Baseline English proficiency (ACCESS) showed no significant treatment-control difference among ELLs, but a small effect size (0.13) favored controls¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3 · i0 negligible
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i0 No significant difference was found on ACCESS English proficiency between treatment and control ELLs, though the printed effect size of 0.13 indicates a disadvantage for the treatment condition. → Portes 2018

Evidence¶

Portes 2018¶

Portes, P. R., González Canché, M., Boada, D., & Whatley, M. E. (2018). Early Evaluation Findings From the Instructional Conversation Study: Culturally Responsive Teaching Outcomes for Diverse Learners in Elementary School. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831217741089

q3 · i0 · causal · r2

ACCESS scores were available for ELLs in both grades, administered midyear before and during the intervention. The test was not significant, but the printed effect size of 0.13 suggests an advantage for the control group; equivalence was not formally tested.

"No significant difference was found for ELLs on this measure; however, the effect size yielded a disadvantage with a magnitude of 0.13 for ELLs in the treatment condition."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The A4L impact on grade 4 CCU outcomes differed significantly by ELL status in years 1 and 2, with substantially larger effects for ELL students, but not in year 3 — related
• The A4L Lessons Project had no statistically significant impact on students' OAKS Reading/Literature achievement after one, two, or three years of participation — related
• The four groups were homogeneous in general English proficiency before treatment (placement-test ANOVA sig .881) — related