MacArthur, Charles A.; Philippakos, Zoi A.; Ianetta, Melissa (2015). Journal of Educational Psychology, v107 n3 p855-867. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1071555
Reviewed: December 2021
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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Researcher-developed measure of grammar, mechanics, and usage |
Self-Regulated Strategy Development vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
0.68 |
0.66 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Researcher-developed measure of grammar, mechanics, and usage |
Self-Regulated Strategy Development vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Findings for one study site: University A;
|
0.70 |
0.72 |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 2% | |
| Black | 35% | |
| Other or unknown | 12% | |
| White | 52% |
| Hispanic | 6% |
The study took place in developmental writing classes in two 4-year universities in the mid-Atlantic region of the United States.
A total of 252 college students were included in the study. The students were taught by 13 teachers in 19 developmental writing classes. Approximately 54% of the students were female. Fifty-two percent were White, 35% were Black, 2% were Asian, and 12% did not report race. Six percent were Hispanic or Latino.
In self-regulated strategy instruction, students in college developmental writing classes were taught strategies for composing essays using a curriculum that was organized based on conventions used in specific essay genres (for example, persuasive or narrative essays). The curriculum included writing strategies for planning (analyzing the writing task in order to set goals, brainstorming, and using a genre-specific graphic organizer), drafting (using the plan, writing the main idea, and writing supporting details), and revising (self-evaluation and peer review using genre-specific criteria and editing). The curriculum also featured self-regulation strategies, such as goal-setting, task management, progress monitoring, and reflection. Students were taught in instructional units that covered persuasive writing and other writing genres. The intervention was offered in class for one semester.
Students in the comparison group received business-as-usual college developmental writing instruction in a course that included persuasive writing.
Intervention group teachers received three days of professional development from the study authors before the semester began. The professional development included discussion of self-regulated strategy instruction principles, modeling by the study authors, and a day of guided practice in which the intervention group teachers taught a curriculum unit and received feedback from the authors. Study staff provided ongoing support during the semester via classroom observations and feedback and, upon request, meeting with teachers to assist with lesson planning. Each intervention group teacher was observed at least four times in class.
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.
Evidence Tier
The Department of Education’s evidence tiers. For more information, please see the WWC Glossary entry for evidence tiers.
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube