Assessing the Use of Aggregate Data in the Evaluation of School-Based Interventions: Implications for Evaluation Research and State Policy Regarding Public-Use Data

Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 44-66

  Jacob, Robin T ^a   Goddard, Roger D ^b   Kim, Eun Sook ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b Mid continent Research for Education and Learning   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

educational evaluation; multilevel modeling; school level data

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893651820     PISSN: 01623737     EISSN: 19351062     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0162373713485814     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bloom H. S.Estimating the effect of job-training programs using longitudinal data: Ashenfelter's findings reconsidered.Journal of Human Resources. 1984;19:544-556.
2. Bloom H. S.Minimum detectable effects: A simple way to report the statistical power of experimental designs.Evaluation Review. 1995;19:547-556.
3. Bloom H. S.,Richburg-Hayes L.,Black A. R.Using covariates to improve precision for studies that randomize schools to evaluate educational interventions.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2007;29:30-59.
4. Cook T. D.,Shadish W. R.,Wong V. C.Three conditions under which experiments and observational studies produce comparable causal estimates: New findings from within-study comparisons.Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2008;27:724-750.
5. Gao S.,Fraser M. W.Propensity score analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2010:.
6. Glazerman S.,Levy D. M.,Myers D.Nonexperimental versus experimental estimates of earnings impacts.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2003;589:63-93.
7. Hedges L.,Hedberg E. C.Intraclass correlation values for planning group-randomized trials in education.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2007;29:60-87.
8. Hill J.,Reiter J.,Zanutto E.Applied Bayesian modeling and causal inference from an incomplete-data perspective. Gelman A.Meng X.-L., ed. New York, NY: John Wiley; 2004:49-60.
9. Ho A. D.The problem with "proficiency": Limitations of statistics and policy under No Child Left Behind.Educational Researcher. 2008;37:351-360.
10. Holland P. W.Two measures of change in the gaps between the CDFs of test-score distributions.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2002;27:3-17.
11. Kmenta J.Elements of econometrics. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1971:.
12. Konstantopoulos S.The impact of covariates on statistical power in cluster randomized designs: Which level matters more?.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2012;47:392-420.
13. Moerbeek M.The consequence of ignoring a level of nesting in multilevel analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2004;39:129-149.
14. Raudenbush S. W.,Bryk A. S.Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE; 2002:.
15. Robinson W. S.Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals.American Sociological Review. 1950;15:351-357.
16. RubinD. B.ThomasN. (1996). Matching using estimated propensity scores: Relating theory to practice. Biometrics, 52, 249-264. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2533160.
17. Somers M. A.,Zhu P.,Jacob R.,Bloom H. Paper presented at the American Public Policy and Management Association Fall Conference; 2012Baltimore, MD; 2012.
18. Van den Noortgate W.,Opdenakker M.-C.,Onghena P.The effects of ignoring a level in multilevel analysis.School Effectiveness and School Improvement. 2005;16:281-303.