{"title":"三级模型中从学生亚群体成长角度评估学校的方法比较","authors":"Yixing Liu, R. Levy, N. Yel, A. Schulte","doi":"10.1080/09243453.2022.2071950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Although there is recognition that there may be differential outcomes for groups of students within schools, examination of outcomes for subgroups presents challenges to researchers and policymakers. It complicates analytic procedures, particularly when the number of students per school in the subgroup is small. We explored five alternatives for applying a three-level multilevel growth modeling framework to examine school-level achievement for a select subgroup of students (students with disabilities) using a large longitudinal database tracking reading achievement. The alternatives vary in terms of use of subgroup only or all student data, use of student-level predictors, and method of linking student or school-level outcomes to school effectiveness indices. Correlations from .57 to .99 among alternatives suggest the choice of how to derive school-level outcomes for a subgroup has consequences for inferences about the school’s effectiveness with the subgroup. Researchers’ assumptions and data available should guide the selection of an approach.","PeriodicalId":47698,"journal":{"name":"School Effectiveness and School Improvement","volume":"34 1","pages":"1 - 23"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of methods for evaluating schools with respect to growth of students in subpopulations in three-level models\",\"authors\":\"Yixing Liu, R. Levy, N. Yel, A. Schulte\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09243453.2022.2071950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Although there is recognition that there may be differential outcomes for groups of students within schools, examination of outcomes for subgroups presents challenges to researchers and policymakers. It complicates analytic procedures, particularly when the number of students per school in the subgroup is small. We explored five alternatives for applying a three-level multilevel growth modeling framework to examine school-level achievement for a select subgroup of students (students with disabilities) using a large longitudinal database tracking reading achievement. The alternatives vary in terms of use of subgroup only or all student data, use of student-level predictors, and method of linking student or school-level outcomes to school effectiveness indices. Correlations from .57 to .99 among alternatives suggest the choice of how to derive school-level outcomes for a subgroup has consequences for inferences about the school’s effectiveness with the subgroup. Researchers’ assumptions and data available should guide the selection of an approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"School Effectiveness and School Improvement\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"School Effectiveness and School Improvement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2022.2071950\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"School Effectiveness and School Improvement","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2022.2071950","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
A comparison of methods for evaluating schools with respect to growth of students in subpopulations in three-level models
ABSTRACT Although there is recognition that there may be differential outcomes for groups of students within schools, examination of outcomes for subgroups presents challenges to researchers and policymakers. It complicates analytic procedures, particularly when the number of students per school in the subgroup is small. We explored five alternatives for applying a three-level multilevel growth modeling framework to examine school-level achievement for a select subgroup of students (students with disabilities) using a large longitudinal database tracking reading achievement. The alternatives vary in terms of use of subgroup only or all student data, use of student-level predictors, and method of linking student or school-level outcomes to school effectiveness indices. Correlations from .57 to .99 among alternatives suggest the choice of how to derive school-level outcomes for a subgroup has consequences for inferences about the school’s effectiveness with the subgroup. Researchers’ assumptions and data available should guide the selection of an approach.
期刊介绍:
School Effectiveness and School Improvement presents information on educational effectiveness, practice and policy-making across primary, secondary and higher education. The Editors believe that the educational progress of all students, regardless of family background and economic status, is the key indicator of effectiveness and improvement in schools. The journal strives to explore this idea with manuscripts that cover a range of subjects within the area of educational effectiveness at the classroom, school or system level, including, but not limited to: •Effective pedagogy •Classroom climate •School ethos and leadership •School improvement and reform programmes •Systemwide policy and reform