Measures inherent to treatments in program effectiveness reviews

Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness

Volumn 4, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 370-380

  Slavin, Robert ^a   Madden, Nancy A ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Education; Measures; Treatments

Indexed keywords

EID: 80053331496     PISSN: 19345747     EISSN: 19345739     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19345747.2011.558986     Document Type: Review

References (35)

1. Barker, T., & Torgesen, J. K. (1995). An evaluation of computer-assisted instruction in phonological awarenesswith belowaverage readers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 13, 89-103.
2. Blachman, B. A., Tangel, D., Ball, E., Black, R., & McGraw, C. (1999). Developing phonological awareness and word-recognition skills: A two-year intervention with low-income inner-city children. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 239-273.
3. Carroll, W.M. (1998). Geometric knowledge of middle school students in a reform-based mathematics curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 98, 188-197.
4. Carroll, W. M., & Fuson, K. (1998). A comparison of Everyday Mathematics (EM) and McMillan (MC) on Evanston student performance on whole-class tests: Recommendations for revision of Everyday Mathematics Grades 1,2,3, and 4. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
5. Clements, D. H. (2007). Curriculum research: Toward a framework for "research-based curricula." Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38, 35-70.
6. Dynarski, M. (2008). Bringing answers to educators: Guiding principles for research syntheses. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 27-29.
7. Foster, K. C., Erickson, G. C., Foster, D. F., Brinkman, D., & Torgesen, J. K. (1994). Computer administered instruction in phonological awareness: Evaluation of the DaisyQuest program. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 27, 126-137.
8. Hancock, C. M. (2002). Accelerating reading trajectories: The effects of dynamic research-based instruction. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63(06), 2139A. (UMI No. 3055690)
9. Hedges, L. V., Stodolsky, S. S., Mathison, S., & Flores, P. V. (1986). Transition Mathematics field study. Chicago: University of Chicago School Mathematics Project.
10. Herman, R., Boruch, R., Powell, R., Fleischman, S., & Maynard, R. (2006). Overcoming the challenges: A response to A. Schoenfeld's "What Doesn't Work". Educational Researcher, 35(2), 22-23.
11. Lundberg, I., Frost, J., & Petersen, O. (1988). Effects of an extensive program for stimulating phonological awareness in pre-school children. Reading Research Quarterly, 23, 263-284.
12. Mathes, P. G., & Babyak, A. E. (2001). The effects of peer-assisted literacy strategies for firstgrade readers with and without additional mini-skills lessons. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 28-44.
13. Mathes, P. G., Howard, J. K., Allen, S. H., & Fuchs, D. (1998). Peer-assisted learning strategies for first-grade readers: Responding to the needs of diverse learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 62-94.
14. Mathes, P. G., Torgesen, J. K., Clancy-Menchetti, J., Santi, K., Nicholas, K., Robinson, C., et al. (2003). A comparison of teacher-directed versus peer-assisted instruction to struggling firstgrade readers. The Elementary School Journal, 103, 459-479.
15. Mesa, C. L. (2004). Effect of Read Naturally software on reading fluency and comprehension. Unpublished master's thesis, Piedmont College, Demorest, GA.
16. Mitchell, M. J., & Fox, B. J. (2001). The effects of computer software for developing phonological awareness in low-progress readers. Reading Research and Instruction, 40, 315-332.
17. Peters, K. G. (1992). Skill performance comparability of two algebra programs on an eighth-grade population. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54(01), 77A. (UMI No. 9314428)
18. Ridgway, J. E., Zawojewski, J. S., Hoover, M. N., & Lambdin, D. V. (2002). Student attainment in the Connected Mathematics curriculum. In S. L. Senk & D. R. Thompson (Eds.), Standards-based school mathematics curricula:What are they? What do students learn? (pp. 193-224).Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Ross, S. M., Nunnery, J., & Goldfeder, E. (2004). A randomized experiment on the effects of Accelerated Reader/Reading Renaissance in an urban school district: Preliminary evaluation report. Memphis, TN: The University of Memphis, Center for Research in Educational Policy.
20. Slavin, R. E. (2008a). What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 5-14.
21. Slavin, R. E. (2008b). Evidence-based reform in education: Which evidence counts? Educational Researcher, 37(1), 47-50.
22. Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective programs in elementary math: A best evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 427-515.
23. Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Groff, C., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective reading programs for middle and high schools: A best-evidence synthesis. Reading Research Quarterly, 43(3), 290-322.
24. Slavin, R. E., Lake, C.,& Groff, C. (2009). Effective programs inmiddle and high school mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 839-911.
25. Taylor, B. M., Frye, B. J., Short, R., & Shearer, B. (1991). Early intervention in reading: preventing reading failure among low-achieving first grade students. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota, Center for Urban and Regional Affairs and Office of the Vice President of Academic Affairs.
26. Thompson, D. R., Senk, S. L., Witonsky, D., Usiskin, Z., & Kaeley, G. (2005). An evaluation of the second edition of UCSMP Transition Mathematics. Chicago: University of Chicago School Mathematics Project.
27. Thompson, D. R., Senk, S. L., Witonsky, D., Usiskin, Z., & Kaely, G. (2006). An evaluation of the second edition of UCSMP Algebra. Chicago: University of Chicago School Mathematics Project.
28. What Works Clearinghouse. (2008a). Beginning reading (What Works Clearinghouse Topic Report). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
29. What Works Clearinghouse. (2008b). Early childhood education (What Works Clearinghouse Topic Report). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
30. What Works Clearinghouse. (2008c). Elementary school mathematics (What Works Clearinghouse Topic Report).Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
31. What Works Clearinghouse. (2008d). Middle school math (What Works Clearinghouse Topic Report). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
32. WhatWorks Clearinghouse. (2008e).WWCprocedures and standards handbook (Version 2.0).Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.ies.ed.gov.ncee/wwc
33. Williams, D. D. (1986). The incremental method of teaching Algebra 1 (Research report). Kansas City: University of Missouri-Kansas City.
34. Ysseldyke, J. E., & Bolt, D. (2006). Effect of technology-enhanced progress monitoring on math achievement. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
35. Ysseldyke, J., Spicuzza, R., Kosciolek, S., & Boys, C. (2003). Effects of a learning information system on mathematics achievement and classroom structure. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 163-173.