Zhu, Bo; Gnedko-Berry, Natalya; Borman, Trisha; Manzeske, David (2019). American Institutes for Research. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED607261
Reviewed: July 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Smarter Balanced Assessment: General Achievement (pooled ELA and Math z-scores) |
National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT) instructional leaders in mentorship roles vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.66 |
0.41 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
CLASS: Global Score |
National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT) instructional leaders in mentorship roles vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.40 |
0.22 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
CLASS - Emotional Support domain |
National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT) instructional leaders in mentorship roles vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.92 |
0.84 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Classroom Organization (CLASS) |
National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT) instructional leaders in mentorship roles vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.69 |
0.21 |
No |
-- | ||
|
CLASS: Instructional Support |
National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT) instructional leaders in mentorship roles vs. Other intervention |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
-0.41 |
-0.40 |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Other or unknown | 39% | |
| White | 61% |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 39% | |
| Other or unknown | 61% |
| Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) | 59% | |
| No FRPL | 42% |
The study was conducted in 52 public K-12 schools in the San Francisco Unified School District.
Students were in grades 4 through 8. Over half (53%) were female, with 87% identified as racial/ethnic minority students, 9% identified as English language learners and 8% identified as receiving special education services. Students attended schools with an average of 59% of the students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. Of the teacher sample, all were in their first year of teaching. The majority (78%) were female; 40% identified as a racial/ethnic minority; 86% were employed full-time; and 27%, 37%, and 37% taught primary, upper elementary, and secondary grades, respectively. .
San Francisco Unified School District offers support to all novice teachers through the Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) program, which includes both National Board Certified Teacher (NBCT) mentors and non-NBCT mentors. BTSA mentors are matched with new teachers based on the mentor's subject expertise and geographic proximity of mentors and mentees. Teachers in the intervention condition received mentoring from mentors who were NBCTs. Mentors were expected to provide at least 1 hour of individual support per week.
Teachers in the comparison condition were participating in the same BTSA program but received mentoring support from non-NBCT mentors.
All mentors in the BTSA program receive training on effective ways of coaching and mentoring, goal setting for novice teachers, best practices in adult learning, individual support and reflection on mentoring practices, and ways to navigate BTSA standards and requirements.
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