This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Trochim, W. M.K. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Trochim, W. M.K. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Methodologically Based Discrepancies in Compensatory Education Evaluations

Cornell University

Meta-analysis of several hundred evaluations of Title I compensatory education programs shows that two distinct research designs consistently yield different results. The norm- referenced model portrays programs as positively effective while the regression-disconti nuity design shows them to be ineffective or even slightly harmful. Three potential biasing factors are discussed for each design—residual regression artifacts; attrition and time-of- testing problems in the norm-referenced design; and assignment, measurement, and data preparation problems in the regression-discontinuity design. In lieu of more definitive research the tentative conclusion is that in practice the norm-referenced design over estimates the program effect while the regression-discontinuity design underestimates it.

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

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Cappelleri, W. M.K. Trochim, T.D. Stanley, and C. S. Reichardt Random Measurement Error Does Not Bias the Treatment Effect Estimate in the Regression-Discontinuity Design: I. The Case of No Interaction Eval Rev, August 1, 1991; 15(4): 395 - 419. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W. M.K. Trochim and J. E. Davis Computer Simulation for Program Evaluation Eval Rev, January 1, 1986; 10(5): 609 - 634. [Abstract] [PDF]