Translating Standardized Effects of Education Programs Into More Interpretable Metrics

Published in: Educational Researcher (2019). doi: 10.3102/0013189X19848729

Posted on RAND.org on May 23, 2019

by Matthew D. Baird, John F. Pane

Read More

Access further information on this document at Sage Journals

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

Evaluators report effects of education initiatives as standardized effect sizes, a scale that has merits but obscures interpretation of the effects' practical importance. Consequently, educators and policymakers seek more readily interpretable translations of evaluation results. One popular metric is the number of years of learning necessary to induce the effect. We compare years of learning to three other translation options: benchmarking against other effect sizes, converting to percentile growth, and estimating the probability of scoring above a proficiency threshold. After enumerating the desirable properties of translations, we examine each option's strengths and weaknesses. We conclude that years of learning performs worst, and percentile gains performs best, making it our recommended choice for more interpretable translations of standardized effects.

Research conducted by

This report is part of the RAND Corporation external publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.