Angrist, Joshua D.; Cohodes, Sarah R.; Dynarski, Susan M.; Pathak, Parag A.; Walters, Christopher R. (2014). Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED562936
Reviewed: April 2016
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
SAT Composite score |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
Students who took the SAT;
|
1372.50 |
1268.20 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Received a score of 3 or higher on at least one Advanced Placement (AP) exam |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.21 |
0.08 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Took at least one AP exam |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.58 |
0.28 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Took the SAT |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.72 |
0.64 |
Yes |
-- |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Graduated from high school within 5 years |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.78 |
0.79 |
No |
-- | |
|
Graduated from high school within 4 years |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.54 |
0.69 |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS), tenth-grade Mathematics score |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.36 |
-0.23 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS), tenth-grade English language arts score |
Boston charter schools vs. Business as usual |
4 Years |
All students;
|
0.12 |
-0.29 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 3% | |
| Black | 61% |
| Hispanic | 31% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 69% |
The study was conducted in Boston, Massachusetts.
In the analytic sample for the tenth grade English language arts [ELA] scores on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System [MCAS] assessment, 54% of the students were female; 61% were Black, 31% were Hispanic, and 3% were Asian.
The intervention group consisted of students who were admitted to one of the six charter schools at the time of the admission lottery or afterward. The intervention was defined as enrollment in one of six charter schools in Boston that used lotteries for admission between fall 2002 and fall 2009.
The comparison group consisted of students who were never admitted to one of the six charter schools. Students in the comparison condition participated in an admissions lottery, but did not attend any of the six charter schools at any point in their academic careers.
This is not applicable for this intervention.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube