Mar 4
This is such a smart comment from Steve Dykstra in another platform that I'm reposting it here.
Germane to the conversations about comparing knowledge-building to other types of comprehension instruction:
“This is as good a time as any to repeat my occassional warning about the misuse of effect size. Effect sizes are great for compiling a lot of studies done in different ways but sharing a common focus. For instance, you have 30 studies of the impact of phonics instruction on reading, using various designs, statistics, and subjects. Effect sizes let you say something about that literature as a whole. Without efect sizes you would struggle to combine the results due to the many differences. Effect sizes are much less useful for some things they are commonly used for. The most common i suing them to draw conclusionsa bout wehther A or B worked better to acheive C. You have two approaches to teaching C, methodds A and B, and you gather all the better studies putting those that used A i one pile and B in another. You calculate effect sizes and use the results to say which worked better, either A or B. Problem is, there was no study comparing A and B in the same experiement. We're using effect sizes to sort of conjurs a study that never happened, a direct comparison of A and B in one stuidy. This is tempting to do, but while such a comparison can be interesting and help us demonstrate the need for a direct comparison of A and B in the same study, there are huge rpoblems with drawing such conclusions from effect sizes. Without going into too much statistical detail, a comparison of this type could seem to show that A is better than B even if every subject who got B gained more than any suvbject who got A. Let me say this more clearly: imagine two weight loss drugs, A and B. It is possible for A to have the larger effect size even though everyone who take B loses more weight than anyone who takes A. While distortions that dramatic never happen tot hat degrees, smaller distortions that are harder to see happen all the time when we use effect sizes to make those kinds of judgments. Finally, and I have seen this promoted by respected "scholars", people compile lists of what interventions have the larger effect size for improving reading and advise teachers to go to the list and pick the one with the bigger number. A child is truggling to read. The teacher has a list of effect sizes for phonics, PA, fluency, vocabulary, and other intereventions. Some effect sizes are 2-3 X the size of others and teachers are advised to start with whatever has the biggest effect size. Effect size are statistical measures of how certain we are that there was an effect. It is a measure of confidence in the actual existence of the effect, and while the magnitude of the effect is one of the underlying forces that can lead to a larger effects size, it is not the only one.”
Mar 4
Recently, @NateJoseph19 published a meta-analysis on reading comprehension.
Almost immediately, it was misinterpreted.
@oliviajune82 unpacks numerous flaws that should command attention, especially in light of the reactions to the paper.
Nate is an educator. He has surely worked overtime on his writing and his new curricular materials. He deserves all-due-flowers for his work.
His role as a teacher has caused many to pull punches about the new meta-analysis. I get it, all too well. I cheered it myself.
But this paper is published in a journal, and any shortcomings warrant a response. I deeply appreciate Olivia's *incredibly detailed* response, and think you will, too.
To Nate's credit, he puts a spotlight on the diminishing returns of strategy instruction. We seldom see this obvious conclusion from the research base, outside @DTWillingham @natwexler's valiant efforts.
Also to Nate's credit, he spent years going down a rabbit hole to inform the field.
Olivia has, too. I hope you will read her writeup, because the broader research base compels attention.
@DavidDidau @vivramak @turing_hamster @C_Hendrick @tombennett71
2
5
21
2,851
Mauve⁷
18 Sep 2023
This machine monday is the @MethodsMT MV-1300GB featuring a 3 axis full boxway machining center. Contact us to learn more.
#EdgeProductionSupplies #TotalMachiningSolutions #Methodds #CNCmachines #machinemonday #machinetools #industrialsupplies #YEG #WesternCanada #OilandGas
1
2
137
13 Feb 2023
Even after #clinicaltrials, there is never 100% certainty about the safety and effectiveness of new medicines. The @ETH_en spin-off #Methodds of Adrian Martinez de la Torre and Stefan Weiler (@ETH_PharmEpi , IPW) offers tailored solutions. Learn more on:
ethz.ch/en/industry/industry…
5
12
3,844
22 Sep 2022
Not to mention the obvious phenomena that the liberals of today have come into contradiction with their republican roots/past, as they have as a class become more cosmopolitan and reliant upon illiberal groups and methodds
1
1
3
29 Jul 2022
There's a data-base for that, too, leaving aside stuff like "by being unable to communicate." Mapping Police Violence looks at all killings, across methodds. mappingpoliceviolence.org/?g….
They are at 49 Black people so far this year. The BLM narrative is dumb, provably untrue, crap.
2
8 Jun 2021
Just keep showing up. I have realized like on entries, we only have two methodds that can be well used. If their is an edge, just play the game as long as you manage your risk.
2
21 Sep 2016
Movie called MSG is a combination of Preaching teaching and life improving methodds.. Must Wtch. #BeatsOfLionHeart
1
19 Aug 2016
What's even MOAR interesting is in vid he runs for congress his own methodds were used against him! lol wow!
1
24 Apr 2016
It's not how many. It's reason and methodds used. Islam is murdering innocent people because they disagree
1