In (Re)search of evidence-based school practices: Possibilities for integrating nationally representative surveys and randomized field trials to inform educational policy

Peabody Journal of Education

Volumn 77, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 28-58

  Berends, Mark ^a   Garet, Michael S ^b  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b AMERICAN INSTITUTES FOR RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3242730820     PISSN: 0161956X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/S15327930PJE7704_3     Document Type: Article

References (97)

1. Baker, D. P., Levine, R., Han, M., & Garet, M. (1998). A feasibility study of longitudinal design for the Schools and Staffing Survey. Working Paper 98–16. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
2. Berends, M. (2002). Educational productivity. In D. L. Levinson, P. W. Cookson, & A. R. Sadovnik (Eds.), Education and sociology: An encyclopedia (pp. 203–209). New York: Routledge.
3. Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. N. (2002). Facing the challenges of whole-school reform: New American Schools after a decade. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
4. Berends, M., Bodilly, S., & Kirby, S. N. (2003). District and school leadership for whole-school reform: New American Schools. In J. Murphy & A. Datnow (Eds.), Leadership lessons from comprehensive school reform (pp. 109–131). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
5. Berends, M., Chun, J., Schuyler, G., Stockly, S., & Briggs, R. J. (2002). Challenges of conflicting reforms: Effects of New American Schools in a high-poverty district. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
6. Berends, M., Kirby, S. N., Naftel, S., & Sloan, J. (2000). The National Longitudinal Survey of Schools: Preliminary findings. Unpublished manuscript. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
7. Biemer, P. P., Groves, R. M., Lyberg, L. E., Mathiowetz, N. A., & Sudman, S. (1991). Measurement errors in surveys. New York: Wiley.
8. Blank, R. K., Porter, A. C., & Smithson, J. (2001). New tools for analyzing teaching, curriculum, and standards in mathematics and science. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
9. Bloom, H. S. (2001). Measuring the impacts of whole-school reforms: Methodological lessons from an evaluation of Accelerated Schools. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
10. Bloom, H. S., Ham, S., Melton, L., & O’Brien, J. (with Doolittle, F. C., & Kagehiro, S.). (2001). Evaluating the Accelerated Schools approach: A look at early implementation and impacts on student achievement in eight elementary schools. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
11. Bodilly, S. J. (1998). Lessons from New American Schools’ scale-up phase: Prospects for bringing designs to multiple schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
12. Bodilly, S. J. (2001). New American Schools’ concept of break the mold designs: How designs evolved and why. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
13. Bohrnstedt, G. W., & Stecher, B. M. (Eds.). (2001). Class size reduction in California: Early evaluation findings, 1996–1998. Sacramento: California Department of Education.
14. Borman, G., Brown, S., & Hewes, G. M. (in press). Early reading skills and the social composition of schools: A multilevel analysis of the kindergarten year. In G. Bohrnstedt & M. Ross (Eds.), Instructional and performance consequences of high-poverty schooling. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
15. Borman, G. D., D’Agostino, J. V., Wong, K. K., & Hedges, L. V. (1998). The longitudinal achievement of Chapter I students: Preliminary evidence from the Prospects Study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 3, 363–399.
16. Boruch, R., de Moya, D., & Snyder, B. (2002). The importance of randomized field trials in education and related areas. In F. Mosteller & R. Boruch (Eds.), Randomized trials in education research (pp. 50–79). Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
17. Brewer, D. J., & Goldhaber, D. D. (2000). Improving longitudinal data on student achievement: Some lessons from recent research using NELS:88. In D. W. Grissmer & J. M. Ross (Eds.), Analytic issues in the assessment of student achievement (pp. 169–188). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
18. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
19. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychologist, 22, 723–742.
20. Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Kerbow, D., Rollow, S., & Easton, J. Q. (1998). Charting Chicago school reform: Democratic localism as a lever for change. Boulder, CO: Westview.
21. Bryk, A. S., Thum, Y. M., Eaton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (1998). Academic productivity of Chicago public elementary schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
22. Burstein, L., McDonnell, L., VanWinkle, J., Ormseth, T. H., Mirocha, J., & Guiton, G. (1995). Validating national curriculum indicators. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
23. Campbell, J. R., Hombo, C. M., & Mazzeo, J. (2000). NAEP 1999 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
24. Campbell, M., Cousins, E., Farrell, G., Kamii, M., Lam, D., Rugen, L., et al. (1996). The Expeditionary Learning Outward Bound design. In S. Stringfield & S. Ross (Eds.), Bold plans for school restructuring: The New American Schools designs (pp. 109–138). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
25. Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2001). Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
26. Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E., Hobson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfield, F., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
27. Comer, J. P. (1980). School power. New York: Free Press.
28. Cook, T. D. (1999). Considering the major arguments against random assignment: An analysis of the intellectual culture surrounding evaluation in American schools of education. Paper presented at the Harvard faculty seminar on experiments in education. Evanston, IL: North-western University.
29. Cook, T. D., Habib, F., Phillips, M., Setterston, R. A., Shagle, S. C., & Degirmencioglu, S. M. (1999). Comer’s School Development Program in Prince George’s County: A theory-based evaluation. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 543–597.
30. Cook, T. D., Murphy, R. F., & Hunt, J. D. (2000). Comer’s School Development Program in Chicago: A theory-based evaluation. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 535–597.
31. Corcoran, M. E. (1996). Rags to rags: Poverty and mobility in the U.S. Annual Review of Sociology, 21, 237–267.
32. Crane, J. (1991). The epidemic theory of ghettos and neighborhood effects on dropping out and teenage childbearing. American Journal of Sociology, 96, 1225–1259.
33. Datnow, A., & Castellano, J. (2000). Teachers’ responses to Success for All: How beliefs, experiences, and adaptations shape implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 775–799.
34. Desimone, L., Porter, A. C., Garet, M., Suk Yoon, K., & Birman, B. (2002, April). Does professional development change teachers’ instruction? Results from a three-year study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association in New Orleans, LA.
35. Dwyer, C., Gamse, B., Layzer, C., Liebling, C., Moss, M., Obeidallah-Davis, D., et al. (2001). Reading Excellence Act and School Implementation and Impact Study: OMB forms clearance package. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates.
36. Edmonds, R. R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 9, 28–32.
37. Elder, G. G., Jr. (1974). Children of the great depression. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38. Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practices. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 17–25.
39. Finn, J. M., & Achilles, C. M. (1999). Tennessee’s class size study: Findings, implications, misconceptions. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 21(2), 97–109.
40. Foorman, B., Francis, D., Fletcher, J., & Schatschneider, C. (1998). The role of instruction in learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37–55.
41. Gamoran, A. (1992). Social factors in education. In M. Alkin (Ed.), Encyclopedia of educational research (pp. 1222–1229). New York: Macmillan.
42. Gamoran, A., Porter, A. C., Smithson, J., & Witte, P.A. (1997). Upgrading high school mathematics instruction: Improving learning opportunities for low-achieving low-income youth. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 325–338.
43. Garet, M., Birman, B., Porter, A., & Desimone, L. (with Herman, B., & Suk Yoon, K.). (1999). Designing effective professional development: Lessons from the Eisenhower Program. Washington DC: American Institutes for Research.
44. Herman, R., Aladjem, D., McMahon, P., Masem, E., Mulligan, I., O’Malley, A. S., et al. (1999). An educator’s guide to schoolwide reform. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research.
45. Hoffer, T. B., & Shagle, S. (in press). Kindergarten classrooms and early numerical skills: Findings from the ECLS survey. In G. Bohrnstedt & M. Ross (Eds.), Instructional and performance consequences of high-poverty schooling, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
46. Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 499–534.
47. Jencks, C. S. (2000). Educational research and educational policy: An historical perspective. In D. W. Grissmer & J. M. Ross (Eds.), Analytic issues in the assessment of student achievement (pp. 279–297). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
48. Jencks, C. S., Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M. J., Cohen, D., Gintis, et al. (1972). Inequality: A reassessment of the effects of family and schooling in America. New York: Basic Books.
49. Jennings, J. F. (1998). Why national standards and tests? Politics and the quest for better schools. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. Jennings, J. F. (2000). Title I: Its legislative history and its promise. Phi Delta Kappan, 81, 516–522.
51. Kane, T. J., & Staiger, D. O. (2001). Improving school accountability measures. Unpublished manuscript. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.
52. Kane, T. J., Staiger, D. O., & Geppert, J. (2002). Randomly accountable. Education Next, 2(1), 57–61.
53. Kirby, S. N., Berends, M., & Naftel, S. (2001). Implementation in a longitudinal sample of New American Schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
54. Kirby, S. N., Naftel, S., Berends, M., & Sloan, J. S. (2002). Schools identified as in need of improvement under Title I: Recent evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Schools. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
55. Kirby, S. N., Sloan, J. S., Naftel, S., & Berends, M. (2001). Title I schools receiving Comprehensive School Reform Demonstration (CSRD) funds: Recent evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of Schools. Unpublished manuscript. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
56. Lee, J. (2002). Racial and ethnic achievement gap trends: Reversing the progress toward equity? Educational Researcher, 31(1), 3–12.
57. Lee, V. E., & Smith, J. B. (1997). High school size: Which works best for whom? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 19, 205–227.
58. Levin, H. M. (1994). Economics of school reform for at-risk students. Unpublished manuscript. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, School of Education.
59. Lilienfeld, D. E., & Stolley, P. D. (1994). Foundations of epidemiology (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
60. Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
61. Longford, N. T. (1995). Models for uncertainty in educational testing. New York: Springer.
62. Lyon, R. (2002). Research in education: On the leading edge of school improvement? Keynote address presented at the Academy for Educational Development, Washington, DC.
63. Masden, A. S. (1994). Resilience in individual development: Successful adaptation despite risk and adversity. In M. C. Wang & E. W. Gordon (Eds.), Educational resilience in inner-city America: Challenges and prospects (pp. 3–26). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
64. Mayer, S., & Jencks, C. (1989). Growing up in poor neighborhoods: How much does it matter? Science, 17, 1441–1445.
65. McDill, E. L., & Natriello, G. (2001). History and promise of assessment and accountability in Title I. In G. D. Borman, S. C. Stringfield, & R. E. Slavin (Eds.), Title I: Compensatory education at the crossroads (pp. 59–77). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
66. Meyer, R. H. (1996). Value-added indicators of school performance. In E. A. Hanushek & D. W. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America’s schools: The role of incentives (pp. 197–223). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
67. Mosteller, F. (1995). The Tennessee study of class size in the early school grades. The Future of Children, 5(2), 113–127.
68. Mullens, J. (1995). Classroom instructional processes: A review of existing measurement approaches and their applicability for teacher follow-up survey. Prepared for the National Center for Education Statistics.
69. National Reading Panel. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Rockville, MD: NICHD Clearinghouse.
70. Natriello, G., & McDill, E. L. (1999). Title I: From funding mechanism to educational program. In G. Orfield & E. H. Deray (Eds.), Hard work for good schools (pp. 31–45). Boston: The Civil Rights Project, Harvard University.
71. Newmann, F. M., Smith, B.A., Allensworth, E., & Bryk, A. S. (2001a). Instructional program coherence: What it is and why it should guide school improvement policy. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 297–321.
72. Newmann, F. M., Smith, B. A., Allensworth, E., & Bryk, A. S. (2001b). School instructional program coherence: Benefits and challenges. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.
73. Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher.
74. Porter, A. C., Garet, M., Desimone, L., Suk Yoon, K., & Birman, B. (2000). Does professional development change teachers’ instruction? Results from a three-year study. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
75. Puma, J. M., & Drury, D. W. (2000). Exploring new directions: Title I in the year 2000. Washington, DC: The National School Boards Association.
76. Purkey, S. C., & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective schools: A review. The Elementary School Journal, 83, 427–452.
77. Raudenbush, R. W. (1997). Statistical analysis and optimal design for cluster randomized trials. Psychological Methods, 2, 173–185.
78. Raudenbush, R.W., & Liu, X. (2000). Statistical power and optimal design for multisite randomized trials. Psychological Methods, 5, 199–213.
79. Rosenbaum, P. R. (2002). Observational studies. New York: Springer.
80. Rowan, B. (2001). What large-scale survey research tells us about teacher effects on student achievement. Unpublished manuscript. Ann Arbor: Study of Instructional Improvement, School of Education, University of Michigan.
81. Rutter, M. (Ed.). (1988). Studies of psychosocial risk: The power of longitudinal data. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
82. Rutter, M. (1999). Resilience concepts and findings: Implications for family therapy. Journal of Family Therapy, 21, 119–144.
83. Rutter, M. (2000). Resilience reconsidered: Conceptual considerations, empirical findings, and policy implications. In J. P. Shonkoff & S. J. Meisels (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood intervention (pp. 651–682). New York: Cambridge University Press.
84. Rutter, M. (2002). Nature, nurture, and development: From evangelism through science toward policy and practice. Child Development, 73(1), 1–21.
85. Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., Ouston, J., & Smith, A. (1979). Fifteen thousand hours: Secondary schools and their effects on children. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
86. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal analysis. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
87. Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (Eds.). (2001). Scientific inquiry in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
88. Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Dolan L. J., & Wasik, B.A. (1996). Every child, every school: Success for all. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.
89. Smith, M. S., Scoll, B. W., & Link, J. (1996). Research-based school reform: The Clinton administration’s agenda. In E. A. Hanushek & D. W. Jorgenson (Eds.), Improving America’s schools: The role of incentives (pp. 9–27). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
90. Stecher, B. M., & Bohrnstedt, G. W. (2002). Class size in California: Findings from 1999–00 and 2000–01. Palo Alto: California Research Consortium.
91. Steinberg, L. (1996). Beyond the classroom: Why school reform has failed and what parents need to do. New York: Simon & Schuster.
92. Study of Instructional Improvement. (2001). Study overview. Ann Arbor: Center for Educational Policy Research, University of Michigan.
93. Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education and the No Child Left Behind Act. Paper presented at the National Clearinghouse for Comprehensive School Reform Network of Researchers Meeting, Washington, DC.
94. U.S. Department of Education. (1996). Pursuing excellence: A study of U.S. eighth-grade mathematics and science teaching, learning, curriculum, and achievement in international context: Initial findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
95. Wilson, W. J. (1991). Studying inner-city social dislocations: The challenge of public agenda research. American Sociological Review, 56, 1–14.
96. Wong, K. K., Hedges, L. V., Borman, G. D., & D’Agostino, J. V. (1996). Final report: Prospects: Special analysis. Washington, DC: Prepared for the Department of Education, Office of the Undersecretary.
97. Wong, K. K., Sunderman, G. L., & Lee, J. (1997). Redesigning the Federal Compensatory Education Program: Lessons from the implementation of Title I schoolwide projects. In M. C. Wang & K. K. Wong (Eds.), Implementing schoolwide reform: Practice and policy imperatives (pp. 59–97). Philadelphia: Temple University Center for Research and Human Development and Education.