Forming teams and human capital accumulation in primary school students

Last registered on September 28, 2021

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Forming teams and human capital accumulation in primary school students
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0008280
Initial registration date
September 22, 2021

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
September 28, 2021, 2:37 PM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Locations

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
Jinan University

Other Primary Investigator(s)

Additional Trial Information

Status
On going
Start date
2015-09-01
End date
2021-10-01
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
We randomly select classes in elementary schools in a rural county in China and form small teams with five to six members within the classes as treatment groups. Students in the teams complete daily duty tasks, attendance checks, and counts of disruptive behaviors. They finish homework individually but hand in homework as a team throughout an entire semester. Students in control classes undertake the same tasks individually instead of as a team. Teachers provide reports on students' disruptive behaviors and performance on tasks in both types of classes. However, the report in treatment classes was based on the performance of the whole team. We compare the test scores and in-class discipline of students from both treatment classes and control classes. A follow-up survey will be conducted on teachers and students in treatment classes for their impression and comments on the experiment.
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Wang, Chunchao. 2021. "Forming teams and human capital accumulation in primary school students." AEA RCT Registry. September 28. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.8280
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)
We randomly selected classes in elementary schools in a rural county in China and formed small teams with five to six members within the classes as treatment groups. Students in the teams completed daily duty tasks, attendance checks, and counts of disruptive behaviors. They finished homework individually but handed in homework as a team throughout an entire semester. Students in control classes undertook the same tasks individually instead of as a team. Teachers provided reports on students’ disruptive behaviors and performance
on tasks in both types of classes.
Intervention Start Date
2015-09-01
Intervention End Date
2016-01-15

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
test scores and personality traits
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The experiment was conducted in a rural county (LH County) of Hunan Province in central China for five months, from September 2015 to January 2016. The duration of the experiment covered the entire autumn semester of the academic year 2015/2016. With the permission
and cooperation of the local education bureau, we randomly selected five elementary schools from the complete set of elementary schools in the county to conduct the experiment. Students from the participating schools were initially randomly assigned to different classes at the start of the first grade. We focused on students in the third, fourth, and fifth grades. We randomly chose two classes in each grade from each school. By lottery, one class was assigned as a treatment class in which we randomly formed teams; the other class was
assigned as the control class in which no intervention was implemented. We requested the students fill out a paper-based questionnaire twice during the experiment. The first-round questionnaire was given two weeks prior to the start of the autumn semester, and the second round was conducted two weeks before the final examination. The questionnaire collected information about the students’ demographics, attitudes toward study, and measurements of personality traits. The questionnaire also gathered basic information about their parents, such as education, occupation, and income.The students filled out the questionnaires during self-study sessions in the presence of head teachers, who then collected the forms and uploaded detailed information to our online system. To guarantee data accuracy and completeness, the head teachers returned incomplete forms or forms with obvious errors to the corresponding students for amendment until the forms were satisfactory. We supervised the entire procedure of questionnaire completion and uploading to ensure the accuracy and effectiveness of information. Team size was set at five to six members. To be comparable with current classroom structure, We first assigned students to three sets according to height, that is, below average, average, and above average height. Within each set, every six students were grouped by lottery, and their seats were also assigned by lottery. We ensured that shorter students took front rows, which is how they would be assigned if they were in the control classes. We also ensured that members of a same team sat next to each other either in the same row or in the same column. In consideration of the children’s visual development, seating was shuffled every two weeks, but the team members remained unchanged. We picked up some prior school activities as team tasks to increase interaction within teams and raise team awareness.
Experimental Design Details
5 years after the intervention, we will conduct a follow-up survey on the teachers and a random sample of students in treatment classes about their impression and comments on the experiment.
Randomization Method
randomization in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
individual
Was the treatment clustered?
No

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
30 classes
Sample size: planned number of observations
1500 students
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
15 classes control, 15 classes treatment
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
School of Economics, Jinan University
IRB Approval Date
2015-03-15
IRB Approval Number
N/A

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?
No
Data Collection Complete
Data Publication

Data Publication

Is public data available?
No

Program Files

Program Files
Reports, Papers & Other Materials

Relevant Paper(s)

Reports & Other Materials