|
|
Research
Four studies reviewed by the WWC investigated the effects of Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies on English language learners. One study (Saenz, Fuchs, & Fuchs, 2005) is a randomized controlled trial that meets WWC evidence standards. The remaining three studies do not meet either WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens.
Meets evidence standards
Saenz, Fuchs, and Fuchs (2005) examined the effectiveness of Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies on English language learners. The study included 99 English language learners (49 Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies and 50 comparison) from 12 classrooms in grades 3–6. Classrooms were randomly assigned to either the Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies condition or the comparison condition within grade and school. Teachers in the comparison condition were asked to conduct reading instruction in their normal fashion. The study team compared lesson plans and found that Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies teachers were more likely than comparison teachers to use one-on-one activities and peer-mediated instruction and less likely to use teacher-led instruction. The study took place in one school district in Texas. Saenz, Fuchs, and Fuchs (2005) present results for three subgroups: 1) low achievers, 33 English language learners (15 Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies and 18 comparison); 2) average achievers, 35 English language learners (17 Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies and 18 comparison); and 3) high achievers, 31 English language learners (17 Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies and 14 comparison). The results for the average-achieving subgroup are presented in Appendix A4. The other two subgroups are not presented because they do not meet WWC evidence standards.7
Extent of evidence
The WWC categorizes the extent of evidence in each domain as small or medium to large (see the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Appendix G). The extent of evidence takes into account the number of studies and the total sample size across the studies that meet WWC evidence standards with or without reservations.8
The WWC considers the extent of evidence for Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies to be small for reading achievement for English language learners. The one study that meets WWC evidence standards did not examine the effectiveness of Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies in the mathematics achievement or English language development domains for English language learners.
7 The low-achieving subgroup results do not meet standards because the combination of overall and differential attrition rates exceeds WWC standards for this area, and the estimates of effects did not account for the existing differences in pre-intervention characteristics. The high-achieving subgroup did not meet standards because the combination of overall and differential attrition rates exceeds WWC standards for this area, and the subsequent analytic intervention and comparison groups are not shown to be equivalent at baseline.
8 The extent of evidence categorization was developed to tell readers how much evidence was used to determine the intervention rating, focusing on the number and size of studies. Additional factors associated with a related concept (external validity, such as the students’ demographics and the types of settings in which studies took place) are not taken into account for the categorization. Information about how the extent of evidence rating was determined for Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies is in Appendix A6.