Claims

In the data-driven instruction evaluation, most aspects of the intervention were implemented as planned

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? Most aspects of the support for data-driven instruction intervention were implemented as planned. → Philip Gleason 2019

Evidence

Philip Gleason 2019

Philip Gleason, Sarah Crissey, Greg Chojnacki, Marykate Zukiewicz, Tim Silva, Sarah Costelloe, Fran O'Reilly. (2019). Evaluation of Support for Using Student Data to Inform Teachers' Instruction. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/

q3 · i? · causal · r?

Implementation findings from the random assignment study of the support for data-driven instruction intervention report that "Most aspects of the intervention were implemented as planned." No effect size is printed for this implementation finding.

"Most aspects of the intervention were implemented as planned."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id data-driven-instruction-support-implemented-as-planned
title In the data-driven instruction evaluation, most aspects of the intervention were implemented as planned
description In the data-driven instruction evaluation, most aspects of the intervention were implemented as planned
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2019
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — philip-gleason-2019

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.