Some results from the analysis of data from the national numeracy project

Research Papers in Education

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 163-184

  Felgate, Rachel ^a   Minnis, Mary ^a   Schagen, Ian ^a  

^a NATIONAL FOUNDATION FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Class size; Multilevel modelling; Numeracy; Progress; Testing; Value added

Indexed keywords

EID: 0142185467     PISSN: 02671522     EISSN: 14701146     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/026715200402489     Document Type: Article

References (11)

1. BLATCHFORD, P. and MORTIMORE, P. (1994). ‘The issue of class size for young children in schools: what can we learn from research?’, Oxford Review of Education, 20, 4, 411-28.
2. FOXMAN, D., RUDDOCK, G., McCALLUM, I. and SCHAGEN, I. (1991). APU Mathematics Monitoring (Phase 2). London: SEAC.
3. GALTON, M. (1996). ‘The class size dilemma: why research findings do not confirm the obvious’, Education Review, 10, 1, 29-35.
4. GOLDSTEIN, H. (1987). Multilevel Models in Educational and Social Research. London: Charles Griffin. GREAT BRITAIN.
5. DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT. STANDARDS AND EFFECTIVENESS UNIT (1999). National Numeracy Project Progress Report 1996-1998. London: DfEE.
6. HILL, P.W. (1998). ‘Shaking the foundations: research driven school reform’, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 9, 4, 419-36.
7. MINNIS, M., FELGATE, R. and SCHAGEN, I. (1999). National Numeracy Project: Technical Report 1998. Slough: NFER.
8. MORTIMORE, P. and BLATCHFORD, P. (1993). The Issue of Class Size (NCE Briefing 12). London: National Commission on Education.
9. OFFICE FOR STANDARDS IN EDUCATION (1998). The National Numeracy Project: An HMI Evaluation. London: Ofsted.
10. ROBINSON, G.E. (1990). ‘Synthesis of research on the effects of class size’, Educational Leadership, 47, 7, 80-90.
11. SCHAGEN, I.P. (1990). ‘A method for the age standardization of test scores’, Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 4, 387-93.