Sentences with phrase «of a standard deviation gain»

Not exact matches

The theory is that, using relationships between risk and return such as alpha and beta, and defining risk as the standard deviation of return, an «efficient frontier» for investing can be identified and exploited for maximum gain at a given amount of risk.

However, although there was no excess of infants in the fluoxetine group with postnatal weight measurements > 2 standard deviations below the mean, these data indicate that breastfeeding while taking fluoxetine is associated with reduced growth that may be of clinical importance in situations in which infant weight gain is already of concern.

Despite the fact that infants breastfed by mothers who took fluoxetine demonstrated less robust weight gain than the comparison group, it is reassuring that there was no significant excess of infants with weight measurements > 2 standard deviations below the mean.

With respect to the adequacy of weight gain in these infants, using > 2z score units (standard deviations) below a mean of 0 to define inadequate weight gain, 8 % and 6 % of infants in the fluoxetine and the no medication groups, respectively, fell into this classification at the time of the first postnatal measurement.

They scale the gain in black students» scores by the standard deviation of test scores computed for a select sample of students, and observe that the gain in their scores due to attending private school is «roughly one - third of the test - score gap between blacks and whites nationwide.»

To catch up to the leading countries would require gains of at least half of a standard deviation, or roughly two years of learning (see «Are U.S. Students Ready to Compete?»

Schools with F grades in 1999 showed an average gain of 18 points, equal to 0.8 standard deviations.

And minority students gain 10 percent of a standard deviation in their desire to be art consumers.

Schools earning D grades improved by 16 points, while schools that received F grades in 1999 made gains of 26 points, equal to 1.25 standard deviations.

D schools improved 0.5 points, while F schools demonstrated an average gain of.9 points, equal to an astounding 2.2 standard deviations.

The standard deviation Howell et al. used to scale gains was around 19, while the standard deviation of national percentile scores is necessarily 28.9, because percentile ranks follow a uniform distribution.

This statistically significant difference of -0.23 standard deviations is in the opposite direction of that expected, based on the student - level relationships between self - control and test - score gains displayed above.

Students identified for retention by the Florida policy gained 0.06 of a standard deviation in reading on both the FCAT and Stanford - 9 over equally low - performing 3rd graders from the previous school year (see Figure 1).

A teacher one standard deviation above the mean effectiveness annually generates marginal gains of over $ 400,000 in future student earnings, assuming a class size of 20, and proportionately higher gains with larger class sizes.

While the gains among these initial 3rd graders are not as dramatic as the 4th grade gains which had captured national attention, Winters found «the gains among initial 3rd graders were very substantial,» about 0.36 standard deviations between 1998 and 2009, or roughly a full additional year of academic progress.

Had the reforms translated into achievement gains of 0.12 standard deviations a year for the remainder of the decade, with performance constant thereafter, scores of graduates would be one standard deviation higher going into the 1990s and the future.

The lowest - performing students gained about 0.20 standard deviations, roughly twice the improvement of those students whose expected gains were to leave them just below proficiency.

The report speaks quite dismissively of the estimates of achievement gains of 0.08 standard deviations.

This is a very large figure, perhaps unbelievably large, implying that a principal at the 75th percentile of this effectiveness measure shows average achievement gains of 0.11 standard deviations (relative to the average principal), while one at the 25th percentile shows average losses of 0.15 standard deviations.

For instance, the median finding across 10 studies of teacher effectiveness estimates that a teacher who is one standard deviation above the average in terms of quality produces additional learning gains for students of 0.12 standard deviations in reading and 0.14 standard deviations in math.

Nevertheless, even the most conservative of our three methodological approaches suggests substantial variation in principal effectiveness: a principal in the top 16 percent of the quality distribution will produce annual student gains that are 0.05 standard deviations higher than an average principal for all students in their school.

In a revealing analysis of a large data set, Hoover Institution economist Eric Hanushek and his colleagues found that placement in special education in grades 3 - 6 was associated with gains of 0.04 standard deviation in reading and 0.11 in math; such small gains indicate that children with LD clearly are not closing the gap.

A gain score of zero indicates that a student has kept pace with the average student in the state, while a student with a gain score of 0.25 standard deviations will have improved his or her performance by enough to exceed roughly 10 percent of the state's students.

Students in the middle of the prior test - score distribution also experience substantial gains of roughly 0.10 to 0.12 standard deviations in math and 0.08 to 0.10 standard deviations in English.

The results of our analysis of these «switchers,» which continues to take into account the difficulties associated with moving between schools, again indicate that students make smaller gains while enrolled in charter schools, by nearly 0.10 standard deviations in reading and 0.16 standard deviations in math.

Students in three countries — Latvia, Chile, and Brazil — improved at an annual rate of 4 percent of a standard deviation, and students in another eight countries — Portugal, Hong Kong, Germany, Poland, Liechtenstein, Slovenia, Colombia, and Lithuania — were making gains at twice the rate of students in the United States.

It is true that on average, an additional $ 1000 in per - pupil spending is associated with an annual gain in achievement of one - tenth of 1 percent of a standard deviation.

Those gains might seem small but when viewed over two decades they accumulate to 30 percent of a standard deviation, enough to bring the United States within the range of, or to at least keep pace with, the world's leaders.

If one then assumes a cumulative impact from giving students not just a single application but continuing treatment through grade 12, the gains reach astronomical proportions, somewhere in the range of 23 to 57 standard deviations.

That kind of talk goes «a long way toward explaining why No Child Left Behind has not worked,» she says, overlooking the fact that gains in math and reading since its passage have amounted to 8 percent of a standard deviation, with even larger gains among minority students (see «Grinding the Antitesting Ax,» check the facts, Spring 2012).

They provide «scientific evidence» to support the claim that a specific set of policies can shift average student performance upward by three to six standard deviations, an extraordinary gain.

Most Americans would be extraordinarily satisfied with average gains of one full standard deviation for a school or district.

Among schools where high - SES students neither gain relative ground nor fall back relative to their statewide peers, there are some schools where low - SES students gain around 0.05 standard deviation of relative ground, and others where low - SES students lose 0.24 standard deviations of relative ground.

Furthermore, estimates from our equations show that modest increases in resources (of $ 500 - $ 750 per student) can lead to significant score gains (one - third of a standard deviation) among disadvantaged students.

Across all tested students in online charters, the typical academic gains for math are -0.25 standard deviations (equivalent to 180 fewer days of learning) and -0.10 (equivalent to 72 fewer days) for reading.

Using the upper range of their effect size estimates, $ 100 spent on classroom coaches would yield a gain of over one - half standard deviations in student achievement, and one - to - one tutoring would yield a one - quarter standard deviations improvement.

By their low - end estimates of benefits (which total to just three standard deviations), each $ 100 spent on classroom coaches would be expected to yield at least a 0.25 standard deviations gain in achievement, very similar to the expected gain for full - day kindergarten.

The aggregate NAEP results cited by the author hide achievement gains of 0.5 - 0.7 standard deviation for black students and 0.3 - 0.4 standard deviation for Hispanic students.

Adjusting for the effect of instructional days, we estimate that scores increased by roughly 0.25 standard deviations, nearly 40 percent less than the reported gains.

Those students are scoring, on average, 10 percent of a standard deviation better than they would have otherwise, and since each peer evaluator evaluates 10 to 15 teachers each year, those gains are occurring in multiple teachers» classrooms for a number of years.

«Forgive some academic jargon, but the most common education reform ideas — reducing class size, raising teacher pay, enrolling kids in Head Start — produce gains of about 0.1 or 0.2 or 0.3 standard deviations.

Promise Academy produced gains of 1.3 and 1.4 standard deviations.

To put these units in context, the average middle school student gains about a quarter of a standard deviation per year; for elementary students, the average gain is between a third and a half of a standard deviation.

A study led by Tulane's Douglas N. Harris found that the New Orleans reform efforts resulted in student learning gains of 0.4 standard deviations.

In the elementary grades 3 through 5, students of new Teach for America teachers gained an average of 5.8 percent of a standard deviation more on the TAAS reading exam than did students with other new teachers, a difference that fell just short of statistical significance (see Figure 2).

A gain of 5 percent of a standard deviation in one year may be considered large, if it is thought that students will continue to experience similar annual gains through the elementary and secondary years.

In math, the differences in gains made by African Americans and Hispanics at AYP schools and non-AYP schools are 11 and 12 percent of a standard deviation, respectively.

Further, another respected international assessment of student performance, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), found gains of only 0.5 percent of a standard deviation annually for U.S. students over roughly the same time period.

In reading, the difference in gains for both groups is 6 percent of a standard deviation.

Over the past two decades, gains of 1.6 percent of a standard deviation have been garnered annually by 4th - and 8th - grade students on the math, science, and reading tests administered by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the nation's report card.