The study could not determine whether knowledge gains transferred to participants' classroom teaching¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q1
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q1 i? The authors state that without follow-up into participants' classrooms, they cannot determine whether the research-to-practice loop is complete. → Pufpaff 2010

Evidence¶

Pufpaff 2010¶

Pufpaff, L. A., & Yssel, N. (2010). Effects of a 6-Week, Co-Taught Literacy Unit on Preservice Special Educators' Literacy-Education Knowledge. Psychology in the Schools, 47(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20485

q1 · i? · causal · r1

Authors' stated limitation of the pretest-posttest project: no follow-up measured whether participants could apply the knowledge gained in their classrooms. "Ultimately, teachers must be able to translate research knowledge into successful teaching."

"The most obvious limitation of this study is the lack of follow-through with participants into their classrooms to determine their ability to apply the knowledge gained during the literacy unit."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Preservice special educators in the 2008 cohort showed significant pretest-to-posttest knowledge gains after the 6-week co-taught literacy unit
• Preservice special educators in the 2009 cohort showed significant pretest-to-posttest knowledge gains, with instruction replicated consistently across years
• Whether strategy instruction works better in authentic content-area tasks is untested, and the one meta-analytic comparison recorded found larger gains in strategic ability in language-arts than in content-area classes