Developing educators throughout their careers: Evaluation of the Rio Grande Valley Center for Teaching and Leading Excellence.
Young, V., Wei, X., Patel, D., Luck, A., & Howell, R. (2015). Washington, DC: SRI International.
-
examining5,865Students, grades4-8
Department-funded evaluation
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2017
- Department-funded evaluation (findings for New Teacher Training)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition.
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.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 4, 5;
|
1529.13 |
1569.86 |
No |
-- | |
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 6, 7, 8;
|
1590.57 |
1580.63 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Math |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 4, 5;
|
1570.41 |
1624.66 |
No |
-- | |
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Math |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 6, 7, 8;
|
1752.35 |
2095.77 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Social Studies |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 8;
|
3246.76 |
3282.13 |
No |
-- |
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.
-
- 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
This study took place in the Pharr-San Juan-Alamo (PSJA) Independent School District (ISD) and the IDEA school district in the Rio Grande Valley of south Texas. These school districts were the setting where authors examined the professional development of new teachers (less than 5 years of experience) in 4th and 5th grades as well as a second set of teachers in 6th through 8th grades. PSJA ISD has a long-standing Early High School initiative and related technical assistance on the Common Instructional Framework, a set of instructional strategies developed by Jobs for the Future and supported throughout the district.
Study sample
While the study indicates that student demographics were used for random assignment, there was no presentation of the student demographics in the study. Students were in the 4th through 8th grades in public schools in the Rio Grande area of South Texas.
Intervention Group
New Teacher Training (NTT) consisted of a five-day summer institute created from the Teach for America's curriculum, three ongoing professional development sessions, and coaching during the school year immediately following the summer institute. NTT included key topics of classroom management, lesson planning, data-driven decision-making, and assessment. Additionally, each district provided its own ongoing professional development and instructional coaching to new teachers. It is assumed that the intervention consisted of the traditional classroom days and times for the school year since no additional teaching intervention is indicated.
Comparison Group
There was no discussion of the comparison condition other than the teachers with more than 5 years of experience were not selected for the New Teacher Training program. It is assumed that the comparison condition consisted of the traditional classroom days and times for the school year. No additional teaching intervention is indicated.
Support for implementation
There was no support for implementation described by the authors. The fidelity of implementation was measured but no specifics on how implementation is carried out were reported.
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: August 2016
- Grant Competition (findings for New Teacher Training)
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards without 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.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grades 4-5;
|
1529.13 |
1569.86 |
No |
-- | |
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grades 6-8;
|
1590.57 |
1580.63 |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Math |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
9 Months |
Grades 4-5;
|
1570.41 |
1624.66 |
No |
-- | |
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Math |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
9 Months |
Grades 6-8;
|
1752.35 |
2095.77 |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Social Studies |
New Teacher Training vs. Business as usual |
9 Months |
Grade 8;
|
3246.76 |
3282.13 |
No |
-- |
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
-
- 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
This study took place in the Pharr-San Juan-Alamo (PSJA) Independent School District (ISD) and the IDEA school district in the Rio Grande Valley of south Texas. These school districts were the setting where authors examined the professional development of new teachers (less than 5 years of experience) in 4th and 5th grades as well as a second set of teachers in 6th through 8th grades. PSJA ISD has a long-standing Early High School initiative and related technical assistance on the Common Instructional Framework, a set of instructional strategies developed by Jobs for the Future and supported throughout the district.
Study sample
There was no presentation of the student demographics in the study. Students were in the 4th through 8th grades in public schools in the Rio Grande area of South Texas.
Intervention Group
New Teacher Training (NTT) consisted of a five-day summer institute created from the Teach for America's curriculum, three ongoing professional development sessions, and coaching during the school year immediately following the summer institute. NTT included key topics of classroom management, lesson planning, data-driven decision-making, and assessment. Additionally, each district provided its own ongoing professional development and instructional coaching to new teachers. It is assumed that the intervention consisted of the traditional classroom days and times for the school year since no additional teaching intervention is indicated.
Comparison Group
There was no discussion of the comparison condition other than the teachers with more than 5 years of experience were not selected for the New Teacher Training program. It is assumed that the comparison condition consisted of the traditional classroom days and times for the school year. No additional teaching intervention is indicated.
Support for implementation
There was no support for implementation described by the authors. The fidelity of implementation was measured but no specifics on how implementation is carried out were reported.
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).