effect size represents a comparison between two groups—in this case, one group that used the strategy of goal setting and one group that did not. The fourth column reports the average effect size in the synthesis study, and the fifth column reports the expected percentile gain in achievement associated with the average effect size. For example, the average effect size of 0.55 from Lipsey and Wilson (1993) is associated with an increase of 21 percentile points for an average student. The average effect size of 0.70 by Graham and Perin is associated with an increase of 26 percentile points for the average student.
Lists of meta-analytic studies like that in table I.1 appear in the following works: A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Research on Instruction (Marzano, 1998), Classroom Instruction That Works (Marzano et al., 2001), Classroom Management That Works (Marzano, 2003a), Classroom Assessment and Grading That Work (Marzano, 2006), The Art and Science of Teaching (Marzano, 2007), Designing and Teaching Learning Goals and Objectives (Marzano, 2009a), and Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading (Marzano, 2010b). These works as a whole include lists of effect sizes for virtually every element in The New Art and Science of Teaching. The studies in table I.1 include over one thousand effect sizes. If one were to list all effect sizes across these works that are foundational to The New Art and Science of Teaching, the final count numbers in the tens of thousands.
Teacher-Designed Studies
Since The Art and Science of Teaching was published in 2007, Marzano Research has conducted its own studies. Specifically, hundreds of teachers at various grade levels and in various subjects have undertaken studies of specific elements or strategies in their classrooms. In general, teachers selected a strategy they wished to study and identified content to teach to two different classes or sets of students. Instruction was the same for both groups with the exception that teachers used the selected strategy with one group of students but not the other. They used the same pretests and post-tests with both groups. Researchers at Marzano Research then analyzed the findings and reported back to teachers.
To date, over five hundred teachers have been involved in such studies resulting in over one thousand findings reported as effect sizes. Visit marzanoresearch.com/research/database to access the results of each study. A series of studies summarizes many of the overall findings (see Haystead & Marzano, 2009). One of the more interesting aspects of these studies is that they were conducted with minimal and sometimes no teacher training. For the most part, teachers received either a very brief training (one half day or less) on a specific strategy, or they simply read a few pages about the strategy. This level of training probably represents the typical environment for a teacher, which involves minimal time for extensive training. The fact that the majority of teacher-designed studies demonstrated positive effect sizes in a short period of time (a few days to a few weeks) is an indicator that teachers can integrate the strategies into their repertoire of techniques relatively quickly.
Schoolwide Studies
Schoolwide studies examine the effects of The Art and Science of Teaching model on the average achievement scores for the school as a whole as opposed to the average achievement scores of students in the classes of specific teachers. For example, one study involves fifty-nine schools and 1,117 teachers. It examines the relationship between teachers’ usage of instructional strategies and the school’s average score on state tests of mathematics and reading (see Marzano Research, 2010, 2011). Effect sizes ranged from 0.53 in mathematics to 0.74 in reading.
Teacher Evaluation Studies
The Art and Science of Teaching as a teacher evaluation model is used in eleven countries, three provinces in Canada, and forty-three states (Basileo & Marzano, 2016). Data from these implementations indicate a relationship between teachers’ use of the strategies in the model and growth in student learning. Growth is commonly determined by value-added measures that are based on state tests at the end of the year. The book Teacher Evaluation That Makes a Difference (Marzano & Toth, 2013) discuses value-added measures in depth. Briefly though, the strength of value-added measures is that they compute student learning over a given year while controlling for students’ previous learning and demographics. These studies demonstrate that teachers’ scores on the model as a whole are positively and significantly correlated with value-added measures based on state tests (see Basileo, Toth, & Kennedy, 2015). Perhaps more important, the studies demonstrate that the individual elements in the model are positively and significantly correlated with value-added measures (see Basileo & Marzano, 2016). Most noteworthy about these studies is that they involve over one hundred and eighty thousand teacher observations spread over three school years (2012 to 2015).
The Major Features of The New Art and Science of Teaching
The New Art and Science of Teaching is new, even though the original strategies are intact, albeit greatly expanded. One of the major changes in The New Art and Science of Teaching is that it takes a student-outcomes perspective as opposed to a teacher-outcomes perspective. To illustrate, The Art and Science of Teaching identifies specific teacher behaviors. Teachers can use rating scales for each element of the model to determine the extent to which they are effectively deploying instructional strategies. While this is useful information, The New Art and Science of Teaching has a focus on student outcomes. This makes intuitive sense since instructional strategies generate certain mental states and processes in learners’ minds which, in turn, enhance students’ learning. Figure I.1 illustrates the teaching and learning progression.
Figure I.1: The teaching and learning progression.
According to figure I.1, specific mental states and processes in learners’ minds are the mediating variable between the effective application of instructional strategies and enhanced student learning. Without these mental states and processes, a given strategy will have little or no effect on students. As subsequent chapters in this book illustrate, this single fact changes the way districts, schools, and classroom educators should monitor the use of instructional strategies, provide teachers with feedback, and analyze students’ learning. Table I.2 depicts the specific mental states and processes that should be present in the learner’s mind.
Table I.2: Teacher Actions and Student Mental States and Processes
| Teacher Actions | Student Mental States and Processes | |
| Feedback | Providing and Communicating Clear Learning Goals | 1. Students understand the progression of knowledge they are expected to master and where they are along that progression. |
| Using Assessments | 2. Students understand how test scores and grades relate to their status on the progression of knowledge they are expected to master. | |
| Content | Conducting Direct Instruction Lessons | 3. When content is new, students understand which parts are important and how the parts fit together. |
| Conducting Practicing and Deepening Lessons |
4. After teachers present new content, students deepen their understanding and develop fluency in
|
