首页> 外文OA文献 >Identifying Effective Education Interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis of rigorous impact evaluations
【2h】

Identifying Effective Education Interventions in Sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-analysis of rigorous impact evaluations

机译:在撒哈拉以南非洲地区识别有效的教育干预措施:对严格影响评估的荟萃分析

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

The aim of this dissertation is to identify effective educational interventions in Sub-Saharan African with an impact on student learning. This is the first meta-analysis in the field of education conducted for Sub-Saharan Africa. This paper takes an in-depth look at twelve different types of education interventions or programs and attempts to not only present analytics on their relative effectiveness, but to also explore why certain interventions seem to be more effective than others. After a systematic literature review, I combine 56 articles (containing 66 separate experiments, 83 treatment arms, and 420 effect size estimates), and I use random-effects meta-analytic techniques to both a.) evaluate the relative impact of different types of interventions and b.) explain variation in effect sizes within and across intervention types. When I examine the relative pooled effect sizes of all twelve intervention areas, I find that interventions in pedagogical methods (changes in instructional techniques) have a higher pooled effect size on achievement outcomes than all other eleven intervention types in the full sample (e.g., school management programs, school supplies interventions, or interventions that change the class size or composition). The pooled effect size associated with these pedagogical interventions is 0.918 standard deviations in the full sample (SE = 0.314, df = 15.1, p = 0.01), 0.566 in the sample excluding outliers and including only randomized controlled trials (SE = 0.194, df = 11, p = 0.01), and 0.228 in a sample that includes only the highest quality studies (SE = 0.078, df = 5.2, p = 0.03). These findings are robust to a number of moderating factors. Using meta-regression, I find that on average, interventions in pedagogical methods have an effect size over 0.30 standard deviations (significant at the 5% level) greater than all other intervention areas combined, even after controlling for multiple study-level and intervention-level variables. Beyond this average effect, I show that studies that employ adaptive instruction and teacher coaching techniques are particularly effective. Further, while studies that provide health treatments or school meals have on average the lowest pooled effect size, I show that if these studies are analyzed using cognitive assessments (tests of memory and attention), health treatments actually produce a relatively large pooled effect size of 0.176 standard deviations (SE = 0.028, df = 2.18); this is particularly true of studies that either prevent or treat malaria. In addition, this meta-analysis examines the state of current education impact evaluation research in Sub-Saharan Africa and highlights both research gaps as well as differences in study design, methodology, and reporting of metrics by academic field. I find that the bulk of the research in this area comes from the field of economics (62%), followed by the fields of education (23%) and public health (15%). Further, the majority of this research has been conducted in a set of six countries: Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda, Burkina Faso, and Madagascar, while rigorous evaluations of education programs have never taken place in others. Moreover, topics currently under rigorous study are not necessarily representative of the major issues facing many Sub-Saharan African school systems today. For example, there are no impact evaluations of multi-grade or multi-shift teaching and only one evaluation of a bilingual education program. This meta-analysis thus recommends a shift in the impact evaluation research agenda to include both a broader geographic and topical focus, as well as an increased emphasis on improvements in pedagogical methods, without which other interventions may not reach their maximum potential impact.
机译:本文的目的是在撒哈拉以南非洲地区找出有效的教育干预措施,以期对学生的学习产生影响。这是针对撒哈拉以南非洲开展的教育领域的首次荟萃分析。本文深入研究了十二种不同类型的教育干预措施或计划,并试图不仅分析其相对效果,而且还探讨了为什么某些干预措施似乎比其他干预措施更有效的原因。经过系统的文献综述后,我合并了56篇文章(包含66个单独的实验,83个治疗组和420个效应量估计值),并且我使用随机效应荟萃分析技术对a。)进行评估,评估了不同类型的干预措施和b。)解释了干预类型内和干预类型之间效应大小的变化。当我检查所有十二个干预领域的相对汇总效应量时,我发现与完整样本(例如学校)中的所有其他十一种干预类型相比,教学方法的干预(教学技术的变化)对成果的汇总效应量更大管理计划,学校用品干预措施或更改班级规模或组成的干预措施)。与这些教学干预措施相关的合并效应量为:整个样本中的标准差为0.918(SE = 0.314,df = 15.1,p = 0.01),样本中的0.566标准差(不包括异常值,仅包括随机对照试验(SE = 0.194,df = 11,p = 0.01)和0.228(仅包含最高质量研究的样本)(SE = 0.078,df = 5.2,p = 0.03)。这些发现对许多缓和因素具有鲁棒性。使用meta回归,我发现,即使在控制了多个研究级别和干预措施之后,平均而言,教学法干预措施的效果大小比所有其他干预措施领域相加,其影响大小超过0.30个标准差(在5%的水平上显着)。级别变量。除了这种平均效果之外,我还证明了采用自适应教学和教师辅导技术的研究特别有效。此外,虽然提供健康治疗或学校进餐的研究平均具有最低的合并效应量,但我表明,如果使用认知评估(记忆力和注意力测试)对这些研究进行分析,则健康治疗实际上会产生相对较大的合并效应量。 0.176标准偏差(SE = 0.028,df = 2.18);对于预防或治疗疟疾的研究尤其如此。此外,这项荟萃分析考察了撒哈拉以南非洲地区当前教育影响评估研究的现状,并突出了研究差距以及研究设计,方法和按学科领域报告指标方面的差异。我发现该领域的大部分研究来自经济学领域(62%),其次是教育领域(23%)和公共卫生领域(15%)。此外,大部分研究是在六个国家中进行的:肯尼亚,尼日利亚,南非,乌干达,布基纳法索和马达加斯加,而其他国家从未对教育计划进行过严格的评估。此外,目前正在严格研究的主题并不一定代表当今许多撒哈拉以南非洲学校系统面临的主要问题。例如,没有对多年级或多班制教学的影响评估,而只有一项双语教育计划的评估。因此,本荟萃分析建议改变影响评估研究议程,以涵盖更广泛的地理和主题重点,并更加强调教学方法的改进,否则,其他干预措施可能无法发挥最大的潜在影响。

著录项

  • 作者

    Conn Katharine M.;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2014
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号