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

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

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 i3 Intervention teachers were observed using the DCCS instructional strategies far 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 q3 i? No differences were found between groups on CQELL Generic Lesson Elements or EL Support, indicating similar overall instructional quality. → 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 aggregated ratings from three classroom observations per teacher using the CQELL and the researcher-created DCCS Observation Tool, comparing 14 intervention and 16 control teachers. The article reports "Hedge's g = 2.02" for DCCS Strategies and g = 0.95 for Adapted Strategies; no group differences on Generic Lesson Elements or EL Support.

"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

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-01
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

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