{"title":"解读数据二分法:应用QuantCrit来理解种族意识交叉元分析研究","authors":"J. Young, Jemimah L. Young","doi":"10.1080/1743727X.2022.2093847","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Our purpose is to proffer QuantCrit methodological approaches to interrogate notions of statistical practice by convention. We present two approaches to meta-analysis and mean effect size calculations for student achievement. The first approach is the conventional approach which applies between-group differences to calculate effect sizes representing achievement gaps. The second approach is commonly referred to as a single-group summary meta-analysis within the medical literature, which calculates within-group mean differences referred to here as student growth. In the conventional study, 39 independent effect sizes were combined to produce an overall mean difference effect size of −.85, which indicated that the average difference in performance between Black and White girl literacy was almost one standard deviation. The second approach summarized the mean differences from 33 effect sizes using the previous administration year as the comparison group. A statistically significant mean difference of .09 was observed for the QuantCrit approach. Our study contributes to the literature on racially just epistemologies by providing concurrent analyses of meta-analytic data to expose the unique features of QuantCrit that make it distinct from traditional approaches to Quantitative research.","PeriodicalId":51655,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Research & Method in Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Decoding the data dichotomy: applying QuantCrit to understand racially conscience intersectional meta-analytic research\",\"authors\":\"J. Young, Jemimah L. Young\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1743727X.2022.2093847\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Our purpose is to proffer QuantCrit methodological approaches to interrogate notions of statistical practice by convention. We present two approaches to meta-analysis and mean effect size calculations for student achievement. The first approach is the conventional approach which applies between-group differences to calculate effect sizes representing achievement gaps. The second approach is commonly referred to as a single-group summary meta-analysis within the medical literature, which calculates within-group mean differences referred to here as student growth. In the conventional study, 39 independent effect sizes were combined to produce an overall mean difference effect size of −.85, which indicated that the average difference in performance between Black and White girl literacy was almost one standard deviation. The second approach summarized the mean differences from 33 effect sizes using the previous administration year as the comparison group. A statistically significant mean difference of .09 was observed for the QuantCrit approach. Our study contributes to the literature on racially just epistemologies by providing concurrent analyses of meta-analytic data to expose the unique features of QuantCrit that make it distinct from traditional approaches to Quantitative research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51655,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Research & Method in Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Research & Method in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2022.2093847\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Research & Method in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2022.2093847","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Decoding the data dichotomy: applying QuantCrit to understand racially conscience intersectional meta-analytic research
ABSTRACT Our purpose is to proffer QuantCrit methodological approaches to interrogate notions of statistical practice by convention. We present two approaches to meta-analysis and mean effect size calculations for student achievement. The first approach is the conventional approach which applies between-group differences to calculate effect sizes representing achievement gaps. The second approach is commonly referred to as a single-group summary meta-analysis within the medical literature, which calculates within-group mean differences referred to here as student growth. In the conventional study, 39 independent effect sizes were combined to produce an overall mean difference effect size of −.85, which indicated that the average difference in performance between Black and White girl literacy was almost one standard deviation. The second approach summarized the mean differences from 33 effect sizes using the previous administration year as the comparison group. A statistically significant mean difference of .09 was observed for the QuantCrit approach. Our study contributes to the literature on racially just epistemologies by providing concurrent analyses of meta-analytic data to expose the unique features of QuantCrit that make it distinct from traditional approaches to Quantitative research.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Research & Method in Education is an interdisciplinary, peer-reviewed journal that draws contributions from a wide community of international researchers. Contributions are expected to develop and further international discourse in educational research with a particular focus on method and methodological issues. The journal welcomes papers engaging with methods from within a qualitative or quantitative framework, or from frameworks which cut across and or challenge this duality. Papers should not solely focus on the practice of education; there must be a contribution to methodology. International Journal of Research & Method in Education is committed to publishing scholarly research that discusses conceptual, theoretical and methodological issues, provides evidence, support for or informed critique of unusual or new methodologies within educational research and provides innovative, new perspectives and examinations of key research findings. The journal’s enthusiasm to foster debate is also recognised in a keenness to include engaged, thought-provoking response papers to previously published articles. The journal is also interested in papers that discuss issues in the teaching of research methods for educational researchers. Contributors to International Journal of Research & Method in Education should take care to communicate their findings or arguments in a succinct, accessible manner to an international readership of researchers, policy-makers and practitioners from a range of disciplines including but not limited to philosophy, sociology, economics, psychology, and history of education. The Co-Editors welcome suggested topics for future Special Issues. Initial ideas should be discussed by email with the Co-Editors before a formal proposal is submitted for consideration.