Claims

EWIMS did not reduce the percentage of students who were suspended after one year

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r3 · q4
Currency · newest study 2017 · 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.

q4 i? The percentage of students suspended once or more did not differ significantly between EWIMS schools and control schools (9 percent in both). → Faria 2017

Evidence

Faria 2017

Faria, A.-M., Sorensen, N., Heppen, J., Bowdon, J., Taylor, S., Eisner, R., & Foster, S. (2017). Getting students on track for graduation: Impacts of the Early Warning Intervention and Monitoring System after one year (REL 2017–272). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Midwest. http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs

q4 · i? · causal · r3

Randomized controlled trial main analysis on the binary suspension risk indicator from extant student records. The suspension rate "was 9 percent in both EWIMS and control schools" with no statistically significant difference; equivalence was not tested.

"The percentage of students who were suspended once or more was 9 percent in both EWIMS and control schools, and the difference was not statistically significant"

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.