The purpose of this study is to examine the effects of feedback on treatment integrity for implementing behavior support plans.
Codding, R. S., Feinberg, A. B., Dunn, E. K., & Pace, G. M. (2005). Effects of immediate performance feedback on implementation of behavior support plans. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 38(2), 205-219.
This paper examines data on 39 charter schools and correlates these data with school effectiveness. We find that class size, per-pupil expenditure, teacher certification, and teacher training—are not correlated with school effectiveness. In stark contrast, we show that frequent teacher feedback, the use of data to guide instruction, high-dosage tutoring, increased instructional time, and high expectations—explains approximately 45 percent of the variation in school effectiveness.
Dobbie, W., & Fryer Jr, R. G. (2013). Getting beneath the veil of effective schools: Evidence from New York City. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(4), 28-60.
This influential book is the result of 15 years research that includes over 800 meta-analyses on the influences on achievement in school-aged students. This is a great resource for any stakeholder interested in conducting a serious search of evidence behind common models and practices used in schools.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning. A synthesis of over, 800.
This book takes over fifteen years of rigorous research into education practices and provides teachers in training and in-service teachers with concise summaries of the most effective interventions and offers practical guidance to successful implementation in classrooms.
Hattie, J. (2012). Visible learning for teachers: Maximizing impact on learning. Routledge.
This meta-analysis of feedback interventions improved performance on average (d ?=?.41).
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological bulletin, 119(2), 254.
Since the beginning of the century, feedback interventions (FIs) produced negative--but largely ignored--effects on performance. A meta-analysis (607 effect sizes; 23,663 observations) suggests that FIs improved performance on average ( d = .41) but that over one-third of the FIs decreased performance
Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119(2), 254-284.
This is a study of classroom management on student engagement and achievement.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Ascd
This is a literature review of the effect of performance feedback on teacher’s use of practices.
Scheeler, M. C., Ruhl, K. L., & McAfee, J. K. (2004). Providing performance feedback to teachers: A review. Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 27(4), 396-407.
The meta-analysis looks at the effect of enhanced instruction on motor skill acquisition of 4-5 yr old children and 4th-21th graders in Israel.
Tenenbaum, G., & Goldring, E. (1989). A meta-analysis of the effect of enhanced instruction: Cues, participation, reinforcement and feedback and correctives on motor skill learning. Journal of Research & Development in Education. 22(3) 53-64.
This literature review examines the impact of various instructional methods
Walberg H. J. (1999). Productive teaching. In H. C. Waxman & H. J. Walberg (Eds.) New directions for teaching, practice, and research (pp. 75-104). Berkeley, CA: McCutchen Publishing.