Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 0 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 0 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 3 |
Descriptor
Effect Size | 3 |
Structural Equation Models | 3 |
Academic Achievement | 1 |
Causal Models | 1 |
Comparative Analysis | 1 |
Computation | 1 |
Context Effect | 1 |
Control Groups | 1 |
Correlation | 1 |
Educational Methods | 1 |
Educational Research | 1 |
More ▼ |
Author
Deke, John | 1 |
Goodman, Joshua T. | 1 |
Puma, Mike | 1 |
Schochet, Peter Z. | 1 |
Thompson, Bruce | 1 |
Wang, Zhongmiao | 1 |
Willse, John T. | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 2 |
Information Analyses | 1 |
Reports - Descriptive | 1 |
Reports - Evaluative | 1 |
Reports - Research | 1 |
Education Level
Elementary Secondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Researchers | 3 |
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Schochet, Peter Z.; Puma, Mike; Deke, John – National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, 2014
This report summarizes the complex research literature on quantitative methods for assessing how impacts of educational interventions on instructional practices and student learning differ across students, educators, and schools. It also provides technical guidance about the use and interpretation of these methods. The research topics addressed…
Descriptors: Statistical Analysis, Evaluation Methods, Educational Research, Intervention
Willse, John T.; Goodman, Joshua T. – Educational and Psychological Measurement, 2008
This research provides a direct comparison of effect size estimates based on structural equation modeling (SEM), item response theory (IRT), and raw scores. Differences between the SEM, IRT, and raw score approaches are examined under a variety of data conditions (IRT models underlying the data, test lengths, magnitude of group differences, and…
Descriptors: Test Length, Structural Equation Models, Effect Size, Raw Scores
Wang, Zhongmiao; Thompson, Bruce – Journal of Experimental Education, 2007
In this study the authors investigated the use of 5 (i.e., Claudy, Ezekiel, Olkin-Pratt, Pratt, and Smith) R[squared] correction formulas with the Pearson r[squared]. The authors estimated adjustment bias and precision under 6 x 3 x 6 conditions (i.e., population [rho] values of 0.0, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 0.7, and 0.9; population shapes normal, skewness…
Descriptors: Effect Size, Correlation, Mathematical Formulas, Monte Carlo Methods