The authors evaluated the effects of P-SELL, a science curricular and professional development intervention for fifth-grade students with a focus on English language learners (ELLs). Using a randomized controlled trial design with 33 treatment and 33 control schools across three school districts in one state, we found significant and meaningfully sized intervention effects on a researcher-developed science assessment and the state science assessment. Subgroup analyses revealed that the P-SELL intervention had a positive and significant effect for each language proficiency group (ELLs, recently reclassified ELLs, former ELLs, and non-ELLs) on the researcher-developed assessment. The intervention also had a positive effect for former ELLs and non-ELLs on the state science assessment, but for ELLs and recently reclassified ELLs, the effect was not statistically significant.
AbediJ. (2010). Performance assessments for English language learners. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, Stanford Center for Opportunity Policy in Education.
2.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: APA.
3.
AugustD.Branum-MartinL.Cárdenas-HaganE.FrancisD.PowellJ.MooreS.HaynesE. (2014). Helping ELLs meet the Common Core State Standards for literacy in science: The impact of an instructional intervention focused on academic language. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 7(1), 54–82.
4.
AugustD.Branum-MartinL.HaganE.FrancisD. (2009). The impact of an instructional intervention on the science and language learning of middle grade English language learners. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 345–376.
5.
BanilowerE. R.SmithP. S.WeissI. R.MalzahnK. A.CampbellK. M.WeisA. M. (2013). Report of the 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
6.
BenjaminiY.HochbergY. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B Methodological, 57(1), 289–300.
7.
BuxtonC. A.LeeO. (2014). English language learners in science education. In LedermanN. G.AbellS. K. (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (2nd ed., pp. 204–222). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
DavisE. A.PalincsarA. S.AriasA.BismackA.MarulisL.IwashynaS. (2014). Designing educative curriculum materials: A theoretically and empirically driven process. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 24–52.
10.
DesimoneL. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
11.
DrakeC.LandT. J.TyminskiA. M. (2014). Using educative curriculum materials to support the development of prospective teachers’ knowledge. Educational Researcher, 43(3), 154–162.
12.
EchevarriaJ.Richards-TutorC.CangesR.FrancisD. (2011). Using the SIOP model to promote the acquisition of language and science concepts with English learners. Bilingual Research Journal, 34(3), 334–351.
13.
FathmanA. K.CrowtherD. T. (Eds.). (2006). Science for English language learners: K–12 classroom strategies. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
14.
GaretM. S.PorterA. C.DesimoneL.BirmanB. F.YoonK. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? From a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
15.
GoldschmidtP.MartinezJ. F.NiemiD.BakerE. L. (2007). Relationship among measures as empirical evidence of validity: Incorporating multiple indicators of achievement and school context. Educational Assessment, 12(3&4), 239–266.
16.
HillC. J.BloomH. S.BlackA. R.LipseyM. W. (2008). Empirical benchmarks for interpreting effect sizes in research. Child Development Perspectives, 2(3), 172–177.
17.
JanzenJ. (2008). Teaching English language learners in the content areas. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 1010–1038.
Lara-AlecioR.TongF.IrbyB. J.GuerreroC.HuertaM.FanY. (2012). The effect of an instructional intervention on middle school English learners’ science and English reading achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(8), 987–1011.
20.
LeeO. (2005). Science education and English language learners: Synthesis and research agenda. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 491–530.
21.
LeeO.DeaktorR.EndersC.LambertJ. (2008). Impact of a multiyear professional development intervention on science achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 726–747.
22.
LeeO.FraddS.H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 27(4), 12–21.
23.
LeeO.KrajcikJ. (Eds.). (2012). Large-scale interventions in science education for diverse student groups in varied educational settings [Special issue]. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(3).
24.
LeeO.LlosaL. (2011–2015). Promoting science among English language learners (P-SELL) scale-up (Discovery Research K-12; NSF Grant DRL 1209309). New York, NY: New York University.
25.
LeeO.LuykxA. (2005). Dilemmas in scaling up innovations in science instruction with nonmainstream elementary students. American Educational Research Journal, 42(3), 411–438.
26.
LeeO.QuinnH.ValdésG. (2013). Science and language for English language learners in relation to Next Generation Science Standards and with implications for Common Core State Standards for English language arts and mathematics. Educational Researcher, 42(4), 223–233.
27.
LesauxN. K.KiefferM. J.KelleyJ. G.HarrisJ. R. (2014). Effects of vocabulary instruction for linguistically diverse adolescents: Evidence from a randomized field trial. American Educational Research Journal, 51(6), 1159–1194.
28.
LipseyM. W.PuzioK.YunC.HebertM. A.Steinka-FryK.ColeM. W.. . . BusickM. D. (2012). Translating the statistical representation of the effects of education interventions into more readily interpretable forms (NCSER 2013-3000). Washington, DC: National Center for Special Education Research, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
29.
LittleR. J. A.RubinD. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: John Wiley.
30.
Maerten-RiveraJ.AhnS.LanierK.DiazJ.LeeO. (in press). Effect of a multiyear intervention on science achievement of all students including English language learners. The Elementary School Journal.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2006). Data local education agency locale code file: School year 2005–06. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.
33.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The nation’s report card: Science 2011 (NCES 2012-465). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
34.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). The condition of education 2014 (NCES 2014-083). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
35.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
36.
National Research Council. (2014). Developing assessments for the Next Generation Science Standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
37.
PenuelW. R.FishmanB. J.YamaguchiR.GallagherL. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958.
38.
RaudenbushS. W.BrykA. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
RoseberyA. S.WarrenB. (Eds.). (2008). Teaching science to English language learners: Building on students’ strengths. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
40.
RoseberyA. S.WarrenB.ConantF. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(1), 61–94.
41.
Ruiz-PrimoM. A.ShavelsonR. J.HamiltonL.KleinS. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(5), 369–393.
42.
SantauA. O.Maerten-RiveraJ. L.HugginsA. C. (2011). Science achievement of English language learners in urban elementary schools: Fourth-grade student achievement results from a professional development intervention. Science Education, 95(5), 771–793.
43.
SaundersW. M.MarcellettiD. J. (2013). The gap that can’t go away: The catch-22 of reclassification in monitoring the progress of English language learners. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 35(2), 139–156.
44.
SchneiderB.McDonaldS. K. (Eds.). (2007a). Scale-up in education: Ideas in principle (Vol. 1). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
45.
SchneiderB.McDonaldS. K. (2007b). Scale-up in education: Issues in practice (Vol. 2). New York, NY: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
46.
SilversteinS. C.DubnerJ.MillerJ.GliedS.LoikeJ. D. (2009). Teachers’ participation in research programs improves their students’ achievement in science. Science, 326(5951), 440–442.
47.
SlavinR.E.LakeC.HanleyP.ThurstonA. (2014). Experimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(7), 870–901.
48.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Statistical abstract of the United States, 2012. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
49.
ZwiepS.StraitsW. (2013). Inquiry science: The gateway to English language proficiency. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(8), 1315–1331.
50.
ZwiepS.StraitsW. J.StoneK. R.BeltranD. D.FurtadoL. (2011). The integration of English language development and science instruction in elementary classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(8), 769–785.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
