IES Blog

Institute of Education Sciences

Practice Guides: How to Use What Works in the Classroom

By Diana McCallum, NCEE

With new education research released every day, it can be difficult to know which teaching methods and classroom practices have been tested and shown to improve student outcomes. You want to know what really works and how to use evidence-based practices in your school or classroom.

What Works Clearinghouse practice guides help bridge the gap between research and practice by examining the findings from existing research studies and combining them with expert advice about applying these findings in the classroom. For each guide, a team of nationally-recognized practitioners and researchers work closely with the WWC to combine evidence from research with guidance from hands-on experience.

Practice guides offer specific recommendations that include a description of the supporting research, steps for carrying out the recommendation, and strategies you can use to overcome potential challenges. Many of the guides also feature supplementary materials, like videos and summaries, to help you quickly find what you need.

One example is our most recent practice guide, Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students. Mastering algebra helps students move from arithmetic operations to understanding abstract concepts, and is for a key to success in future mathematics courses, including geometry and calculus. Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students presents three evidence-based recommendations educators can use to help students develop a deeper understanding of algebra, promote process-oriented thinking, and encourage precise communication. These recommendations help address common challenges in algebra instruction and focus on:

  • Utilizing the structure of algebraic representations to make connections among problems, solution strategies, and representations; 
  • Incorporating solved problems into classroom instruction and activities to help students develop their algebraic reasoning skills; and
  • Comparing and selecting from alternative algebraic strategies to give students flexibility when solving problems. 

You can read the Practice Guide Summary for a quick overview of these recommendations or spend a few minutes watching videos in which Jon Star, of Harvard University’s Graduate School of Education, explain the recommendations.  

The Teaching Strategies for Improving Algebra Knowledge in Middle and High School Students is just one of 19 practice guides available on the What Works Clearinghouse website. Some of the others are:

  • Teaching Math to Young Children: Preschool and kindergarten teachers can get details on how to improve math lessons with this guide, including strategies to create a math-rich environment. You’ll find examples of classroom activities and games that can supplement lesson plans and provide opportunities for children to learn math.

You can find information and links to all 19 practice guides on our website. We also cover a variety of other math and literacy topics, as well as guides focused on dropout prevention, using data to monitor student progress and make decisions, and preparing students for college.

Visit whatworks.ed.gov to find the practice guide that’s right for you or to suggest a topic you’d like us to explore.

Dr. McCallum is an education research analyst on the What Works Clearinghouse team.

About the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)

For more than a decade, the goal of the WWC has been to provide educators with the information they need to make evidence-based decisions with the aim of improving student outcomes. Established by the U.S. Department of Education’s Institute of Education Sciences, the WWC strives to be a central and trusted source of scientific evidence on education programs, products, practices, and policies. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

 

IES Grantees Receive Award for Early Career Scientists and Engineers

By Dana Tofig, Director of Communications, IES

President Obama has named two Institute of Education Sciences (IES) grantees as recipients of the prestigious Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers. This is the highest honor given by the U.S. Government to science and engineering professionals in the early stages of their independent research careers.

Christopher Lemons, of Peabody College of Vanderbilt University, and Cynthia Puranik, of Georgia State University, will be honored at a White House ceremony in the spring, along with 103 other recipients of the award. They were nominated for the award by the leadership of IES and the recipients were announced Thursday.

The awards, established by President Clinton in 1996, are coordinated by the Office of Science and Technology Policy within the Executive Office of the President. According to a White House statement, “the awardees are selected for their pursuit of innovative research at the frontiers of science and technology and their commitment to community service as demonstrated through scientific leadership, public education, or community outreach.”

Lemons and Puranik have both served as principal investigators for IES’ National Center for Education Research and National Center for Special Education Research.  Among the IES-funded research they have conducted together are “Enhancing Reading Instruction for Children with Down Syndrome: A Behavioral Phenotypic Approach” and “Peer Assisted Writing Strategies.”

Dr. Puranik, who was at the University of Pittsburgh when she was nominated, is currently an associate professor of Communications Sciences and Disorders in the College of Education and Human Development at Georgia State University in Atlanta. She is also an affiliate faculty for the Research on the Challenges of Acquiring Language and Literacy Initiative at Georgia State. In addition to the IES-funded research above, Dr. Puranik, was also the Principal Investigator for grant that sought to develop a test of emergent writing skills.

Dr. Lemons is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Special Education at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University and a member of the Vanderbilt Kennedy Center in Nashville. He is also co-director of the National Center for Leadership on Intensive Intervention, a senior advisor for the National Center on Intensive Intervention, and serves on the board of a number of scholarly journals, including his work as associate editor for the American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.  

Diversity in home languages: Examining English learners in U.S. public schools

By Joel McFarland

More than 4.9 million English learners (EL) were enrolled in U.S. public elementary and secondary schools during the 2013-14 school year, representing just over ten percent of the total student population.   

Recently published data from the U.S. Department of Education’s EDFacts data collection shed light on the linguistic diversity of EL students, as well as the distribution of EL students across grades. EDFacts data are drawn from administrative records maintained by state education agencies and provide a detailed picture of the total population of K-12 public school students in the United States. (Depending on the organization or publication, ELs can also be known as English language learners (ELL) or Limited English Proficient (LEP) students.)

States reported that Spanish was the home language of nearly 3.8 million EL students in 2013-14, which accounts for 76.5 percent of all EL students and nearly 8 percent of all public K-12 students. Arabic and Chinese were the next most commonly spoken home languages, reported for approximately 109,000 and 108,000 students, respectively.

It may surprise some to learn that English (91,700 students) was the fourth most commonly reported home language. This may reflect students who live in multilingual households, and those who were adopted from other countries and raised to speak another language but currently live in English-speaking households. Overall, there were 38 different home languages reported for 5,000 or more students.


Ten most commonly reported home languages of English learner (EL) students

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, EDFacts file 141, Data Group 678; Common Core of Data, "State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary and Secondary Education." See Digest of Education Statistics 2015, table 204.27.


EDFacts data also allow us to examine the distribution of EL students across grade levels. Data from the 2013-14 school year show that a greater percentage of students in lower than in upper grades were identified as EL students. For example, 17.4 percent of kindergarteners were identified as EL students, compared to 8.0 percent of 6th graders and 6.4 percent of 8th graders. Among 12th graders, only 4.6 percent of students were identified as ELs. 


Percentage of Public K-12 students identified as English learners (ELs), by grade level: 2013-14SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, EDFacts file 141, Data Group 678; Common Core of Data, "State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary and Secondary Education." See Digest of Education Statistics 2015, table 204.27.


More home language and grade-level data on English learners can be found in the Digest of Education Statistics. Additional data on EL students, including state-level data and data by locale (e.g., city, suburban, town, and rural), can be found in the Condition of Education.

Interested in recent research on how EL students are identified and served? Check out the Inside IES Research blog.

Regional Educational Laboratories: Connecting Research to Practice

By Joy Lesnick, Acting Commissioner, NCEE

Welcome to the NCEE Blog! 

Joy Lesnick

We look forward to using this space to provide information and insights about the work of the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE). A part of the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), NCEE’s primary goal is providing practitioners and policymakers with research-based information they can use to make informed decisions. 

We do this in a variety of ways, including large-scale evaluations of education programs and practices supported by federal funds; independent reviews and syntheses of research on what works in education; and a searchable database of research citations and articles (ERIC) and reference searches from National Library of Education. We will explore more of this work in future blogs, but in this post I’d like to talk about an important part of NCEE—the Regional Educational Laboratories (RELs).

It’s a timely topic. Last week, the U.S. Department of Education released a solicitation for organizations seeking to become REL contractors beginning in 2017 (the five-year contracts for the current RELs will conclude at the end of 2016). The REL program is an important part of the IES infrastructure for bridging education research and practice. Through the RELs, IES seeks to ensure that research does not “sit on a shelf” but rather is broadly shared in ways that are relevant and engaging to policymakers and practitioners. The RELs also involve state and district staff in collaborative research projects focused on pressing problems of practice. An important aspect of the RELs’ work is supporting the use of research in education decision making – a charge that the Every Student Succeeds Act has made even more critical.

The RELs and their staff must be able to navigate comfortably between the two worlds of education research and education practice, and understand the norms and requirements of both.  As part of this navigating, RELs focus on: (1) balancing rigor and relevance; (2) differentiating support to stakeholders based on need; (3) providing information in the short term, and developing evidence over the long term; and (4) addressing local issues that can also benefit the nation.

While the RELs are guided by federal legislation, their work reflects – and responds to – the needs of their communities. Each REL has a governing board comprised of state and local education leaders that sets priorities for REL work. Also, nearly all REL work is conducted in collaboration with research alliances, which are ongoing partnerships in which researchers and regional stakeholders work together over time to use research to address an education problem.  

Since the current round of RELs were awarded in 2012, these labs and their partners have conducted meaningful research resulting in published reports and tools, held hundreds of online and in-person seminars and training events that have been attended by practitioners across the country, and produced videos of their work that you can find on the REL Playlist on the IES YouTube site. Currently, the RELs have more than 100 projects in progress. RELs do work in nearly every topic that is crucial to improving education—kindergarten readiness, parent engagement, discipline, STEM education, college and career readiness, teacher preparation and evaluation, and much more.

IES’s vision is that the 2017–2022 RELs will build on and extend the current priorities of high-quality research, genuine partnership, and effective communication, while also tackling high-leverage education problems.  High-leverage problems are those that: (1) if addressed could result in substantial improvements in education outcomes for many students or for key subgroups of students; (2) are priorities for regional policymakers, particularly at the state level; and (3) require research or research-related support to address well. Focusing on high-leverage problems increases the likelihood that REL support ultimately will contribute to improved student outcomes.

Visit the IES REL website to learn more about the 2012-2017 RELs and how you can connect with the REL that serves your region.  Visit the FedBizOpps website for information about the competition for the 2017-2022 RELs.

Challenges, changes, and current practices for measuring student socioeconomic status

By Lauren Musu-Gillette

There is an abundance of data and research that shows a relationship between a student’s socioeconomic status (SES) and their academic outcomes. For example, students from low-SES families are far more likely to drop out and far less likely to complete a bachelor’s degree than their peers from middle- and high-SES families.

As we seek to better interpret and understand these and other findings related to student progress, it important for NCES to try to collect accurate and complete measures of student SES.


Percentage distribution of highest level of educational attainment of spring 2002 high school sophomores in 2012, by socioeconomic status (SES)

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Education Longitudinal Study of 2002 (ELS:2002), Base Year and Third Follow-up. See Digest of Education Statistics 2014, table 104.91.


Measures of SES usually combine several different statistics, most commonly family income/wealth, parent educational attainment, and parent occupation.[1] In some surveys, NCES is able to collect data directly from parents in order to measure all these component of SES. However, in many assessments and some surveys, NCES is unable to collect this information directly from parents making it difficult to create a consistent measure of SES across the Center.

NCES staff recognizes both the importance of collecting valid and reliable SES data, and the challenges associated with doing so. For example, between 2010 and 2012, NCES convened a panel of experts in the fields of economics, education, statistics, human development, and sociology who provided information on SES, including theoretical foundations, common components, data collection and measurement approaches, and possible implications of a new measure of SES for the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). There are several challenges for NAEP when considering the inclusion of survey items that can be used to measure student SES. Since NAEP does not include a parent survey, student or school-level data is currently the only potential source for data. However, data on SES can be difficult to collect directly from students as many are unable to accurately respond to questions about their family income or the highest level of their parent or parents’ education.

In terms of school-level data, student eligibility for free and reduced price meals has historically been an important indicator of household income. However, recent changes in the way schools are required to record eligibility for free and reduced price meals has required researchers to reconsider the use of this data point  as a measure of family income, or as a proxy, more generally, for SES. A recent NAEP blog on this topic provides additional information on NAEP-specific considerations, but these changes impact data collection efforts across the agency. Additionally, the free and reduced price meals data only reflect income, which is only part of a complete SES measure, and does not differentiate between middle and high SES students.

Given these changes, NCES is working to  identify other variables that could serve as more reliable and valid measures of student SES.  For example, several NCES staff members are involved with the Alternative SES Measure Working Group as part of the National Forum on Education Statistics. This group recently released the Forum Guide to Alternative Measures of Socioeconomic Status in Education Data Systems. This publication presents advantages and disadvantages for eight alternative measures of SES.  These resources are intended to serve as reference tools for education agencies engaged in identifying, evaluating, or implementing alternative SES measures. They are not data collection instruments and do not represent federal reporting requirements.

Collecting data on and examining differences in educational outcomes by student SES is important to both researchers and educators. As data systems evolve and measures of SES change over time, NCES is committed to researching and collecting the best data possible with the resources available.

 

[1] For most NCES surveys, parent educational attainment and parent occupation is based on the highest level achieved by either parent and/or guardian in the household.