IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jedbes/v36y2011i4p441-471.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Typical RCTs of Education Interventions Have Sufficient Statistical Power for Linking Impacts on Teacher Practice and Student Achievement Outcomes?

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Z. Schochet

    (Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.)

Abstract

For RCTs of education interventions, it is often of interest to estimate associations between student and mediating teacher practice outcomes, to examine the extent to which the study’s conceptual model is supported by the data, and to identify specific mediators that are most associated with student learning. This article develops statistical power formulas for such exploratory analyses under clustered school-based RCTs using ordinary least squares (OLS) and instrumental variable (IV) estimators and uses these formulas to conduct a simulated power analysis. The power analysis finds that for currently available mediators, the OLS approach will yield precise estimates of associations between teacher practice measures and student test score gains only if the sample contains about 150 to 200 study schools. The IV approach, which can adjust for potential omitted variable and simultaneity biases, has very little statistical power for mediator analyses. For typical RCT evaluations, these results may have design implications for the scope of the data collection effort for obtaining costly teacher practice mediators.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Z. Schochet, 2011. "Do Typical RCTs of Education Interventions Have Sufficient Statistical Power for Linking Impacts on Teacher Practice and Student Achievement Outcomes?," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 36(4), pages 441-471, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:36:y:2011:i:4:p:441-471
    DOI: 10.3102/1076998610375840
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/1076998610375840
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3102/1076998610375840?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:36:y:2011:i:4:p:441-471. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.