Categories for Decision Making
March 23, 2021
Mastery Learning. Mastery learning is an instructional approach that relies on students successfully mastering material before moving on to the next lesson. It has been found to be a very powerful instructional method, with effect sizes ranging from 0.50 to 0.58, and is the fundamental component of many education interventions such as Response to Intervention (RtI), Personalized System of Instruction (PSI), and computer-based instruction. Mastery learning requires that instructional materials be sequenced so that instruction builds on what has been previously mastered until the overall learning objectives are mastered. Using formative assessment procedures, teachers frequently assess how each student is progressing toward mastering the objectives in each learning unit. Students who demonstrate competency move on to the next unit. Students may study in groups or alone, working through each unit, but progress is assessed individually. For students who have not mastered the lesson, additional group or individual instruction is provided. Remediation may include tutoring, peer monitoring, small group discussions, or additional homework. Mastery learning has been found to be effective at all levels of education.
Citation: Guinness, K., Detrich, R., Keyworth, R. & States, J. (2021). Overview of Mastery Learning. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/instructional-delivery-learning.
Link: https://www.winginstitute.org/instructional-delivery-learning
March 19, 2021
Are Scientific Reading Instruction and Dyslexia Interventions the Same? Distinctions for Elementary Education Preparation Programs. Dyslexia is a language-based disability that can hinder the fluent acquisition of reading skills. Dyslexia poses a particular challenge to teachers instructing students in reading. It is estimated that approximately 15%-20% of the population is impacted by dyslexia. This paper compares the tenets of structured literacy, the reading method used in many dyslexia programs, to scientific reading instruction. Directed content analysis of documents relevant to the research topic revealed three themes which accounted for concepts from the National Reading Panel report, Scientific Reading Instruction, and the International Dyslexia Association.
Citation: Woods, L., & Graham, K. K. (2020). Are Scientific Reading Instruction and Dyslexia Interventions the Same? Distinctions for Elementary Education Preparation Programs. SRATE Journal, 29(1), n1.
Link: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1243766.pdf
March 19, 2021
Effective programs for elementary science: A best-evidence synthesis. This article presents a systematic review of research on the achievement outcomes of all types of approaches to teaching science in elementary schools. The review concludes that science teaching methods focused on enhancing teachers’ classroom instruction throughout the year, such as cooperative learning and science-reading integration, as well as approaches that give teachers technology tools to enhance instruction, have significant potential to improve science learning.
Citation: Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Hanley, P., & Thurston, A. (2012). Effective programs for elementary science: A best-evidence synthesis. Baltimore, MD, Johns Hopkins University.
Link: https://bestevidence.org/category/science/science-elementary/
March 17, 2021
Research-Based Writing Practices and the Common Core: Meta-analysis and Meta-synthesis. To meet writing objectives specified in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), many teachers need to make significant changes in how writing is taught. While CCSS identified what students need to master, it did not provide guidance on how teachers are to meet these writing benchmarks. The current article presents research-supported practices that can be used to meet CCSS writing objectives in kindergarten to grade 8. This paper identified these practices by conducting a new meta- analysis of writing intervention studies, which included true and quasi-experiments, as well as single-subject design studies.
Citation: Graham, S., Harris, K. R., and (2015). Research-Based Writing Practices and the Common Core: Meta-analysis and Meta-synthesis. The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 115, No. 4 (June 2015), pp. 498-522.
Link: https://www.rcsdk12.org/site/handlers/filedownload.ashx?moduleinstanceid=56697&dataid=48555&FileName=Research%20Based%20Writing%20Practices%20and%20the%20Common%20Core.pdf
March 17, 2021
What constitutes a science of reading instruction? Recently, the term science of reading has been used in public debate to promote policies and instructional practices based on research on the basic cognitive mechanisms of reading, the neural processes involved in reading, computational models of learning to read, and the like. In this article, the author cautions against instructional over- generalizations based on various kinds of basic research without an adequate consideration of instructional experiments. The author provides several examples of the premature translation of basic research findings into wide-scale pedagogical application.
Citation: Shanahan, T. (2020). What constitutes a science of reading instruction?. Reading Research Quarterly, 55, S235-S247.
Link: http://textproject.org/assets/Uploads/Shanahan-Science-of-Reading-2020.pdf
February 10, 2021
Dropout Prevention in the Time of COVID-19. Students on the path toward dropping out of high school often exhibit signals that they are at risk well before they stop engaging in school. As school closures due to COVID-19 separate students from structured routines and educational supports, the number of disengaged students may continue to grow. Educators should be aware of and look for signs of disengagement and act to maximize engagement and supports for at-risk students during COVID-19 closures.
Citation: Kassner, L., Jonas, D., and Klein, S. (2020). Dropout Prevention in the Time of COVID-19. U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, What Works Clearinghouse.
Link: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/appalachia/blogs/blog29_dropout-prevention-in-COVID-19.asp
January 25, 2021
In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, States are struggling to reopen and keep open, most, if not all, of their 138,000 K-12 schools. Given this level of uncertainty, it is critical to track data that will help schools identify problems quickly, assess their nature, and respond in timely and effective ways to safeguard the health of students and education staff while providing a quality education. This Wing Institute dashboard will on track issues regarding the reopening of schools under the Covid-19 pandemic.
Citation: American Academy of Pediatrics. (2021). Children and COVID-19: State-Level Data Report. 2021. Available in: https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%201.14.21.pdf
Link: https://www.winginstitute.org/covid-19-impact
December 2, 2020
Fidelity of implementation is a critical but often neglected component of any new system, practice, or intervention in educational research and practice. Fidelity is a multidimensional construct focused on providing evidence of adherence, quality, dosage, differentiation, and responsiveness following implementation. Unfortunately, fidelity has not always been prioritized, although evidence suggests that is changing, at least in published research. Further, although there are myriad methods for measuring fidelity, psychometric evaluations of fidelity tools have been limited, except in the SWPBIS literature. Calls for a science of fidelity have been made (Gresham, 2017) and are beginning to be answered. Overall, there appears to be more research focused exclusively on fidelity, including measurement approaches, psychometric evaluations, and relation to outcomes. As this research expands, we hope that the broad use and integration of fidelity in practice follows. We believe that the days of neglecting fidelity are behind us in education and see fidelity playing a central role in education moving forward. Through reliable and valid measurement of fidelity, scalable evidence-based practices can be developed and proliferated, positively impacting students’ academic and behavioral outcomes.
Citation: Gage, N., MacSuga-Gage, A., and Detrich, R. (2020). Fidelity of Implementation in Educational Research and Practice. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/systems-program-fidelity
Link: https://www.winginstitute.org/systems-program-fidelity
November 16, 2020
Fidelity of implementation is a critical but often neglected component of any new system, practice, or intervention in educational research and practice. Fidelity is a multidimensional construct focused on providing evidence of adherence, quality, dosage, differentiation, and responsiveness following implementation. Unfortunately, fidelity has not always been prioritized, although evidence suggests that is changing, at least in published research. Further, although there are myriad methods for measuring fidelity, psychometric evaluations of fidelity tools have been limited, except in the SWPBIS literature. Calls for a science of fidelity have been made (Gresham, 2017) and are beginning to be answered. Overall, there appears to be more research focused exclusively on fidelity, including measurement approaches, psychometric evaluations, and relation to outcomes. As this research expands, we hope that the broad use and integration of fidelity in practice follows. We believe that the days of neglecting fidelity are behind us in education and see fidelity playing a central role in education moving forward. Through reliable and valid measurement of fidelity, scalable evidence-based practices can be developed and proliferated, positively impacting students’ academic and behavioral outcomes.
Citation: Gage, N., MacSuga-Gage, A., and Detrich, R. (2020). Fidelity of Implementation in Educational Research and Practice. Oakland, CA: The Wing Institute. https://www.winginstitute.org/systems-program-fidelity
Link: https://www.winginstitute.org/systems-program-fidelity
November 12, 2020
Assessing the Cost of Instructional Coaching. Each year school systems spend approximately $15 million per school year, $230 per student, and $3,390 per teacher, totaling 2.9% of the operating budget, to provide a variety of professional development opportunities from workshops to coaching to whole-school development (Cleaver, 2020). Research suggests coaching is one of the most effective methods for increasing the effectiveness of professional development.
Over the past twenty years, the popularity of school-based instructional coaching has grown. But one obstacle to the wide-spread use of coaching is the cost of delivering the service. This paper examines the resources needed for coaching and offers a framework for measuring these costs. The author finds coaching costs range from $3,260 to $5,220 per teacher. These are substantial expenses. Given limited education budgets, policymakers need to conduct cost/benefit analyses that compare traditional professional development methods such as workshops. This study lays the groundwork for cost-effectiveness studies by presenting a framework for measuring costs and reporting costs of a specific program.
Another valuable resource for determining a return on investment for education interventions is Stewart Yeh’s 2007 study, The cost-effectiveness of five policies for improving student achievement. Yeh offers a framework for utilizing a practice effect size and costs of the practice to determine what method is best suited given a school’s current budget. Incorporating cost-benefit analyses into schools’ decision-making process is essential if educators make the most informed decisions impacting student outcomes.
Citation: Knight, D. S. (2012). Assessing the cost of instructional coaching. Journal of Education Finance, 52-80.
Yeh, S. S. (2007). The cost-effectiveness of five policies for improving student achievement. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(4), 416-436.
Link: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David_Knight28/publication/236780276_Assessing_the_Cost_of_Instructional_Coaching/links/57fbca5008ae6ce92eb2afe3/Assessing-the-Cost-of-Instructional-Coaching.pdf
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1098214007307928
