National Center for Education Research

National Center for Education Research
Continuous Improvement Research in Education AND Evaluation of State & Local Education Programs & Policies (Topics 2 & 3 of H) James Benson, Ph.D. Allen Ruby, Ph.D. National Center for Education Research

Overview Overview of IES and its mission Requirements for both topics
Specifics for each topic Purpose The project narrative Significance Partnership Research Plan Personnel and Resources Other important sections of the application Preparing and submitting an application

Legislative Mission of IES
Describe the condition and progress of education in the United States Identify education practices that improve academic achievement and access to education opportunities Evaluate the effectiveness of Federal and other education programs

Organizational Structure of IES
National Board for Education Sciences Standards & Review Office Office of the Director National Center for Education Evaluation National Center for Education Statistics National Center for Education Research National Center for Special Education Research

IES Grant Programs: Research Objectives
Develop or identify education interventions (i.e., practices, programs, policies, and approaches) that enhance academic achievement that can be widely deployed Identify what does not work and thereby encourage innovation and further research Understand the processes that underlie the effectiveness of education interventions and the variation in their effectiveness

Partnerships & IES Priorities
IES seeks to... Encourage education researchers to develop partnerships with stakeholder groups to advance relevance of research and usability of its findings for day-to-day work of education practitioners and policymakers Increase capacity of education policymakers and practitioners to use knowledge generated from high quality data analysis, research, and evaluation through wide variety of communication and outreach strategies (See

Partnerships & IES Research Grant Programs
Partnerships and Collaborations Focused on Problems of Practice and Policy (84.305H) To further promote research partnerships between research institutions and State and local education agencies (SEAs/LEAs) Contains 3 topics Researcher-Practitioner Partnerships in Education Research Continuous Improvement Research in Education Evaluation of State & Local Education Programs & Policies

The Two Topics Continuous Improvement Research in Education (Continuous Improvement) Well-established partnerships Goal: To adapt and revise a specific approach, using a continuous improvement strategy, to address a specific education issue or problem of high importance to the education agency that has important implications for improving student education outcomes Evaluation of State & Local Education Programs & Policies (State/Local Evaluation) New or established partnerships Goal: To carry out rigorous evaluations of education programs or policies (programs/policies) that are implemented by state or local education agencies and have important implications for improving student education outcomes

Requirements Shared by Both Topics
Focus on student education outcomes Partnership between research institutions and SEAs/LEAs

Focus on Student Outcomes
IES funds research to improve the quality of education for all students through advancing the understanding of and practices for teaching, learning, and organizing education systems All research must address education outcomes of students Academic outcomes Social and behavioral competencies that support student success in school

Student Population Students from prekindergarten through postsecondary and adult education Typically developing students Students with disabilities or at risk for disabilities Specific requirements for identifying students at risk for disabilities status see

Ultimate Outcomes of Interest: Student Outcomes
Grade Outcome Prekindergarten School readiness (e.g., pre-reading, language, vocabulary, early math and science knowledge, social and behavioral competencies) Kindergarten – Grade 12 Learning, achievement, and higher-order thinking in reading, writing, mathematics, and science; progress through the education system (e.g., course and grade completion or retention, high school graduation, and dropout); social and behavioral competencies important to academic and post-academic success

Ultimate Outcomes of Interest: Student Outcomes
Grade Outcome Postsecondary (Grades 13 – 16: baccalaureate and sub-baccalaureate) Access to, persistence in, progress through, and completion of postsecondary education; for students in developmental programs, additional outcomes include achievement in reading, writing, English language proficiency, and mathematics; success in gateway math and science courses, introductory English composition Adult Education (Adult Basic Education, Adult Secondary Education, Adult ESL, and GED preparation) Student achievement in reading, writing, English language proficiency, and mathematics; access to, persistence in, progress through, and completion of adult education programs

Applications must be from a Partnership
Partnership must include at least a research institution and a U.S. education agency Applications must include at least one Principal Investigator (PI) from a research institution and at least one PI from an SEA or LEA PI from research institution: Must have the ability and capacity to conduct scientifically valid research and expertise in the education issue to be addressed PI from SEA or LEA: Must have decision-making authority for the education issue within his or her agency

Partnership Length of Partnership
Continuous Improvement document at least 1 year of collaboration and describe products State/Local Evaluation may be new or existing partnership Broad definition of research institution Ability and capacity to conduct scientifically valid research

Partnership: SEA Partner
State education agencies Examples: education agencies, departments, boards, commissions Oversee early learning, elementary, secondary, postsecondary/higher, and adult education Includes education agencies in U.S. territories and tribal education agencies

Partnership: LEA Partner
Local education agencies which are primarily public school districts Community college districts State and city postsecondary systems If there is a state or city higher education agency that oversees the postsecondary system, include them as an agency partner If there is no state or city education agency that oversees the postsecondary system, the system can apply as the sole agency partner A postsecondary system that applies as an education agency partner cannot also serve as the research institution partner in the same project

Additional Partners Partnerships may include more than one State or local education agency if they share similarities and interests Non-education state and local agencies may be partners as long as an education agency is a partner Partnerships may include more than one research institution if they have shared interests and will make unique contributions Partnerships may include other non-research organizations (e.g., issue-oriented or stakeholder groups) that will contribute to the partnership and its work

Quick Check Check the fit between your research and the topic!
Just because you have a partnership, doesn’t mean the Continuous Improvement topic or the State/Local Evaluation topic is the best grant topic for you Potentially better fit Education Research Grants Program (84.305A) or Special Education Research Grants Program (84.324A)

Specifics about the Topics
Continuous Improvement Research in Education Evaluation of State & Local Education Programs & Policies

Continuous Improvement: General Purpose
Promote joint research by partnerships of research institutions and SEAs/LEAs Addresses an education issue or problem of key importance to an SEA/LEA Directly contributes to solving problems faced by an SEA/LEA

Continuous Improvement: Specific Purpose
Implement, adapt, and revise an educational approach to address the education issue or problem of concern to the SEA/LEA, with the aim of improving student outcomes Increase the agency’s capacity to carry out research, development, and implementation Contribute to our understanding of how approaches can be adopted to address local conditions and wide implementation

Continuous Improvement: Expected Products of the Grant
Description of the partnership as it developed during the grant Description of the approach in use by the end of the project Description of the process of continuous improvement used to adapt/revise the approach and the measures used in that process Results from an ongoing comparison of student outcomes in sites (e.g., schools/classrooms) where the approach is being adapted and revised, compared to sites that are not trying to implement the approach

Continuous Improvement: Expected Products of the Grant
Recommendations for how the partnership could be maintained over the longer term Specific and general lessons from the revisions to the approach and changes made in the education system that improved the approach and its implementation Lessons learned from the joint development work performed by the partnership that could benefit other partnerships

Education Issue and Approach
Applicants may propose to address any education issue or problem of priority to the LEA/SEA An approach is defined as a policy, program, intervention, practice or combination thereof that addresses a problem/issue of high importance to an education agency, and that has a strong theoretical and/or empirical rationale for improving student education outcomes.

The Project Narrative Significance Partnership Research Plan Personnel
Resources

Significance In the Significance section, clearly describe…
The education issue/problem The approach to be adapted/revised The education system Current practice in the education system

Significance Describe the education issue to be addressed
Its links to student education outcomes Its importance to the education agency’s decision making Its importance to other education agencies, policymakers, and education research

Significance Describe the proposed approach to be implemented, adapted, and revised in order to address the education issue Describe the theory of change for the approach Provide any empirical evidence that the approach can be successfully implemented Provide any empirical evidence that the approach can improve student outcomes

Significance Describe the education system
Describe the education system(s) where implementation will occur E.g., classroom, school, district, multiple districts, state Discuss why the approach will need adaptation and revision for successful implementation in this system Discuss how the system(s) may need to change to support successful implementation

Significance Describe current practice in the education agency
Describe how the education agency is currently addressing the education issue Discuss why current practice is not satisfactory Describe the current status of approach within the education agency

Resources

Partnership In the Partnership section, clearly describe…
Partnership development Tracking the partnership’s success

Partnership Description
Describe the partners The research institution and the education agency Any other members of the partnership The partnership’s previous work (1-year minimum) and resulting products Partners’ common interests and complementary abilities How all members contribute to and benefit from the partnership How the partners decided to propose a Continuous Improvement project Management structure and procedures to keep the project on track and quality control

Partnership Development
Planned activities and processes to further develop the partnership How will these activities and processes contribute to the research, agency capacity building, and future collaborations? Partnership decision-making process How will you determine next steps in research, dissemination, capacity building, and future research? Building the education agency’s capacity to carry out research, development, and implementation

Tracking the Partnership
Monitoring the success of the partnership During the project: Maintaining the partnership, completing the adaptation and revision of the approach, completing the ongoing comparison After the project: Opportunities for the partnership to continue and for the agency to be more able to carry out research, development, and implementation IES encourages projects to propose additional indicators of partnership success

Resources

Research Plan In the Research Plan, clearly describe…
A measurement strategy and plan for data collection The continuous improvement process An ongoing comparison study of student outcomes

Measurement Strategy Describe how you will collect data and measure for: How well the approach is functioning including its: Usability: Can intended user physically implement the approach as well as understand it and be willing to use it? Feasibility: Is the approach usable within the constraints of the education system? Progress toward the desired outcomes (as set out in the theory of change) Short-term Intermediate Final What attributes of the approach and the education system need revision Describe measure construction, including any new measures the project will need, AND how the measures will inform the improvement process

Continuous Improvement Process
Describe the Improvement Process Starting Approach: how the approach will be obtained and initially implemented Analysis Process: how collected data will be studied and interpreted to determine adaptations and revisions Implementation Process: how the iterative revisions of the approach will be implemented Describe the Monitoring of the Improvement Process Infrastructure and processes to keep work on track Identification of needed changes in the education system

Ongoing Comparison Study
Detail a plan for an ongoing comparison of student outcome between sites taking part in adaptation and revision of the approach and those not involved Comparability of comparison sites Timing of comparisons From start of project Not need to be every improvement cycle but should take place every semester or year) Student outcomes to be compared (using easily available data) Analysis plan Comparison site practice (based on non-intensive study) Not expected to have the rigor of a pilot study or an efficacy study (as described in A or A)

Specifics about the Topics
Continuous Improvement Research in Education Evaluation of State & Local Education Programs & Policies

State & Local Evaluation: Purpose
Promote joint evaluation research by research institutions and SEAs/LEAs On an education program/policy of key importance to SEAs/LEAs That will directly contribute to SEA/LEA program and policy decisions Provide opportunities to develop the partnership through the evaluation Foster longer-term research partnerships Provide and support the use of rigorous research-based evidence in decision making Continue practitioner input into research agenda

What should the partnerships do during the grant?
Broadly, the partnerships should… Identify an education program or policy Implemented by an SEA/LEA Of high priority to that agency Intended to improve student education outcomes Carry out an evaluation of that program/policy

Expected Products of the Grant
Causal evidence of the impact of a clearly specified program/policy implemented by an SEA/LEA Overall impacts Impacts under a variety of conditions Conclusions on and revisions to the theory of change that guides the program/policy Contributions to our theoretical understanding of education processes and procedures

Expected Products of the Grant
If a beneficial impact is found… The organizational supports, tools, and procedures needed for sufficient implementation of the core components of the program/policy under routine practice should be identified If a beneficial impact is not found… A determination should be made whether and what type of further research would be useful to revise the program/policy and/or its implementation The financial costs of the program/policy

Resources

Significance In the Significance section, clearly describe…
The education program or policy to be evaluated Components Processes and materials to support implementation Evidence it is ready to be or already implemented How it differs from existing practice

Significance Its implementation By an SEA or LEA
Target population and sites End users of the program or policy and how they are to carry it out

Significance The theory of change
How the program or policy is to effect changes that ultimately lead to beneficial impacts to student outcomes Intermediate outcomes in this process Rationale for testing its impact on student education outcomes In widespread use but not well-evaluated An alternative to common practice that has a theoretical (perhaps empirical as well) justification Improvement on previous research

Resources

Describe the Partnership
The research institution and the education agency Any other members of the partnership Common interest in and benefits from this evaluation The process through which they decided to propose a State/Local project Past or ongoing collaborations and results from them Management structure and procedures to keep the project on track and quality control

Partnership Development Plan
Partnership’s decision-making process Improving the education agency’s capacity to participate in and use education research Identify the agency’s interests in capacity building The agency’s specific understanding of the proposed research design and the validity and generalization of the evidence provided from it The agency’s general capacity to understand and use research

Resources

Research Plan State research questions and hypotheses Describe sample
Define population and how your sample and sampling procedures will allow inferences to the population Exclusion and inclusion rules and their justification Strategies used to increase participation and reduce attrition Describe the setting Discuss implications for the generalizability of your study

Research Plan: Design Rationale for the Selected Research Design
Causal inference Threats to internal validity Degree of equivalence at baseline Bias from overall and differential attrition Meet WWC evidence standards (with or without reservations)

Research Plan: Design Preferred Design: Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) Note unit of randomization and justify choice Describe process for random assignment and maintaining its integrity Potential Issues Entire population: Treatment fidelity Volunteers: Comparison group status Lotteries: Attrition of non-accepted parties Staggered roll out: Little time for true comparison

Research Plan: Design Alternatives to the RCT Design
If RCT is not possible, justify why Alternatives to minimize or model selection bias Regression discontinuity designs Well-designed quasi-experimental designs Comparative interrupted time series

Research Plan: Statistical Power
Detailed description of power analysis and justification for method used to calculate power Including assumptions Power for main analyses and important subgroup analyses Reviewers should be able to check power calculations

Research Plan: Outcome Measures
Student education outcome measures relevant to states, districts, and schools Often found in administrative data Can include researcher-developed measures but not as the primary outcome measures Provide reliability, validity, and appropriateness Intermediate outcomes Link to theory of change

Research Plan: Moderators & Mediators
May explain differential impacts of intervention Identified in theory of change Describe how they will be measured in both treatment and control Discuss if doing exploratory or confirmatory analysis of each one examined Describe analysis plan

Research Plan: Fidelity of Implementation
Describe how measures capture core components of the program or policy Note their psychometric properties Describe design and implementation of fidelity study Measure fidelity in both treatment and comparison groups

Research Plan: Fidelity of Implementation
Discuss how data will be analyzed and will contribute to overall evaluation For secondary data analyses using historical data Requirement can be waived with documentation of lack of fidelity data

Research Plan: Comparison Group Practice
Describe who makes up comparison group Detail how you will measure whether they are similar/different from treatment group Detail how you will measure what they receive in place of the treatment Determine if control group receives components similar to intervention and how much

Research Plan: Analysis
Detailed description of data analysis procedures Make clear how analyses directly answer your research questions and can be done based on the design Quantitative: Statistical procedures, model, and software Qualitative: Methods to index, summarize, and interpret data Will quantitative and qualitative data be used for separate or combined analyses? Address clustering of students in classrooms in schools Address missing data Include plans for analyses of subgroups, mediators, moderators, and fidelity of implementation

Research Plan: Cost Analysis
Document financial costs of program implementation Detailed enough for another state or district to use Can include a cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit analysis but not required

Research Plan: Dissemination Plan
Identify all your audiences and how you will disseminate the results to them The education agency partner (ongoing process) Other education agencies, policymakers, and practitioners The research community The public

Resources

Personnel Identify all key personnel on the project team
Roles and responsibilities on the project Qualifications (i.e., expertise and experience) to carry out the roles and responsibilities % FTE on the project (one key person should have enough time to maintain progress of project) Past success at working in similar partnerships PI qualifications for managing a grant of this size and type For State/Local Evaluation Ensure objectivity of evaluation

Resources Describe the institutional resources of all the institutions involved in the partnership and how these resources will contribute to building the partnership and to the research Institutional capacity to manage the grant Resources available at the partner institutions that will be used Plans to acquire any major resources not yet in hand Joint Letter of Agreement by partners (Appendix D)

Resources If individual schools are taking part…
Schools should document their involvement E.g., Letters of Agreement in Appendix D If secondary data is being analyzed… The organization holding those data should document their willingness to provide the data If school staff are taking part… E.g., through surveys, observations, logs Discuss how their cooperation will be obtained (e.g., use of incentives) and their current knowledge of the project

Other Important Sections of the Application
Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Budget & Budget Narrative

Appendix A Page Limit: 3 If you are resubmitting an application, use up to 3 pages to discuss how you responded to reviewer comments

Appendix B Page Limit: 15 Figures, charts, or tables that supplement the project narrative Timelines for the project Examples of measures to be used E.g., tests, surveys, observation, and interview protocols Do NOT include narrative text

Appendix C Page Limit: 10 If you are proposing to study an approach, intervention or assessment, you may include examples of materials used in the intervention or assessment, such as… curriculum material computer screen shots assessment items other materials

Appendix D No Page Limit
Letters of Agreement from all the research partners Joint Letter from key partners Separate Letters from other organizations involved Letters should clearly state the organization’s expected role in the partnership and their commitments to the project Similar letters from any consultants and schools taking part Letters from holders of data should make clear that the data described in the application will be provided for the proposed use by the project

Budget & Budget Narrative
Continuous Improvement The maximum award is $2.5 million The maximum project length is 4 years State/Local Evaluation The maximum award is $5 million The maximum project length is 5 years Award size depends on the project scope Include a detailed budget form (SF 424) AND a narrative that links the activities, personnel, etc. from the Project Narrative to the funds requested

Letter of Intent Due Date Application Package Posted
Important Dates & Deadlines Application Deadline Letter of Intent Due Date Application Package Posted Start Dates August 7, 2014 4:30:00 PM DC Time June 5, 2014 July 1, 2015 to Sept 1, 2015

Information Sources Request for Applications Letter of Intent
Letter of Intent Application Package Click on “Find Grant Opportunities”, then “Basic Search”, then type in “84.305” under CFDA Number, then select “84.305H” Program Officers

Peer Review (Standards & Review Office)
4/22/2017 Compliance screening for format requirements Responsiveness screening for program requirements Assignment to review panel 2 to 3 reviewers (substantive and methodological) The most competitive proposals are reviewed by full panel Many panelists will be generalists to your topic There will be an expert in every procedure you use Panel provides an overall score plus specific scores on Significance, Partnership, Research Plan, Personnel, and Resources

Notification All applicants will receive notification that the following information is available via the Applicant Notification System (ANS): Status of award Reviewer summary statement If you are not granted an award the first time, consider resubmitting and talking with your Program Officer

For More Information http://ies.ed.gov/funding James.Benson@ed.gov

National Center for Education Research

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "National Center for Education Research"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

National Center for Education Research

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "National Center for Education Research"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback