Deskmates: Reconsidering Optimal Peer Assignments Within the Classroom

Last registered on March 19, 2020

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Deskmates: Reconsidering Optimal Peer Assignments Within the Classroom
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0005299
Initial registration date
March 16, 2020
Last updated
March 19, 2020, 12:02 PM EDT

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
PI Affiliation

Additional Trial Information

Status
Completed
Start date
2015-06-01
End date
2016-12-31
Secondary IDs
Abstract
We conduct our field experiment within primary school classrooms where a pair of deskmates forms the smallest possible designated peer group. We randomize the seats to ensure that every student has a randomized deskmate. We further measure the non-cognitive peer difference between a pair of deskmates, and we record their mid-term and final grades.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Eric, Mak, Li Li and Chunchao Wang. 2020. "Deskmates: Reconsidering Optimal Peer Assignments Within the Classroom." AEA RCT Registry. March 19. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.5299-1.0
Sponsors & Partners

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
Randomize the initial seating plan in a class and fix it for one semester.
Intervention Start Date
2015-09-01
Intervention End Date
2016-07-01

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
Mid-term and final scores (Chinese, Math); non-cognitive measurements.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
We conduct our field experiment within primary school classrooms where a pair of deskmates forms the smallest possible designated peer group; we further measure the non-cognitive peer difference between a pair of deskmates---a metric measuring the difference in their responses to Big Five personality questionnaire items.
Experimental Design Details
Randomization Method
Public Lottery.
Randomization Unit
student.
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
21 classes (The seating plan of each class is separately randomized).
Sample size: planned number of observations
1005 students.
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
1005 (Note: It is not a traditional RCT as there are no treatment and control arms. Instead, the seating plan is randomized).
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
Supporting Documents and Materials

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
IRB Approval Date
IRB Approval Number

Post-Trial

Post Trial Information

Study Withdrawal

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information

Intervention

Is the intervention completed?
Yes
Intervention Completion Date
July 01, 2016, 12:00 +00:00
Data Collection Complete
Yes
Data Collection Completion Date
July 06, 2016, 12:00 +00:00
Final Sample Size: Number of Clusters (Unit of Randomization)
1005 students in 21 classes, 3 schools
Was attrition correlated with treatment status?
No
Final Sample Size: Total Number of Observations
1005 students
Final Sample Size (or Number of Clusters) by Treatment Arms
21 classes (the seating plan for each class is randomized)
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

There are documents in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access to this information.

Request Information

Program Files

Program Files
No
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Abstract
We find that knowledge spillover in the classroom depends on how peer personalities differ. To address the issue of within-group sorting, we conduct a field experiment within primary school classrooms where a pair of deskmates forms the smallest possible designated peer group. We measure the non-cognitive peer difference between a pair of deskmates, defined as the averaged difference in their responses to Big Five personality questionnaire items, to understand the social process within each designated peer group. Our estimation results reveal that knowledge spillover between deskmates works only when their non-cognitive peer difference is relatively small. Otherwise, a detrimental effect ensues. After accounting for non-cognitive peer difference, optimizing peer assignments yields a 2%-6% gain in academic achievement after a semester. Recurring reassignments are necessary to sustain this optimization gain because assimilation or differentiation occurs between deskmates over time.
Citation
Li Li, Eric Mak and Chunchao Wang, "Deskmates: Reconsidering Optimal Peer Assignments Within the Classroom," 2019. SSRN Working Paper.

Reports & Other Materials