Målrettet og tilrettelagt matematikkundervisning for elever som presterer svakt i matematikk: Resultater fra et randomisert kontrollert forsøk på 8. trinn og videregående skole i Oslo

Research output: Book/anthology/dissertation/reportReportResearch

  • Lena Brasen Lindenskov
  • Mathilde Bjørnset, Fafo Institute, Norway
  • Trude Gunnes, Statistisk sentralbyrå Norge, Norway
  • Marianne Takvam Kindt, Fafo Institute, Norway
  • Lars J. Kirkebøen, Statistisk sentralbyrå Norge, Norway
  • Jon Rogstad, Fafo Institute, Norway
  • Marte Rønning, Statistisk sentralbyrå Norge, Norway
The purpose of this report is to describe and evaluate an intervention implemented
in public lower and upper secondary schools in Oslo. The intervention targeted
students with poor mathematics skills in 8th grade and the first year of upper
secondary education (Vg1) and aimed to enable more students to complete upper
secondary education (VGO) by improving their math skills. The intervention
consisted of: 1) didactics training of teachers and 2) adapted instruction instead of
regular instruction for students during two periods of 4-6 weeks (one in autumn
and one in spring). In lower secondary school, adapted instruction took place in
small groups, in upper secondary schools in regular groups.
The intervention was implemented as a randomized experiment, in which 24 of 48
lower secondary schools in Oslo and 9 of 17 relevant upper secondary schools
were randomly selected to participate. We evaluate the intervention by comparing
results in treatment and control schools. We are not yet able to study the
completion of VGO, and therefore focus on the results on the standardized national
test in numeracy in 9th grade (NP9) and the Oslo test in mathematics at Vg1.
We find that average NP9 in the target group in lower secondary school increases
by 0.02-0.04 percent of a standard deviation but cannot conclude that this is an
effect of the intervention. Most effect estimates are not statistically significant.
However, we do find that the share of target students at the lowest mastery level is
reduced by 2 percentage points, from an initial level of about 10 percent. This
difference is significant at the 10 percent level. We do not find any signs of effects
on students outside the target group. Based on the effect estimates and previous
research, we estimate the economic benefit of the intervention. We cannot
conclude that the intervention is cost-effective. At the same time, there is
substantial uncertainty in the estimates, and we cannot exclude effects that make
the intervention cost-effective.
In upper secondary, we find no effect on the students’ mathematics skills as
measured by the Oslo test. However, we find evidence of increased completion of
Vg1 for the first two cohorts (where we have data for completion of Vg1). We
cannot yet conclude whether increased completion is an effect of the intervention.
If in the long term, there is a corresponding effect on the completion of VGO, the
intervention in upper secondary will have been cost-effective.
We also conducted a qualitative evaluation, based on interviews and surveys. This
evaluation shows a change over time in the attitude towards the intervention.
Participating teachers were initially positive to the content of the intervention but
sceptical about features of the implementation. This changed to a more generally
positive attitude. In the final year, the intervention became a part of regular
teaching, and the schools' focus shifted to new projects. Teachers' responses about
their teaching and observations of lessons indicate that the intervention had an
impact on teaching. However, teaching during the intervention is not fully in line
with the didactic principles of the intervention, nor are these principles exclusive to
the treatment schools. Organizational conditions may have limited the effect of the
intervention. There were challenges with turnover among teachers, and possibly
with selecting the students who would benefit most from the intervention.
In summary, the intervention has largely succeeded in connecting with and
motivating the treatment school teachers and is seen as relevant by these. On the
other hand, we cannot conclude that the intervention has succeeded in improving
the students’ results, although there are some signs of this. In the longer term, it
will be possible to study any effects on actual completion of VGO.
Original languageNorwegian
Place of publicationOslo
PublisherStatistisk sentralbyrå • Oslo
Number of pages80
ISBN (Print)978-82-587-1068-1
ISBN (Electronic)978-82-587-1069-8
Commissioning bodyKunnskapsdepartementet, Oslo, Norge
Publication statusPublished - 11 Feb 2020
Series Statistisk sentralbyrå - Rapporter
Number7
Volume2020
ISSN0806-2056

See relations at Aarhus University Citationformats

Press/Media items

ID: 179019671