Using What Works Clearinghouse–Sanctioned Rigorous Methods to Develop Comparison Groups for Evaluation

• In Event: Poster Session 4
  In Poster Session: Research, Evaluation, Assessment, and Accountability in Schools: Featuring the Analytic Explorations of Graduate Student Scholars

Abstract

Evaluation of program impact in the field of education has been a controversial topic over the years. Although randomized control trials have great advantages in causal inference, they often raise ethical and economic concerns in practice. As an alternative, quasi-experimental designs may provide valid evidence of influence if they are well-designed. In this article, we presented an evaluation case of a district-wide early learning improvement program. To strike a balance between practicability and academic rigor, we developed comparison groups from multiple perspectives, and used a series of tests consistent with WWC 3.0 standards to reach most valid comparisons. Implications for evaluation practice were discussed.

Authors

• Xingyuan Gao, Western Michigan University

• Jianping Shen, Western Michigan University

• Huilan Y. Krenn, W. K. Kellogg Foundation