Evaluation of the James Madison Legacy Project: Cohort 2 Student Knowledge
Owen, D. (2018). Washington, DC: Georgetown University.
-
examining4,539Students, grades6-12
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2019
- Grant Competition (findings for James Madison Legacy Project (JMLP))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a randomized control trial with cluster level inferences and joiners, but it demonstrates baseline equivalence.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Knowledge of civics and American government - Middle school |
James Madison Legacy Project (JMLP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
JMLP and comparison groups, excludes JMLP hybrid group;
|
14.37 |
11.91 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Knowledge of civics and American government - Middle school |
James Madison Legacy Project (JMLP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
JMLP hybrid vs. comparison; excludes JMLP group;
|
13.66 |
11.91 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Knowledge of civics and American government - High school |
James Madison Legacy Project (JMLP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
JMLP hybrid vs. comparison; excludes JMLP group;
|
18.48 |
16.17 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Knowledge of civics and American government - High school |
James Madison Legacy Project (JMLP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
JMLP vs. comparison only; excludes JMP hybrid condition;
|
18.01 |
16.17 |
Yes |
|
|
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.
-
Female: 49%
Male: 51% -
- 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
Alaska, Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, West Virginia
-
Race Black 11% Other or unknown 8% White 53% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 20% Not Hispanic or Latino 80%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 80 middle schools and 141 high schools in the United States, including 42 states and the District of Columbia.
Study sample
The sample was 50.8% male and 49.2% female, 6.3% Asian or Pacific Islander, 10.7% Black/African American, 20.1% Hispanic/Latino, 1.9% Native American or Alaska Native, 52.8% White/Caucasian, and 8.2% Multiple Races.
Intervention Group
The James Madison Legacy Project (JMLP) is a 3-year nationawide inititaive of the Center for Civic Education that aims to expand the availability and effectiveness of civics instruction in elementary and secondary schools by providing professional development to teachers of high need students. The JMLP provided professional development to teachers instructing over 200,000 students in a minimum of 900 participating schools with significant concentrations of high need students. Teachers attended summer institutes at one of 26 sites where they learned about the "We the People" curriculum, were educated in subject-area content, and were instructed in effective pedagogies for presenting the curriculum. The JMLP program covers six content units aligned with civics instruction. The hybrid programs received the first three content units in-person, followed by three video sessions for the remaining units.
Comparison Group
The comparison group students received business-as-usual civics instruction.
Support for implementation
Teachers attended summer institutes at one of 26 sites where they learned about the "We the People" curriculum, were educated in subject-area content, and were instructed in effective pedagogies for presenting the curriculum. The JMLP begins with 36 hours of professional development at the institute, followed by an additional 16 hours during the school year that is typically spread across three days (two in the all and one in the spring). Locations for in-person meetings included universities, conference centers, and facilities at historic sites. Teachers can engage via the online community and are in regular contact with mentor teachers. JMLP has also developed the scaleable version of the program, which includes digital resources as opposed to relying on solely face-to-face instruction. The JMLP program covers six content units aligned with civics instruction. The hybrid programs received the first three content units in-person, followed by three video sessions for the remaining units.
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).