Dr. Batya Elbaum Dr. Elbaum brings substantial expertise in meta-analysis of disability research related to early intervention as well as preschool and school-aged children and has written numerous refereed publications on implications of her work for educational practice. She also is well-versed in designing surveys of parents, teachers, service providers, and high school students with disabilities. A bit of background. Dr. Elbaum is currently Associate Professor of Teaching and Learning at the University of Miami. She is also a member of the Editorial Boards of several well-known journals emphasizing disability research, and will serve as a peer reviewer on all NICHCY research-related publications.

Dr. Russell Gersten Dr. Gersten is a nationally recognized expert in both quantitative and qualitative research and evaluation methodologies, with an emphasis on translating research into classroom practice. He is regularly consulted as an expert in the area of mathematics resaerch, use of randomized trials in educational research, and the education of English learners. Dr. Gersten brings to the Center truly exceptional expertise and experience. He holds a Ph.D. in Special Education from the University of Oregon. A bit of background. Dr. Gersten is executive director of Instructional Research Group as well as professor emeritus in the College of Education at the University of Oregon. In 2002, Dr. Gersten received the Distinguished Special Education Researcher Award from the American Educational Research Association's Special Education Research Division. He has over 125 publications in scientific journals such as Review of Educational Research, the American Educational Research Journal, and Exceptional Children, and serves on 13 editorial boards, including some of the most prestigious journals in the field, such as Reading Research Quarterly, Journal of Learning Disabilities, Exceptional Children, and Elementary School Journal.

Dr. Lee Swanson Dr. Swanson is extremely well-known in the field of disabilities and meta-analysis. His expertise in these areas, particularly with respect to learning disabilities, has been of enormous benefit to the more than 2 million students with learning disabilities served in the public schools under IDEA. A bit of background. Dr. Swanson is currently a Distinguished Professor in Educational Psychology at the University of California, Riverside. He serves on 15 editorial boards, including that of the American Educational Research Journal and Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, and has authored over 215 published articles, most recently upon the results of his meta-analysis of interventions with students who have learning disabilities.

Dr. Jeff Valentine Dr. Valentine brings to the Research Panel an expertise in methodological and quantitative issues associated with conducting high quality research. Dr. Valentine is the Methods Group Coordinator for the Campbell Collaboration, an international body that aims to promote the use of strong evidence in policy and practice decisions. Dr. Valentine was the lead author of the What Works Clearinghouse's Study Design and Implementation Assessment Device (Visit Study DIAD for a detailed description) and second author (with Harris Cooper) on the Cumulative Research Evidence Assessment Device (CREAD). A bit of background. Dr. Valentine holds his doctorate in Social Psychology, and is currently a Research Scientist in the Department of Psychology and Program in Education at Duke University. Besides his strong technical expertise, he also is interested in social, developmental, and educational psychology. He is the author of numerous refereed publications and presentations on systematic review, synthesis, and meta-analysis.

Connect to Their Research
Perhaps there's no better way to meet the Research Panel than to connect with their work. We've listed a few representative publications below. You'll find more listed in our A-Z page called NICHCY Connections...to Learning Disabilities.

• What leads a special educator to stay in the field---or leave?
  Gersten, R., Harniss, M.K., Keating, T., & Yovanoff, P. (2001, Summer). Working in special education: Factors that enhance special educators' intent to stay. Exceptional Children, 67(4), 549-67.
  

  A study involving 887 urban special educators investigated factors that lead to attrition and retention and found several critical factors to consider to increase retention and commitment. A leading negative factor was stress due to job design. Perceived support by principals or other teachers helped alleviate this stress. (Contains references) (ERIC: Author/CR)

• Co-teaching children with disabilities.
  Murawski, W.W., & Swanson, H.L. (2001, September/October). A meta-analysis of co-teaching research: Where are the data? Remedial and Special Education, 22(5), 258-67.
  

  This synthesis of data based articles about co-teaching between general and special education personnel found, of 89 articles reviewed, only 6 provided sufficient quantitative information for an effect size to be calculated. Effect sizes and dependent measures varied widely. Results indicate the need for further research to substantiate the effectiveness of co-teaching for students with disabilities. (Contains references) (ERIC: Author/DB)

• How best to teach English language learners.
  Baker, S., & Gersten, R. (2000). Practices for English-language learners. An overview of instructional practices for English-language learners: Prominent themes and future directions [Topical Summary]. Denver, CO: National Institute for Urban School Improvement. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 445 176)
  

  This review of research considers how best to teach English-language learners. A realistic appraisal of the empirical database indicates that research findings have failed to provide answers to questions about the importance of native language instruction and the best age and best methods for introducing academic instruction in English. The review suggests that good bilingual programs anchor curriculum goals to vocabulary development, and develop teachers' awareness and provide them with resources to allow the use of visual aids in their instruction. Good bilingual programs also use small-group cooperative learning and peer tutoring to enhance learning. They develop the skills of bilingual teachers to use students' native language strategically to reinforce academic content learning, and they use ongoing research as a resource for staff development. The review concludes that it is beneficial to use students' native language, but it should be done in a strategic manner. There is virtually no research to support the position that proficiency in a student's native language is needed before full-time instruction in English can be provided. (Contains 53 references.) (ERIC: SLD)

• Teaching math to students at risk of failure.
  Baker, S., Gersten, R., & Lee, D. (2002, September). A synthesis of empirical research on teaching mathematics to low-achieving students. Elementary School Journal, 103(1), 51-73.
  

  Used meta analysis to synthesize research on the effects of interventions to improve mathematics achievement of students considered at risk for academic failure. Found that effective interventions included providing teachers and students with student performance data; using peer tutors; providing clear, specific feedback to parents on children's mathematics success; and using explicit instruction to teach math concepts and procedures. (ERIC: Author/KB)

• Effectiveness of one-on-one tutoring programs in reading.
  Elbaum, B., Hughes, M.T., Moody, S.W., & Vaughn, S. (2000, December). How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 605-19.
  

  Conducts a meta-analysis of supplemental, adult-instructed one-to-one reading interventions for elementary students (N=1,539) at risk for reading failure. Results indicate that interventions using trained volunteers or college students were highly effective. Studies comparing one-to-one with small-group supplemental instruction showed no advantage for the one-to-one programs. (Contains 76 references and 3 tables.) (ERIC: Author/GCP)

• Grouping practices when children with disabilities are learning to read.
  Elbaum, B., Hughes, M., Moody, S.W., & Vaughn, S. (1999, Spring). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65(3), 399-415.
  

  A meta-analysis of 20 studies (1975-1995) indicated positive effects for alternative grouping formats for teaching reading to students with disabilities compared to whole-class instruction, particularly for student pairing. In addition, analyses indicated that outcomes for students involved in cross-age tutoring varied significantly by students' role within the pair. (ERIC: Author/CR)

• And what about interpreting effect sizes?
  Valentine, J., & Cooper, H. (2003). Effect size substantive interpretation guidelines: Issues in the interpretation of effect sizes. Available online at the WWC, at: http://whatworks.ed.gov/reviewprocess/essig.pdf
  

  In the course of developing review standards, conducting reviews, and producing reports, the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) has produced working papers providing guidance for addressing difficult technical issues. These papers advance the state-of-the-art in the design, implementation, analysis, and reporting of causal research. One such is authored by Dr. Valentine and is available at the link above.

• What have we learned from the last two decades of LD research?
  Two Decades of Research in Learning Disabilities: Reading Comprehension, Expressive Writing, Problem Solving, Self-Concept. Keys to Successful Learning: A National Summit on Research in Learning Disabilities. (1999). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 430 365)
  
  
  This document presents four brief papers that review and synthesize the research on intervention with students who have learning disabilities (LD). The papers are:
  
  
  • "Can School-Based Interventions Enhance the Self-Concept of Students with Learning Disabilities?" (Batya Elbaum and Sharon Vaughn). This review finds that school-based interventions of either the skill development or skill enhancement types can lead to beneficial changes in students' self-perceptions and that middle school students appeared most responsive to such interventions. Executive summary available at: www.ld.org/research/ncld_self_concept.cfm
    
  
  
  • "Reading Comprehension Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities" (Russell Gersten and Scott Baker). Findings indicated the effectiveness of reading comprehension interventions, instruction in self-monitoring techniques, and peer-assisted learning strategies. Continuing difficulties with teaching students to generalize new skills were also found. Executive summary available at:
    www.ld.org/research/ncld_reading_comp.cfm
    
  
  
  • "Teaching Expressive Writing to Students with Learning Disabilities" (Russell Gersten and Scott Baker). Found that instructional writing interventions lead to significant improvements in students' writing and that common features of successful instruction included explicit instruction in the phases of writing, teacher demonstration, and teacher and/or peer feedback. Executive summary available at:
    www.ld.org/research/ncld_writing.cfm
    
  
  
  • "Intervention Research for Adolescents with Learning Disabilities" (H. Lee Swanson). This paper reports on a meta-analysis of 58 interventions. It found that direct instruction and strategy instruction were the most effective techniques. (ERIC: DB) Executive summary available at:
    www.ld.org/research/ncld_high_order.cfm