Daugherty, Lindsay; Schweig, Jonathan; Gates, Susan M. (2020). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED604595
Reviewed: May 2022
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
New York City Regents Exam: Math |
Targeted Intensive School Support Program (TISS) vs. Business as usual |
0 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
New York City Regents Exam: English |
Targeted Intensive School Support Program (TISS) vs. Business as usual |
0 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Principal Retention |
Targeted Intensive School Support Program (TISS) vs. Business as usual |
0 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Absentee Rate |
Targeted Intensive School Support Program (TISS) vs. Business as usual |
0 Weeks |
Full sample;
|
33.00 |
38.00 |
Yes |
|
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 34% | |
| Other or unknown | 66% |
| Hispanic | 46% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 54% |
The study took place in New York City public schools from 2014 to 2019.
The WWC calculated the aggregate demographics using data reported for the intervention and comparison groups separately. Across the 82 schools included in the analysis sample, 34% of students were Black, and race was not specified for the remaining students; 46% were Hispanic, 15% were English language learners, 21% were students with a disability and 78% met the New York State's criteria for being classified as a student living in poverty.
The Targeted Intensive School Support Program (TISS) is a supportive coaching program offered to novice principals and assistant principals in New York City Department of Education (NYC DOE) schools that have been identified as struggling and in need of comprehensive intervention. TISS is implemented in 28 elementary, middle, and high schools across the NYC DOE district. The program is designed to prepare a team of two like-minded leaders (or thought partners) and to provide the team with robust coaching support to accelerate the change process in these struggling schools. The TISS program supports these principals with additional and sustained coaching, team-based coaching, and specialized coaching according to needs. The program aims to improve student achievement in English Language Arts and mathematics.
Schools in the comparison group had new, first-year principals that had completed a residency-based principal preparation program who had not participated in the intervention.
Principals in TISS received access to TISS coaches and specialist coaches with expertise in budgeting, school data analysis, instruction, English language learners, students in special education, teacher evaluation, and scheduling and planning.
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