Teacher preparation programs and Teach for America research study.
Ware, A., LaTurner, R. J., Parsons, J., Okulicz-Kozaryn, A., Garland, M., & Klopfenstein, K. (2011). Dallas: Education Research Center, The University of Texas at Dallas.
-
, grades3-11
Teach for America (TFA) Intervention Report - Teacher Training, Evaluation, and Compensation
Review Details
Reviewed: September 2016
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Teach for America (TFA).
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) English Language Arts/Reading (ELA/R) Passing Rate Gain |
Teach for America (TFA) vs. Business as usual |
9 Months |
Grades 3–8, 2008–09 cohort;
|
0.03 |
0.03 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
Rural, Suburban, Urban
-
- B
- A
- C
- D
- E
- F
- G
- I
- H
- J
- K
- L
- P
- M
- N
- O
- Q
- R
- S
- V
- U
- T
- W
- X
- Z
- Y
- a
- h
- i
- b
- d
- e
- f
- c
- g
- j
- k
- l
- m
- n
- o
- p
- q
- r
- s
- t
- u
- v
- x
- w
- y
Texas
Study Details
Setting
The study analyzed student achievement data from four Texas school districts: Donna ISD, Houston ISD, McAllen ISD, and IDEA Public Schools.
Study sample
The authors did not report the demographic characteristics of the students and teachers included in these analytic samples. In addition, the authors present subgroup findings for African-American students, Hispanic students, and economically disadvantaged students (i.e., students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch). The subgroup findings for which baseline equivalence between the TFA and comparison groups was demonstrated are reported as supplemental findings. The supplemental findings do not factor into the intervention’s rating of effectiveness.
Intervention Group
Students were taught by TFA teachers. The authors did not report any deviations from the TFA model.
Comparison Group
Students were taught by novice non-TFA teachers—that is, teachers with less than 3 years of experience who did not participate in TFA.
Support for implementation
Prior to beginning teaching, TFA teachers receive training in a 5-week summer institute that aims to develop participants’ pedagogical knowledge and skills and includes supervised practice teaching under the direction of an experienced teacher. During their 2-year teaching commitment, TFA teachers receive one-on-coaching from TFA program directors, participate in learning team meetings with other TFA teachers, and have access to online TFA resources that include lesson plans and videos.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).