Title Registration Form Campbell Collaboration Education ... - SFI

Title Registration Form
Campbell Collaboration Education Coordinating Group
Titles must be registered BEFORE work commences on reviews.
Please return a separate form for each review.
1) Name and affiliation of primary reviewer:
Harris Cooper, Duke University.................................................................................
2) Name(s) and affiliation(s) of co-reviewer(s):
Ashley Batts Allen, Duke University; ........................................................................
Erika A. Patall, Duke University ................................................................................
3) Provisional title [preferred format of title: (intervention) for (education condition) in
(population)]:
Does extending the school year improve academic achievement? ..........................
4) Objective:
The proposed review will examine the effect of extended school year on academic
achievement for kindergarten through high school age students.
5) Rationale for review / background:
School reforms meant to improve the academic performance of American students come
in many varieties. Recently, attention has turned to the fundamental issue of time.
Reformers point out that students spend less time in school in this country than in many
countries that outperform the United States on international comparisons. Further, they
claim that much of the achievement gap between rich and poor students in the U.S. can
be explained by differential resources available to children and adolescents when school
is not in session. These reformers are proposing -- and implementing – a number of
programs to extend time spent on academic endeavors as approaches to increasing the
achievement of all students and closing the achievement gap between ethnic and
economic groups. Skeptics of these reforms question their effectiveness and suggest
that money and effort would better be spent on improved curricula, higher teacher
quality, and revamped school organization.
Five interventions have been offered to add to the time students spend on academic
pursuits, to prevent summer learning loss, and to ameliorate the differential impact of
time-out-of-school on children from different economic and ethnic backgrounds. Three
reforms relate to the school year: (a) providing summer school opportunities; (b)
modifying the school calendar by replacing the single long summer break with multiple
shorter breaks, and; (c) lengthening the school year by adding days to it. Two other
reforms relate to the school day: (d) offering out-of-school-time programs with academic
components and; (e) extending the school day by adding time to it.
Two of the five proposed remedies involving time-in-school effects – extending the
school year and school day -- are yet to be the subject of critical and rigorous syntheses.
The proposed project will address the issue of extending the school year and be guided
by the following question:
1. What does the cumulative research suggest regarding the impact of extending
the school year on academic achievement and achievement-related outcomes?
The answer to this question will be interpreted in light of previous research to provide
policy makers with research summaries that focus on related policy options.

6) Method:
a) Types of studies included (e.g. randomized, quasi-experimental):
Randomized experiments, quasi-experiments, pre-test post-test comparisons,
naturalistic, cross-sectional measurement designs, correlational designs, and
qualitative designs will be included in the synthesis. Each design category will be
synthesized separately so that the results of each design can be compared (see
Cooper, Robinson & Patall, 2006 for an example). Randomized experiments and
quasi-experimental designs best allow for causal conclusions to be drawn. However,
it is expected that few if any randomized experiments will be found and most
interventions will have implemented a quasi-experimental or pre-post design. While
non-experimental designs do not allow for causal conclusions to be drawn, these
designs often utilize a broader range of samples, settings, and outcomes. Therefore,
examining the results of non-experimental designs allow the generalizability of the
results of experiments to be assessed and provide greater opportunity for moderators
to be identified.....................................................................................................
b) Types of participants included:
The interventions must be delivered to school-aged children (K-12) in school settings.
Interventions conducted in the context of special education classrooms or alternative
schools are eligible for inclusion. Interventions may have been conducted in any
region or country. We will exclude studies conducted on preschool-aged children or
on postsecondary students. Interventions may have been conducted at the
classroom, school, state, region, or national level.
c) Types of interventions (and comparisons) included:
The study could have manipulated time in school by extending the number of days
spent in school. Alternatively, the study could have measured days in school per year
in a continuous fashion and related it to achievement or an achievement related
outcome.
d) Types of outcomes included:
The study must report intervention effects for academic achievement or an
achievement related outcome. Academic achievement may include classroom
grades, standardized achievement tests, as well as teacher, parent, or student
reports. Achievement related outcomes include school attendance, attitudes toward
school and learning, motivation, behavioral conduct, among other outcomes. The
report has to contain enough information to permit the calculation of an estimate of
the homework-achievement relationship. ..........................................................
e) Proposed codings for quality appraising included studies (e.g. concealment of
random allocation; blinded assessment of outcome; attrition; ITT analysis
etc.): ...................................................................................................................
We will use many of the design characteristics identified in the Study Design and
Implementation Assessment Device (DIAD) both to categorize studies and as
moderators in the meta-analyses. The Study DIAD was developed in consultation
with a wide range of methodological and statistical experts in the social and medical
sciences. The instrument focuses on the operational details of studies and results in
a profile of scores instead of a single score to represent study quality. Pilot testing of
the instrument has suggested that satisfactory between-judge agreement can be
obtained using well-trained raters. At the most abstract level, the Study DIAD uses
questions to address the construct validity, internal validity, external validity, and
statistical conclusion validity of a study (see Valentine & Cooper, 2007).
f) Methods for data extraction of included studies:
A coding form will be developed for this project. Numerous different characteristics of
each study will be included in the database. These characteristics encompassed six
broad distinctions among studies: (a) the research report (e.g. author, year of
2

publication, type of report), (b) the research design (e.g. type of design, number of
students, classrooms included in the lengthened year and traditional year conditions),
(c) the intervention characteristics/length of year variable (e.g. length of the school
year), (d) the sample of students (e.g. grade level, ethnicity), (e) the outcome (e.g.
measure of achievement, timing of the outcome measurement relative to
implementation of the intervention), and (f) the estimate of the relationship between
year length and achievement (e.g. d-index, β coefficient, or r-index).
g) Proposed quality assurance procedures (e.g. independent double data
extraction etc.):
Two coders will independently extract information from all reports selected for
inclusion. Discrepancies will be noted and discussed by the coders and if agreement
is not reached a third coder will be consulted.
7) Roles and responsibilities (please give brief description of content and
methodological expertise within the review team):
a) Content: Harris Cooper’s content expertise relates to the application of social
psychology to educational policy issues. In particular, he studies how the activities
that children and adolescents engage in when not in school influence their academic
achievement. He also studies the impact of school calendars and calendar variations
on students and their families. ............................................................................
b) Systematic review methods: Harris Cooper and his research team also have
interest the application and development of research synthesis methods. Harris
Cooper is author of the book, Synthesizing Research: A Guide for Literature Reviews
(1998), which is in its third edition. He is also the co-editor of the Handbook of
Research Synthesis (1994), a volume that is currently being prepared for a second
edition. Erika Patall has substantial expertise in research synthesis and has been
involved and research syntheses on the effectiveness of homework (Cooper,
Robinson & Patall, 2006) and the effectiveness of afterschool. She has also led two
research syntheses; one on parent involvement in homework and another on the
effect of provision of choice on motivation. Ashley Allen has completed coursework in
research synthesis and has substantial exposure to every stage of a meta-analysis.
c) Information retrieval: The research team is experienced with every stage of
research synthesis, including information retrieval. Both of Harris Cooper’s books
cover methods associated with information retrieval. The research team has
completed numerous research syntheses that include the most up-to-date
information retrieval techniques. .........................................................................
d) Statistical analysis (meta-analysis): The research team is experienced with every
stage of research synthesis, including meta-analysis. Both of Harris Cooper’s books
cover meta-analytic techniques. Erika Patall is first author of a book chapter on metaanalysis
to appear in The Handbook of Social Research. The research team has
completed numerous research syntheses that include the most up-to-date metaanalysis
techniques.............................................................................................
7) Support required (please give details of any support/guidance required): none
Contact details of primary reviewer:
Name: Harris Cooper ...........................................................
Title: Director of Program in Education and Professor of Psychology and
Neuroscience .............................................................
Affiliation: Duke University..................................................
Address 1: 213 West Duke Building....................................
Address 2: Box 90739.........................................................
City: Durham........................................................................
State, Province or County: North Carolina ........................
3

Postal Code: 27708 ............................................................
Country: USA ......................................................................
Phone: 919-660-3167..........................................................
Fax: 919-660-3080...............................................................
Email: cooperh@duke.edu ..................................................
8) Approximate date for submission of DRAFT PROTOCOL (please note this should
be no longer than 6 months after title approval): March 1, 2008 ........................
9) Approximate date for submission of DRAFT REVIEW (please note this should be
no longer than one year after title approval): July 1, 2009 (Please note this synthesis
is being conducted in conjunction with a related synthesis on extending the school day).
..................................................................................................................................
10) Are you/ your co-authors members of the Campbell Collaboration ........... Yes
References
Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing research: A guide for literature reviews (3 rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
Cooper, H., & Hedges, L. B. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of research synthesis. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
Cooper, H., Robinson, J.C., & Patall, E.A. (2006). Does homework improve academic
achievement?: A synthesis of research, 1987-2003. Review of Educational
Research, 76, 1-62.
Valentine, J.C. & Cooper, H. (2007) A systematic and transparent approach for assessing
the methodological quality of intervention effectiveness research: The Study Design
and Implementation Assessment Device (Study DIAD).
When completed, please email to:
Julia Lavenberg
Managing Editor
Campbell Collaboration Education Coordinating Group
j.lavenberg@gmail.com
4