Project Activities
The research team collaborated with practicing professionals across four elementary campuses to iteratively develop and refine a professional development model to support teachers' ability to teach literacy skills to upper-elementary EL students. They conducted usability and feasibility tests and ran a pilot study to compare the outcomes of teachers who engaged in C2 to those who did not.
Structured Abstract
Setting
The project took place in elementary schools in a major-suburban school district in Texas.
Sample
Participants in the development phase included educators and students in three elementary schools (15 educators and approximately 330 students). The pilot study sample included seven elementary schools (45 teachers and 594 students).
The C2 model is intended to support teachers in increasing their knowledge of how to (1) address the language needs of upper elementary ELs, (2) implement evidence-based instructional practices during their daily literacy block, and (3) skillfully enhance their practice based on knowledge gained from reflection-action practice. To do so, it includes five core features: (1) evidence-based practices, (2) instructional coaching (3) peer collaboration for practice refinement, (4) self-assessment and self-Reflection of teaching, and (5) teacher-driven action planning.
Research design and methods
During the development phase of the project, researchers used an iterative feedback cycle to develop and evaluate the feasibility and usefulness of the professional learning model’s content focus and the tools and standardized protocols for the other job-embedded professional learning components. During this phase, project staff engaged elementary school sites and their administrators, instructional coaches and fourth- and fifth-grade staff to participate in key project activities. During the pilot study phase of the project, the research team fully implemented the C2 model and conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial with four schools assigned to the intervention and three to the comparison condition.
Control condition
Teachers in the comparison condition received business-as-usual professional learning and their students were provided with the schools' business-as-usual reading and language arts instruction as part of the general curriculum.
Key measures
Data sources used during the development phase included an (1) educator feedback questionnaire, (2) end-of-year educator survey, (3) formal classroom observations, and (4) teacher learning artifacts. Formal classroom observations were conducted by project staff at the beginning and end of the year on all participating teachers. Teacher learning artifacts collected for analysis included teachers written self-reflections and action plans developed as part of the self-reflective process. For the pilot study, students' growth in language development and reading comprehension was tested using the Core Academic Language Skills (CALS) Instrument, Receptive & Expressive One-Word Picture Vocabulary Tests, and the Test of Sentence Reading Efficiency and Comprehension (TOSREC). Additionally, data from the state-mandated measures of TELPAS (Texas English Language Proficiency System) and STAAR (State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness) were collected for participating students. Teachers' fidelity of implementation and instructional quality was measured using the C2 Teacher Observation Protocol. Formal classroom observations were conducted with all treatment and comparison teachers. Observations of treatment teachers were recorded and coded using the protocol to measure fidelity to the intervention.
Data analytic strategy
The research team estimated the impact of C2 on student and teacher outcomes using linear regression models, controlling for pretest performance and student-level covariates. To examine student outcomes, researchers fit separate linear models for each outcome variable, with the grand-mean centered pretest score, experimental condition, special education status, English learner status, and grade level included as fixed effects. They also accounted for clustering of students within schools. Small-sample corrections were used to improve the accuracy of p-values under clustered designs. For teacher-level data, regressions of posttest scores on the pretest and intervention status were used to evaluate the effect of participation in C2.
Cost analysis strategy
The researchers conducted the cost analysis using the ingredients approach, cataloguing all resources required to achieve the intervention’s effects and pricing each one across categories of personnel (e.g., teacher/tutor time), facilities (e.g., classroom space), materials and equipment (e.g., instructional materials), training (e.g., professional development), and miscellaneous costs. The analysis catalogued the resources need for the C2 condition only. Total C2 costs were calculated from a societal perspective, capturing all costs to all parties whether resources were purchased or provided at no charge, while excluding costs for intervention development and research-related expenses.
Key outcomes
Key outcomes for this project will be shared once published in a peer-reviewed and publicly accessible format.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Project contributors
Products and publications
This project will develop a professional development model and generate information about its costs. The researchers will also produce peer-reviewed publications, presentations, and additional dissemination products (e.g., research briefs) that reach education stakeholders such as practitioners and policymakers.
Publications:
ERIC Citations: Publications from this project are available here.
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
