Content deleted Content added
oops |
|||
Line 25:
Supporters point to statistical studies that compare the performance of students enrolled in IMP courses with their peers enrolled in traditional high school mathematics courses. Merlino and Wolff, two such researchers, report that in their several studies IMP students consistently outperformed traditionally taught students on both the math and verbal sections of the [[PSAT/NMSQT|PSAT]], as well as on the SAT-9.<ref>[http://www.gphillymath.org/StudentAchievement/Reports/SupportData/Part1Intro.htm] Merlino, J. and Wolff, E: ''Assessing the Costs/Benefits of an NSF “Standards-Based Secondary Mathematics Curriculum on Student Achievement'', Philadelphia, PA: The Greater Philadelphia Secondary Mathematics Project, 2001</ref> Kramer reported that grade 12 IMP students in his study performed better on all areas of mathematics tested by the NAEP test,<ref>[http://lmt.mspnet.org/media/data/IMP_block.pdf?media_000000002049.pdf] Kramer, S: “The Joint Impact of Block Scheduling and a Standards-Based Curriculum on High School Algebra Achievement and Mathematics Course Taking” (doctrinal dissertation), University of Maryland, 2003</ref> and Webb and Dowling reported IMP students performed significantly better on statistics questions from the Second International Mathematics Study, on mathematical reasoning and problem solving tasks designed by the State of Wisconsin, and on a quantitative reasoning test developed by a university to administer to entering students.<ref>Webb, N. and Dowling, M: “Comparison of IMP Students with Students Enrolled in Traditional Courses on Probability, Statistics, Problem Solving, and Reasoning,” ''Project Report 97-1'', University of Wisconsin – Madison, Wisconsin Center for Education Research, 1997</ref>
I NEED SOME FUCKING HELP ON ORCHARD HIDEOUT E-MAIL ME huttypo@aol.com
== Notes ==
| |||