The DCCS professional development program increased teachers' use of the targeted high-impact instructional strategies relative to control teachers¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i3 Intervention teachers used DCCS instructional strategies substantially more than control teachers (Hedge's g = 2.02). → Leslie M. Babinski 2018 q3 i3 Intervention teachers also used Adapted Strategies more than control teachers (Hedge's g = 0.95). → Leslie M. Babinski 2018

Evidence¶

Leslie M. Babinski 2018¶

Leslie M. Babinski, Steven J. Amendum, Steven E. Knotek, Marta Sánchez, Patrick Malone. (2018). Improving Young English Learners’ Language and Literacy Skills Through Teacher Professional Development: A Randomized Controlled Trial. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217732335

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

Intent-to-treat analysis of three aggregated classroom observations per teacher, using the CQELL and the researcher-created DCCS Observation Tool, comparing 14 intervention teachers with 16 control teachers. The intervention effect on DCCS Strategies was significant with "Hedge’sg = 2.02" and on Adapted Strategies with g = 0.95.

"However, the intervention did lead to greater use of Adapted Strategies ( Mdiff = 0.57, 95% CI [.05, 1.10], p =.032, Hedge’s g = 0.95) and DCCS Strategies ( Mdiff = 0.38, 95% CI [0.27, 0.50],p .001, Hedge’sg = 2.02) relative to teachers in the control group."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The DCCS professional development program increased intervention teachers' use of the targeted DCCS instructional strategies and Adapted Strategies relative to control teachers, with no difference in overall lesson quality — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• The intervention did not change overall classroom instructional quality as measured by the CQELL Generic Lesson Elements and EL Support subscales — related