been emphasized recently by the inclusion of accreditation standards across disciplines. The Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) established IPE competencies in 2009, but evaluating how activities link to competencies has not been investigated in depth. The purpose of this project is to investigate how well two IPE activities align with IPEC competencies. To evaluate how our IPE activities met IPEC competencies, we developed a checklist and an observation instrument. A brief description of each is included as well as the outcomes. We analyzed Disaster Day, a simulation exercise that includes participants from Nursing, Medicine, and Pharmacy, and Interprofessional Healthcare Ethics (IPHCE), a course that introduced medical, nursing, and pharmacy students to ethical issues using didactic sessions and case discussions. While both activities appeared to facilitate the development of IPE competencies, Disaster Day aligned more with IPEC competencies than the IPHCE course and appears to be a more comprehensive way of addressing IPEC competencies. However, offering one IPE activity or curricular element is not sufficient. Having several IPE options available, utilizing the tools we developed to map the IPE curriculum and evaluating competency coverage is recommended.

Are study strategies related to medical licensing exam performance?

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between study strategies and performance on a high stakes medical licensing exam entitled the United States Medical Licensing Examination Step 1. METHODS: The action research project included seventy nine student participants at the Texas A & M Health Science Center College of Medicine during their pre-clinical education. Data collection included pre-matriculation and matriculation academic performance data, standardized exam data, and the Learning and Study Strategies Instrument. Multiple regression analyses were conducted. For both models, the dependent variable was the Step 1 score, and the independent variables included Medical College Admission Test, Undergraduate Grade Point Average, Year 1 Average, Year 2 Average, Customized National Board of Medical Examiners Average, Comprehensive Basic Science Exam score, and Learning and Study Strategy Instrument sub-scores. Model 2 added Comprehensive Basic Science Self-Assessment average. RESULTS: Concentration (Model 1 - ß = .264; Model 2 - ß = .254) was the only study strategy correlated with Step 1 performance. The other statistically significant predictors were Customized National Board of Medical Examiners Average (ß = .315) and Year 2 Average (ß = .280) in Model 1 and Comprehensive Basic Science Self-Assessment Average (ß = .338) in Model 2. CONCLUSIONS: There does appear to be a relationship between the study strategy concentration and Step 1 licensing exam performance. Teaching students to practice and utilize certain techniques to improve concentration skills when preparing for and taking exams may help improve licensing exam scores.