Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text Free
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow An erratum has been published
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bloom, H. S.
Right arrow Articles by Black, A. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Vol. 29, No. 1, 30-59 (2007)
DOI: 10.3102/0162373707299550


Article

Using Covariates to Improve Precision for Studies That Randomize Schools to Evaluate Educational Interventions

Howard S. Bloom, Lashawn Richburg-Hayes and Alison Rebeck Black

MDRC

This article examines how controlling statistically for baseline covariates, especially pretests, improves the precision of studies that randomize schools to measure the impacts of educational interventions on student achievement. Empirical findings from five urban school districts indicate that (1) pretests can reduce the number of randomized schools needed for a given level of precision to about half of what would be needed otherwise for elementary schools, one fifth for middle schools, and one tenth for high schools, and (2) school-level pretests are as effective in this regard as student-level pretests. Furthermore, the precision-enhancing power of pretests (3) declines only slightly as the number of years between the pretest and posttests increases; (4) improves only slightly with pretests for more than 1 baseline year; and (5) is substantial, even when the pretest differs from the posttest. The article compares these findings with past research and presents an approach for quantifying their uncertainty.

Key Words: randomizing schools • cluster randomization • precision • intraclass correlation • educational interventions • pretests


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am Educ Res JHome page
S. W. Raudenbush
Advancing Educational Policy by Advancing Research on Instruction
American Educational Research Journal, March 1, 2008; 45(1): 206 - 230.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EDUCATIONAL RESEARCHERHome page
F. Sloane
Comments on Slavin: Through the Looking Glass: Experiments, Quasi-Experiments, and the Medical Model
Educational Researcher, January 1, 2008; 37(1): 41 - 46.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AND POLICY ANALYSISHome page
L. V. Hedges and E. C. Hedberg
Intraclass Correlation Values for Planning Group-Randomized Trials in Education
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, March 1, 2007; 29(1): 60 - 87.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



AER home page RER home page EPA home page JEB home page RRE home page