英国教育试验的效应量

Michael Sanders, Christyan Mitchell, Aisling Ni Chonaire
{"title":"英国教育试验的效应量","authors":"Michael Sanders, Christyan Mitchell, Aisling Ni Chonaire","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3532325","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Sample size, or power calculations are an integral part of conducting randomised controlled trials. Rules of thumb can be useful in these calculations, but can have negative consequences if the rules do not match up with reality. We review a large database of effect sizes in education, and find that average effect sizes are roughly one third the size of those described as ‘small’ in a widely used rule of thumb, that less than 5% of all effect sizes meet the threshold for ‘small’ and that effect sizes are fairly stable over time and the age of children involved. We find that interventions that are clustered for randomisation typically produce smaller effect sizes, and that researchers’ intuition about the ordinal ranking of findings is fairly accurate. We suggest a revised rule of thumb for education randomised trials.","PeriodicalId":345692,"journal":{"name":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect Sizes in Education Trials in England\",\"authors\":\"Michael Sanders, Christyan Mitchell, Aisling Ni Chonaire\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3532325\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Sample size, or power calculations are an integral part of conducting randomised controlled trials. Rules of thumb can be useful in these calculations, but can have negative consequences if the rules do not match up with reality. We review a large database of effect sizes in education, and find that average effect sizes are roughly one third the size of those described as ‘small’ in a widely used rule of thumb, that less than 5% of all effect sizes meet the threshold for ‘small’ and that effect sizes are fairly stable over time and the age of children involved. We find that interventions that are clustered for randomisation typically produce smaller effect sizes, and that researchers’ intuition about the ordinal ranking of findings is fairly accurate. We suggest a revised rule of thumb for education randomised trials.\",\"PeriodicalId\":345692,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3532325\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Political Methods: Experiments & Experimental Design eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3532325","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

样本大小或功率计算是进行随机对照试验的一个组成部分。经验法则在这些计算中可能很有用,但如果规则与现实不符,可能会产生负面后果。我们回顾了一个关于教育效应量的大型数据库,发现平均效应量大约是一个广泛使用的经验法则中被描述为“小”的效应量的三分之一,不到5%的效应量符合“小”的阈值,而且随着时间的推移和儿童的年龄,效应量相当稳定。我们发现,为随机化而聚集的干预措施通常会产生较小的效应,而且研究人员对研究结果的顺序排序的直觉相当准确。我们建议修订教育随机试验的经验法则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect Sizes in Education Trials in England
Sample size, or power calculations are an integral part of conducting randomised controlled trials. Rules of thumb can be useful in these calculations, but can have negative consequences if the rules do not match up with reality. We review a large database of effect sizes in education, and find that average effect sizes are roughly one third the size of those described as ‘small’ in a widely used rule of thumb, that less than 5% of all effect sizes meet the threshold for ‘small’ and that effect sizes are fairly stable over time and the age of children involved. We find that interventions that are clustered for randomisation typically produce smaller effect sizes, and that researchers’ intuition about the ordinal ranking of findings is fairly accurate. We suggest a revised rule of thumb for education randomised trials.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信