An analysis of the fidelity implementation policies of the what works clearinghouse

Current Issues in Education

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 1-24

  Stockard, Jean ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OREGON   (United States)

Author keywords

Evidence screening; Implementation fidelity; Program evaluation; Systematic reviews; What works clearinghouse

Indexed keywords

EID: 78649369990     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1099839X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Adams, G. L. & Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on Direct Instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle: Educational Achievement Systems.
2. American Federation of Teachers. (1998). Building on the best, learning from what works: Seven promising reading and language arts programs. Washington, D.C.: AFT.
3. Beck, I.L. & McCaslin, E.S. (1978). An analysis of dimensions that affect the development of code-breaking ability in eight beginning reading programs. LRDC Report No. 1978/6 Pittsburgh.
4. Borman, G. D., Hewes, G.M., Overman, L.T., & Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73, 125-230.
5. Briggs, D. C. (2008). Synthesizing causal inferences. Educational Researcher 37, 15-22.
6. Chatterji, M. (2005). Evidence on What Works: An argument for extended-term mixed- method (ETMM) evaluation designs Educational Researcher 34, 14-24.
7. Chatterji, M. (2008). Synthesizing evidence from impact evaluations in education to inform action. Educational Researcher 37, 23-26.
8. Cohen, J (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin 112: 155-159
9. Confrey, J. (2006). Comparing and contrasting the national Research Council Report On Evaluating Curricular Effectiveness with the What Works Clearinghouse Approach. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 28 (3) 195-213.
10. Cook, T. D. (2002). Randomized experiments in educational policy research: A critical examination of the reasons the educational evaluation community has offered for not doing them. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 24, 175-199.
11. Crowley, J. J. & Hauser, A.G. (2007). Evaluating whole school improvement models: Creating meaningful and reasonable standards of review. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12, 37-58.
12. Desimore, L. (2002). How can comprehensive school reform models be successfully implemented? Review of Educational Research, 72, 433-479.
13. Emshoff, J. G., Blakely, C., Gottschalk, R., Mayer, J., Davidson, W.S., & Erickson, S. (1987). Innovation in Education and Criminal Justice: Measuring Fidelity of Implementation and Program Effectiveness. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9, 300-311.
14. Engelmann, S. (2008). Machinations of the What Works Clearinghouse. Unpublished Paper, http://www.zigsite.com/PDFs/MachinationsWWC%28V4%29.pdf (last downloaded March 31, 2010).
15. Fashola, O. S. & Slavin, R.E. (1997). Promising programs for elementary and middle schools: Evidence of effectiveness and replicability. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 2, 251-307.
16. Gersten, R., Fuchs, L.S., Compton, D., Coyne, M., Greenwood, C., & Innocenti, M.S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149-164.
17. Haynes, N. M. (1998). Lessons learned. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 3, 87-99.
18. Herman, R., Aladjam, D., McMahon, P., Masem, E., Mulligan, I., Smith, O., O'Malley, A., Quinones, S., Reeve, A., & Woodruff, D. (1999). An educator's guide to schoolwide reform. Washington, D.C.: American Institutes for Research
19. McArthur, G. (2008). Does What Works Clearinghouse work? A brief review of Fast ForWord. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 32, 101-107.
20. McMillan, J. H. (2007). Randomized field trials and internal validity: Not so fast my friend. Practical assessment, Research and Evaluation, 12 (15).
21. O'Donnell, C. L. (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78, 33-84.
22. Ross, S. M. (2007). Achievements, challenges, and potential advancements in reviewing educational evidence for consumers. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 12, 91-100.
23. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2006). What doesn't work: The challenge and failure of the What Works Clearinghouse to conduct meaningful reviews of studies of mathematics curricula. Educational Researcher, 35 (2), 13-21.
24. Slavin, R. E. (2008). What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 37, 5-14.
25. Stockard, J. (2008). The What Works Clearinghouse Beginning Reading Reports and Rating of Reading Mastery: An Evaluation and Comment. Technical Report # 2008-4. Eugene, Oregon: National Institute for Direct Instruction.
26. Stockard, J. (forthcoming). Direct instruction and first grade reading achievement: The role of technical support and time of implementation. Journal of Direct Instruction.
27. Zvoch, K., Letourneau, L.E., & Parker, R.P. (2007). A multilevel multisite outcomes-by- implementation evaluation of an early childhood literacy model. American Journal of Evaluation, 28, 132-150.