EWIMS schools were more likely than control schools to report using an early warning system and having a dedicated team, but did not differ in frequency of data review or interventions offered¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2–r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? EWIMS schools were more likely than control schools to report using an early warning system and having a dedicated team to identify and support at-risk students. → Faria 2017 q2 i? EWIMS schools did not differ from control schools in the frequency of data review or the number and type of interventions offered. → Faria 2017 (2)

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

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Treatment contrast analyses using school leader survey data comparing EWIMS and control schools' practices. Schools "were more likely than control schools to report using an early warning system and having a dedicated team" but did not differ on data review frequency or interventions.

"EWIMS schools were more likely than control schools to report using an early warning system and having a ded­icated team to identify and support at-risk students, but EWIMS schools did not differ from control schools in the frequency of data review or the number and type of interventions offered."

Faria 2017 (2)¶

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

q2 · i? · causal · r3

Treatment contrast analyses from the same school leader survey comparison. EWIMS schools "did not differ from control schools in the frequency of data review or the number and type of interventions offered".

"but EWIMS schools did not differ from control schools in the frequency of data review or the number and type of interventions offered"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• EWIMS did not have a detectable impact on school data culture, though the overall scale effect size (Hedges' g = 0.27) favored EWIMS — related
• EWIMS did not reduce the percentage of students who were suspended after one year — related
• Overall implementation of the EWIMS seven-step process was low and challenging in the first year, with all but two schools categorized as low implementers — related