A Preliminary Investigation of the Empirical Validity of Study Quality Appraisal

Autor/inn/en	Cook, Bryan G.; Dupuis, Danielle N.; Jitendra, Asha K.
Titel	A Preliminary Investigation of the Empirical Validity of Study Quality Appraisal
Quelle	In: Journal of Learning Disabilities, 50 (2017) 1, S.14-22 (9 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0022-2194
DOI	10.1177/0022219415581178
Schlagwörter	Investigations; Evidence Based Practice; Experimental Programs; Special Education; Quality Assurance; Educational Quality; Research Reports; Instructional Effectiveness; Learning Disabilities; Research Methodology; Participant Characteristics; Maximum Likelihood Statistics; Experimenter Characteristics; Outcome Measures; Intervention; Data Analysis; Test Reliability; Test Validity; Meta Analysis + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Untersuchung; Erprobungsprogramm; Special needs education; Sonderpädagogik; Sonderschulwesen; Qualitätssicherung; Quality of education; Bildungsqualität; Research report; Forschungsbericht; Unterrichtserfolg; Learning handicap; Lernbehinderung; Research method; Forschungsmethode; Auswertung; Testreliabilität; Testvalidität; Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse
Abstract	When classifying the evidence base of practices, special education scholars typically appraise study quality to identify and exclude from consideration in their reviews unacceptable-quality studies that are likely biased and might bias review findings if included. However, study quality appraisals used in the process of identifying evidence-based practices for students with learning and other disabilities have not been empirically validated (e.g., studies classified as unacceptable quality shown to have different, and presumably more biased, effects than high-quality studies). Using Gersten et al.'s (2005) approach for appraising the quality of group experimental studies in special education, we examined whether (a) studies classified as unacceptable quality and high quality had meaningfully different effects and (b) unacceptable-quality studies were more likely to have outlying effects than high-quality studies among 36 group experimental studies that investigated the effectiveness of instructional practices for students with learning disabilities. Our preliminary analyses found that the effects of unacceptable-quality studies were not meaningfully different from the effects of high-quality studies. We discuss implications of these findings and call for more research to be conducted in this area. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications and Hammill Institute on Disabilities. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01