Αποδελτίωση περιοδικού Review of Educational Research, September 2009, Volume 79, No. 3

Καλησπέρα σε όλους

Review of Educational Research, September 2009, Volume 79, No. 3


-->Gaea Leinhardt
Editorial Statement p.p. 1087-1088.

-->Gaea Leinhardt
The Editor Notes p.p. 1089.

-->Rubén Gaztambide-Fernández
What Is an Elite Boarding School? p.p 1090-1128
This article brings attention to the rarefied world of elite boarding schools. Despite their reputation for excellence, these unique educational institutions remain largely outside the gaze of educational researchers and the scope of public debates about education. One reason for this absence is a lack of knowledge about what exactly defines an elite boarding school and the characteristics that stand them apart from other schools in significant ways. Drawing on a review of the relevant literature, the article outlines five criteria by which elite boarding schools can be identified: typologically elite, scholastically elite, historically elite, geographically elite, and demographically elite. Although the "elite" status of any given school in any of these criteria may be open to debate, it is the particular combination of these five dimensions that defines an elite boarding school. After a discussion of these five characteristics, the article outlines some implications for future research that considers elite boarding schools as an integral part of the educational system in the United States and presents some of the challenges facing the study of privilege.

-->Jens Möller, Britta Pohlmann, Olaf Köller, and Herb W. Marsh
A Meta-Analytic Path Analysis of the Internal/External Frame of Reference Model of Academic Achievement and Academic Self-Concept p.p 1129-1167
A meta-analysis of 69 data sets (N = 125,308) was carried out on studies that simultaneously evaluate the effects of math and verbal achievements on math and verbal self-concepts. As predicted by the internal/external frame of reference (I/E) model, math and verbal achievements were highly correlated overall (.67), but the correlation between math and verbal self-concepts (.10) was close to zero. Correlations between math and verbal achievement and correlations between achievements and self-concepts within the domains were more positive when grades instead of standardized test results were used as achievement indicators. A path analysis revealed support for the I/E model, with positive paths from achievement to the corresponding self-concepts (.61 for math, .49 for verbal) and negative paths from achievement in one subject to self-concept in the other subject (–.21 from math achievement on verbal self-concept, –.27 from verbal achievement to math self-concept). Furthermore, results showed that the I/E model is valid for different age groups, gender groups, and countries. The I/E model did not fit the data when self-efficacy measures were used instead of self-concept measures. These results demonstrate the broad scope of the I/E model as an adequate description of students’ self-evaluation processes as they are influenced by internal and external frames of reference.

-->Michael J. Kieffer, Nonie K. Lesaux, Mabel Rivera, and David J. Francis
Accommodations for English Language Learners Taking Large-Scale Assessments: A Meta-Analysis on Effectiveness and Validity p.p. 1168-1201
Including English language learners (ELLs) in large-scale assessments raises questions about the validity of inferences based on their scores. Test accommodations for ELLs are intended to reduce the impact of limited English proficiency on the assessment of the target construct, most often mathematic or science proficiency. This meta-analysis synthesizes research on the effectiveness and validity of such accommodations for ELLs. Findings indicate that none of the seven accommodations studied threaten the validity of inferences. However, only one accommodation—providing English dictionaries or glossaries—has a statistically significant effect on ELLs’ performance, and this effect equates to only a small reduction in the achievement score gap between ELLs and native English speakers. Findings suggest that accommodations to reduce the impact of limited language proficiency on academic skill assessment are not particularly effective. Given this, we posit a hypothesis about the necessary role of academic language skills in mathematics and science assessments.

-->Russell Gersten, David J. Chard, Madhavi Jayanthi, Scott K. Baker, Paul Morphy, and Jonathan Flojo, Mathematics Instruction for Students With Learning Disabilities: A Meta-Analysis of Instructional Components, p.p.1202-1242
The purpose of this meta-analysis was to synthesize findings from 42 interventions (randomized control trials and quasi-experimental studies) on instructional approaches that enhance the mathematics proficiency of students with learning disabilities. We examined the impact of four categories of instructional components: (a) approaches to instruction and/or curriculum design, (b) formative assessment data and feedback to teachers on students' mathematics performance, (c) formative data and feedback to students with LD on their performance, and (d) peer-assisted mathematics instruction. All instructional components except for student feedback with goal-setting and peer-assisted learning within a class resulted in significant mean effects ranging from 0.21 to 1.56. We also examined the effectiveness of these components conditionally, using hierarchical multiple regressions. Two instructional components provided practically and statistically important increases in effect size–teaching students to use heuristics and explicit instruction. Limitations of the study, suggestions for future research, and applications for improvement of current practice are discussed.

-->Robert M. Bernard, Philip C. Abrami, Eugene Borokhovski, C. Anne Wade, Rana M. Tamim, Michael A. Surkes, and Edward Clement Bethel, A Meta-Analysis of Three Types of Interaction Treatments in Distance Education, p.p 1243-1289.
This meta-analysis of the experimental literature of distance education (DE) compares different types of interaction treatments (ITs) with other DE instructional treatments. ITs are the instructional and/or media conditions designed into DE courses, which are intended to facilitate student–student (SS), student–teacher (ST), or student–content (SC) interactions. Seventy-four DE versus DE studies that contained at least one IT are included in the meta-analysis, which yield 74 achievement effects. The effect size valences are structured so that the IT or the stronger IT (i.e., in the case of two ITs) serve as the experimental condition and the other treatment, the control condition. Effects are categorized as SS, ST, or SC. After adjustment for methodological quality, the overall weighted average effect size for achievement is 0.38 and is heterogeneous. Overall, the results support the importance of the three types of ITs and strength of ITs is found to be associated with increasing achievement outcomes. A strong association is found between strength and achievement for asynchronous DE courses compared to courses containing mediated synchronous or face-to-face interaction. The results are interpreted in terms of increased cognitive engagement that is presumed to be promoted by strengthening ITs in DE courses.

--> Herbert W. Marsh, Lutz Bornmann, Rüdiger Mutz, Hans-Dieter Daniel, and Alison O’Mara, Gender Effects in the Peer Reviews of Grant Proposals: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Comparing Traditional and Multilevel Approaches, p.p. 1290-1326.
Peer review is valued in higher education, but also widely criticized in terms of potential biases, particularly gender. We evaluate gender differences in peer reviews of grant applications, extending Bornmann, Mutz, and Daniel’s meta-analyses that reported small gender differences in favor of men (d = .04), but a substantial heterogeneity in effect sizes that compromised the robustness of their results. We contrast these findings with the most comprehensive single primary study (Marsh, Jayasinghe, and Bond) that found no gender differences for grant proposals. We juxtapose traditional (fixed- and random-effects) and multilevel models, demonstrating important advantages to the multilevel approach. Consistent with Marsh et al.’s primary study, there were no gender differences for the 40 (of 66) effect sizes from Bornmann et al. that were based on grant proposals. This lack of a gender effect for grant proposals was very robust, generalizing over country, discipline, and publication year