Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION

Research Analysis of a Dissertation

Mina J. Blazy

California State University, San Bernardino

EDUC 707 Introduction to Quantitative Research Methods

Monica Loyce, Ed.D.

March 4, 2017
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
2

Abstract

In the following document I will analyze and explain the dissertation of a Multi-Level analysis of

Project lead the Way Implementation in Indiana by reviewing the methods employed in the

research, literature review, statistical analysis, measures, outcomes and conclusion. There are

examples of the data collected analyzed with p-values and the SAS data equations. The research

and analysis shows that there is significance with the impact of PLTW curriculum and students

that take the engineering courses and consider STEM majors in higher education.

LITERATURE REVIEW
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
3

The literature review gives background knowledge of the history of science, technology,

engineering and mathematics (STEM), outcomes of testing, standards, programs and curriculum,

Project Lead the Way (PLTW), the National Science Resources Centers five areas for reform,

policy and education policy research and institutional theory. The organization of the literature

review gives a clear background of why STEM became a focus in the United States. The

timeline of the Literature Review is ordered as follows:

History of STEM Education Policy

o Rising above the Gathering Storm
o The America Competes Act
o Prepare and Inspire
Outcomes
o National Testing Outcomes
o International Testing Outcomes
o State Testing Outcomes
Standards, Programs and Curriculum
o National Standards
o Curriculum
Project Lead the Way
o PLTW Evolution Studies
The National Science Resources Centers five Areas for Reform
Policy and Education Policy Research
o First Generation of Policy Implementation
o Second Generation of Policy Implementation
o Education Policy Implementation Factors
o Policy Instruments
Institutional Theory
o Institutional analysis and Development Framework
Conclusion

Throughout the timeline in the literature review there is information of how essential the

legislative and executive branch are part of the decision process with regards to STEM

education. The federal government has named the Committee on STEM Education to follow

through on these functions. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English Language Arts

(ELA) and mathematics and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are listed as a
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
4

federal government initiative brought together by a committee of professionals. States are

required to adopt CCSS and NGSS in order to receive certain federal funds.

This study is a multi-level analysis of PLTW and identifies research in the past that is of

value to this dissertation. Included in his literature review, specific and quantitative findings.

Sorge, built upon the research of Bottoms and Anthony, Tran and Nathan, Van Overschelde and

Rethwisch, Starobin, Laanan and Haynes who collectively represent Iowa, Wisconsin and Texas

school systems. Their studies looked at the middle school PLTW curriculum, the high school

PLTW curriculum and the higher education articulation of PLTW along with associating how

PLTW students compared to other STEM curriculum and their outcomes in college. Sorge

concluded with a summary of the research and the belief that further research is an opportunity to

should be continued based on policy at the school and district level in Indiana.

METHODS

The research focused on school and district level community attributes and their

influences on outcomes related to the adoption and implementation of PLTW in Indiana

schools. (Sorge, 2014a, p. 64) The study is quantitative and multi-level. Sorge diagrams the

study in three levels. He starts with level three as the district level, level two is both a PLTW

school and non-PLTW school, and level one is PLTW School with PLTW students with a STEM

major and non-STEM major, and non-PLTW Student linked to STEM major and non-STEM

major and the Non-PLTW school with subheadings, non-PLTW students STEM major and non-

STEM Major. Diagram:

Table 3.1 Group Analysis (Sorge, 2014b, p. 65)

 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
5

There are eight hypotheses. (Sorge, 2014b)

1. Attending a school that offers PLTW will increase the likelihood of

students majoring in a post-secondary STEM program. This odds ratio
will be greater if they have taken PLTW courses.

2. The factors for college persistence will differ for students at PTLW
schools, students at non-PLTW schools, and PLTW students.
3. The factors that are statistically significant for majoring in STEM will
be different for PLTW schools and non-PLTW schools. They will also be
different for PLTW students.

4. Attending a school that offers PLTW will increase the likelihood that a
student will persist from his/her freshman to sophomore year of
college.

5. District/community level factors focused on educational attainment

and income/wealth will be statistically significant in impacting the
likelihood PLTW students major in STEM. These factors will differ for
non-PLTW students at PLTW schools and students at non-PLTW schools.

6. For PLTW students, the odds ratios for statistically significant

district/community level factors will be greater than the odds ratio of
school and student level variables for majoring in STEM. The odds ratio
for these factors for PLTW students will be proportionally greater for
PLTW students than non-PLTW students at PLTW schools and students
at non-PLTW schools.
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
6

7. District/community level factors focused on educational attainment

and income/wealth will be statistically significant in impacting PLTW
students persisting from their freshman to sophomore year of college.
The statistically significant factors for PLTW students will be different
from the statistically significant factors for non-PLTW students at PLTW
schools or students at non- PLTW schools for persisting.

8. For PLTW students, the odds ratios for statistically significant

district/community level factors will be greater than the odds ratio of
school and student level variables for persisting from their freshman to
sophomore year of college. The odds ratio for these factors will be
proportionally greater for PLTW students than non-PLTW students at
PLTW schools and students at non-PLTW schools.

Sorge used a measurement tool with multilevel statistical modeling with Institutional Analysis

and Development (IAD) and Hierarchical Linear Modeling (HLM) in order to avoid over lapping

data. Level one Data was collected from the Indiana Department of Education (IDOE), the

Indiana Department of Workforce Development (DWD) and the National Clearinghouse (via the

Indiana Commission for Higher Education (ICHE) (Sorge, 2014a, p. 67). Level two data was

collected from IDOE and PLTW and level three data was collected from the national Center for

Education Statistics (NCES) (Sorge, 2014a, p. 68).

LIMITATIONS

The HLM analysis required a large sample size. Data were missing from level one and the data

that were being pulled was proprietary. When data were missing from the variables a data set

was removed and only schools that had full data were used in the study. Also, high school to

university data may have an impacted the study because of peripheral variables.

DATA ANALYSIS

There are 27 tables in section 4 (4.1, etc.) with data in data analysis section. The list is as

follows (Sorge, 2014b):

1. 2010 Public School Data, 2010 Public School Sample Population Demographics
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
7

2. 2010 Public Schools Sample Population

3. 2010 Public Schools Sample Population Minimum and Maximum
4. Null Analysis population-average model with robust standards errors for adopting
PLTW
5. Individual Level 1 Independent Variable Models
6. Individual Level 2 Independent Variable Models
7. Different Models for Predicting a School Adopts PLTW
8. Final Estimations of Fixed Effects for Model Used for Evaluating if a school
Adopted PLTW
9. Basic Descriptive Statistics of PLTW schools and Non-PLTW Schools
10. Basic Descriptive Statistics of Student Groups
11. Basic Descriptive Statistics of PLTW Schools and Non-PLTW schools
12. Level 2 Variables on Majoring in STEM
13. Variable Predicting STEM Majors with High School Diploma Variable
14. Variable Predicting STEM Majors with Bachelors Degree
15. Variable Predicting Majors with Per capita Income
16. Level 2 Variables o Persistence from Freshman to Sophomore Year
17. Variables Predicting Persistence with High School Diploma
18. Variables Predicting Persistence with Bachelors Degree or Above
19. Variables Predicting Persistence with Per Capita Income
20. Level 3 Variables and PLTW Students Majoring STEM
21. Variable Predicting STEM Majors with High School Diploma Variable
22. Variable Predicting STEM Majors with Bachelors Degree Variable
23. Variable Predicting STEM Majors with Per Capita Income
24. Level 3 Variables and PLTW Students Persistence
25. Variable Predicting Persistence with High School Diploma Variable
26. Variables predicting Persistence with Bachelors Degree or Above
27. Variables Predicting Persistence with Per Capita Income.

Descriptive statistics were used to describe the PLTW schools and non-PLTW schools,

their communities and the six groups of students. (Sorge, 2014b) The number of participates in

the sample in each category was represented by N where N = 292 total school districts Level

three. All schools (N=348) with both PLTW curriculum (N=233) and not offered PLTW schools

(N=115) with both maximum and minimum values. There were 181 PLTW schools that offered

PLTW engineering pathways and only five offered Biomedical Pathway courses and 47 offered

both PLTW Engineering and Biomedical Pathways. The tables listed, but not limited to, variable

description, mixed model equation, p-value and odds ratio. The null hypothesis or statistical

significance was explained for all tables.

 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
8

Table 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 4.15 for example, shows that non-White students, percent of school

eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch, percent of graduates passing the SAT, average composite

score on SAT, and percent of graduates who took the SAT have a p-value that is statistically

significant for hypothesis three for majoring in STEM when comparing PLTW schools and non-

PLTW schools. One example is that the p-values in Table 12 for hypothesis three were at least

<.001. Many of the formulas were query based and could be used from a database to crunch

the numbers. All eight hypotheses were tested using either formula formed from the IAD data or

pulled from the IDOE.

DISCUSSON/ CONCLUSION

Based on the findings, the percent of the population with a high school diploma and above or

bachelors degree and above (education level of a community) are each significant predictors in

both the adoption of PLTW by a school and the future probability of the students majoring in

STEM. (Sorge, 2014a, p. 106) Interestingly, non-white students that were in PLTW courses

were more likely to major in STEM compared to white students. According to hypothesis six,

females were significantly as likely to major in STEM as their male counter parts when enrolled

in PLTW (Sorge, 2014b, pp. 9596). It is believed that these findings would help the Leaky

Pipeline (Blickenstaff, 2005) of females that leave STEM or arent interested in STEM fields.

Sorge restated that PLTW students were more likely to major in STEM based on his research and

past researchers.

Throughout Sorges conclusion, he continues to discuss the significance of PLTW students and

non-PLTW students of schools that used the PLTW curriculum to non-PLTW students at schools

that did not have PTLW. There was no significance, or a null hypothesis, with the exposure of

PLTW curriculum to non-PLTW students that attended the school. However there was a
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
9

continued pattern of significance with students who were in PLTW courses that major in STEM

in higher education.

Sorge also found a correlation between students who were eligible for free and reduced

lunch with low ELA scores were less likely to end up in STEM fields. On the other hand,

students that were in PLTW courses that were considered underrepresented populations (females

and non-whites) were as likely to consider STEM careers. Sorge states that teachers,

administrators, policymakers and PLTW should be cognizant of how to help socioeconomically

disadvantaged students have access to PLTW courses.

Sorge concluded with more questions regarding the success of students in PLTW and

non-PLTW students. He formulated questions about why PLTW teachers were more effective in

their PLTW courses but not in their non-PLTW courses. Additionally, recommendations were

made for the Indiana funding policy and how to reach lower income schools. Future research was

recommended that would follow a cohort of students as it is thought this would yield better data

on STEM graduation rates in higher education.

References

Blickenstaff, J. C. (2005). Women and Science Careers: Leaky Pipeline or Gender Filter?

Gender and Education, 17(4), 369386. Retrieved from

http://libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ691194&site=ehost-live

Sorge, B. H. (2014a). A multilevel analysis of project lead the way implementation in Indiana

(Ph.D.). Purdue University, United States -- Indiana. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/pqdthss/docview/1681362996/abstract/

B7DF4C3DF7544FB0PQ/1
 Running Head: RESEARCH ANALYSIS OF A DISSERTATION
10

Sorge, B. H. (2014b). A multilevel analysis of project lead the way implementation in Indiana

(Ph.D.). Purdue University, United States -- Indiana. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.lib.csusb.edu/pqdthss/docview/1681362996/abstract/

143992448DC14949PQ/1