TEST Page – CARE

CARE researchers, along with partners at Penn State University and Gibson Consulting Group, used a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the Knowledge in Action (KIA) project-based learning (PBL) approach to Advanced Placement (AP). The study found that KIA students outperformed non-KIA students on AP exams, including within subgroups. Though the shift to PBL required considerable pedagogical changes, teachers and students perceived benefits beyond AP performance, and the majority of teachers planned to continue using PBL after the study. The pattern of results was consistent for two years and in two courses, AP U.S. Government and AP Environmental Science. Results support teacher-driven adoption of KIA for students from both lower- and higher-income households, and in both courses. (From Saavedra et al, 2021)

In partnership with the Stanford History Education Group (SHEG) and Gibson Consulting Group, CARE researchers administered an assessment to more than 3,000 students in 16 districts across the country. Districts varied by region, urbanicity, size and demographic composition to create a sample approximating the demographic profile of high school students across the United States. The SHEG-developed assessment gauged students’ ability to evaluate digital sources on the open internet. Nearly all students floundered. Ninety percent received no credit on four of six tasks. These results informed SHEG’s development of curriculum designed to teach U.S. students how to be critical consumers of online information.

Journal article and reports:

• Students’ Civic Online Reasoning: A National Portrait (Educational Researcher)
• Students’ Civic Online Reasoning: A National Portrait (SSRN)

In partnership with NORC at the University of Chicago the purpose of this study is to learn how to improve equity-focused civics education. Funded by the Institute of Education Sciences’ Education Research Grants program, this randomized controlled trial study seeks to provide rigorous evidence of the impact of the Generation Citizen (GC) “action civics” curriculum on students’ critical thinking, civic knowledge, engagement, and behavior (i.e., 2022 midterm voting), and engagement with learning. Working in partnership with two diverse, large, urban school districts in the US, our study evaluates implementation, cost effectiveness, and impact. Results will inform educators’ and policymakers’ decisions regarding whether and how to implement civic education.

In partnership with the Street Law Inc., the purpose of this study was to evaluate the implementation of Street Law’s “Rule of Law” curriculum, lessons, materials and professional learning program in one east-coast school district as well as among teachers from various other nearby districts. Funded by the Annenberg foundation, our evaluation examined changes in students’ understanding of the concept of “Rule of Law” gained through Street Law’s “Rule of Law” curriculum, as well as participating teachers’ experiences and perceptions of student engagement. Results are informing continued program development, associated professional development, and may lead to a subsequent impact study. Read more about this study here.

In partnership with the University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, our team evaluated the state of Virginia’s Governor’s STEM Academies, a collection of more than 20 programs designed to increase students’ access to STEM curriculum and, ultimately, careers. In this study, our activities included using novel data extraction techniques to transform academies’ original application documents into manipulable and analyzable data. The research team combined these data with current administrative records from Virginia’s state longitudinal data system to investigate how academies’ course and credential offerings have evolved to meet the demands of Virginia’s employers, and the academic and career interests of students.

Beginning with the 2017-18 school year, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) established grant programs to provide financial support to Title I schools. The purpose of the grants is to design and implement strategic school improvements. One whole-school improvement model, “School Restart,” requires schools to develop a new academic program and replace school leadership and instructional staff. This study, in partnership with American Institutes for Research, Gibson Consulting Group, and TEA as part of the Southwest Regional Education Laboratory, is conducting an evaluation of the effects of school restart on student, teacher, and principal outcomes. The study will provide evidence on whether school restart improved student and educator outcomes, and whether the characteristics of students and staff changed after implementation. Read more about this study here.

Funded by The Cullen Foundation, the purpose of this study is to evaluate the implementation and effectiveness of the Buffalo Urban Teaching Fellows (BUTF) residency educator preparation program. In partnership with four local colleges and TNTP, The Cullen Foundation is providing residency stipends (up to $15,000 in tuition assistance per resident) for aspiring teachers to learn through paid positions in schools while they pursue educator certification and transition to a teaching career. Our study will examine the extent to which the BUTF program successfully recruits local teachers to earn credentials and teach in local Buffalo schools, and whether the preparation received through the residency model is successful in preparing teachers for the classroom.

The purpose of this study was to describe the teaching and learning of high school students in two New Tech Network (NTN) high schools, contextualized within the most recent literature on project-based learning (PBL) and workforce-aligned skills. Both schools use a whole-school project-based learning model. One is mature, currently in their 13th year of operation, and a small magnet school. The other, new in its second operational year at the time of the study, is a large comprehensive high school. Our case study research approach included interviews, focus groups, observations, document review, and surveys to understand common successes, challenges, areas for improvement and opportunities for sharing successes. Emerging themes included broad consensus supporting PBL’s benefits for students, teachers’ need for more and different professional learning supports and materials, and the facilitative nature of the whole-school approach, among others.

In partnership with Gibson Consulting Group, Inc. and the Office of Child Development (OCD) at the University of Pittsburg, our team is examining the implementation and impact of PPS’ summer learning program. Through site visits to summer programs, conversations with participating staff, and student surveys, our qualitative research activities will examine how BOOST is implemented, what experiences students have, and how well BOOST programming is meeting identified students’ needs. We will identify strengths of summer BOOST programming and look for areas to improve or strengthen potential areas of weakness. With longitudinal student administrative data, our quantitative research activities will seek to answer whether, and to what extent, participation is associated with improved reading and math performance on standardized, interim benchmark assessments. Quantitative analyses will also examine whether impacts vary by BOOST location, and whether program effects are related to program dosage, measured by the frequency of BOOST summer attendance. Our team will integrate the qualitative and quantitive findings to provide a more holistic understanding of student experiences and outcomes associated with BOOST participation.

Center for Reinventing Public Education: In support of researchers at the Center for Reinventing Public Education at Arizona State University, CARE researchers create a biweekly newsletter aimed at synthesizing key developments in pandemic learning recovery and student wellbeing for non-academic audiences. In addition, CARE researchers have compiled and contributed to consensus reports on key issues in education. Intended for policy and practitioner audiences, these reports review and compile research findings in an area of particular policy relevance