Patel, D., Wei, X., Laguarda, K., Stites, R., Cheever, H., & Goetz, R. (2018). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. https://www.sri.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/evaluation_of_edconx_final_report_3-22-18_final.pdf .
Reviewed: January 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
California English Language Development Test (CELDT) & WIDA’s Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to-State for English Language Learners (ACCESS) [Combined & Standardized] |
Education Connections (EdConx) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
RCT sample only, English learner students of ELA teachers only;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Teacher Instructional Practice Scale (designed for EdConX evaluation) |
Education Connections (EdConx) vs. Business as usual |
0 Months |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
Of the three districts included in the RCT study, one was a large urban district in North Carolina, one was a large urban district in California, and the third was a small rural district in Virginia. While the study focused on core subject teachers in grades 6 through 12, some elective classes were included in the full sample.
The student outcome analysis included 100% English learners (ELs). Other student characteristics were not reported. Most teachers were high school teachers (74% in the intervention group and 66% in the comparison group) and the remaining were middle school teachers. In their focal class (the class with the highest proportion of EL students) teachers reported an average class size of 28 students and that nearly 30% of the class was comprised of EL students.
The Center for Applied Linguistics (CAL) developed an online platform, Education Connections (EdConx), to train and support teachers to integrate English language proficiency standards with content standards to deliver lessons that are both content-rich and accessible to English Learners (ELs). The EdConx platform consists of academic and teaching resources vetted by experts in EL instruction, online courses designed and facilitated by instructors from TESOL International, live events/webinars led by subject-matter experts, and forums to support teacher collaboration. In addition to the online resources, CAL held in-person information sessions with teachers to support their use of the EdConx platform. From fall 2014 through spring 2017, CAL partnered with six school districts in four states to provide access to the EdConx platform to 6th- through 12th-grade teachers of mainstream classrooms. By design, teachers could interact with the platform and its available resources in the way that best met their professional needs.
Teachers in the comparison condition conducted business as usual and received access to EdConx after 1.5 years. During the study years, comparison students were likely exposed to instruction and support services as they had been in the past.
Teachers in the intervention received several elements of support, including access to professional development and professional learning communities, online minicourses, live subject matter sessions, and technology support.
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