11-14-07 memo

From: Gerdeman, Dean [mailto:Dean.Gerdeman@ed.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2007 4:55 PM
To: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Cc: Ingalls, Katrina; Feldman, Amy
Subject: RE: Response to OMB questions for 200706-1850-006: Improving Adolescent Literacy Across
the Curriculum in High Schools
Karen,
Per your request, the OMB number for the package being cited is 1850-0816-v.1.
Please note that in the package currently under review, ED has corrected the description of the
compensation structure in Supporting Statement A, item 9 to the following:
"The treatment schools will receive the intervention and all materials and support that go with the
intervention. Because control schools will not receive the intervention program but will be subjected to
data collection and other activities, each control school will receive $1,000 in compensation."
In Statement B, a reference to the out-of-date compensation structure in item 2c has been removed. The
revised Statements A and B are attached.
Please let me know if you have further questions.
Best,
Dean Gerdeman
R. Dean Gerdeman
Research Scientist
Institute of Education Sciences
US Department of Education
202-219-1373
Dean.Gerdeman@ed.gov

-----Original Message----From: Gerdeman, Dean
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 2:29 PM
To: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Cc: Ingalls, Katrina; Feldman, Amy
Subject: RE: Response to OMB questions for 200706-1850-006: Improving Adolescent Literacy Across
the Curriculum in High Schools
Dear Karen,
I apologize for the delay in responding. ED is still researching this issue. The compensation structure
noted in the OMB package, which is the source of the reference in question, was based on out-of-date
information. Due to staff being out of the office last Friday, we are still working on getting correct
information to OMB. We expect to have a response to you by Wed. 11/13.
Best,
Dean Gerdeman
-----Original Message----From: Ingalls, Katrina
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2007 9:50 AM

To: Gerdeman, Dean
Cc: Ingalls, Katrina
Subject: FW: Response to OMB questions for 200706-1850-006: Improving Adolescent Literacy Across
the Curriculum in High Schools
Importance: High
Dean,
Please provide Karen with the OMB number fore the collection you are citing here. Send the response
directly to Karen with a cc to me. Thanks.
Katrina
-----Original Message----From: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 5:44 PM
To: Ingalls, Katrina
Cc: Gerdeman, Dean; Feldman, Amy; Martinez, Rochelle W.; Dooling, Bridget C.
Subject: RE: Response to OMB questions for 200706-1850-006: Improving Adolescent Literacy Across
the Curriculum in High Schools
Katrina, can you please provide the OMB control number for the study cited in response to question #5?
Thanks. - Karen
[In footnote] "The 2007 Mathematics: Professional Development Impact Study currently being conducted
by the American Institutes for Research for the Institute for Education Sciences/US Department of
Education ()"

From: Ingalls, Katrina [mailto:Katrina.Ingalls@ed.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 2:45 PM
To: Matsuoka, Karen Y.
Cc: Ingalls, Katrina; Gerdeman, Dean; Feldman, Amy
Subject: FW: Response to OMB questions for 200706-1850-006: Improving Adolescent Literacy Across
the Curriculum in High Schools
Importance: High
Karen,
I am forwarding the sponsor's responses to your questions. Note that Dean Gerdeman has replaced OK
Parks as the COR for this collection. He has attached a new supporting statement part A and B and
Appendix I below. Please let us know if you need anything further on this collection. Thanks.
Katrina Ingalls
-----Original Message----From: Gerdeman, Dean
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 12:11 PM
To:
Ingalls, Katrina
Cc:
Axt, Kathy; Feldman, Amy; Park, OK-Choon; Stair, Morgan
Subject:
Response to OMB questions for 200706-1850-006: Improving Adolescent Literacy Across the Curriculum in High Schools

Dear Katrina,

This email is a response to the questions from Karen Matsouka at OMB that you forwarded to Amy
Feldman on 11/2. Amy is out of the office all week in training. I am the new COR for the REL Midwest.
Please see the responses to the questions below and the following attachments: revised Statement A,
revised Statement B, new Appendix I.
Let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.
Best,
Dean Gerdeman
R. Dean Gerdeman, Ph.D.
Research Scientist
Institute of Education Sciences
US Department of Education
202-219-1373
Dean.Gerdeman@ed.gov

<> <>
<>
1.

Can ED describe the intervention a bit more fully?
A footnote has been in inserted in Part A, item 2 that directs the reader to
Appendix I, which is a description of the intervention provided to us by
the program developers. A copy of Appendix I is attached to this email.

2.
Confidentiality - Under item 2 in Part A, there is a discussion of privacy that mentions
"routine uses." This is a Privacy Act reference, yet in item 10, the REL cites ESRA as its
confidentiality statute, which is appropriate, without citing the Privacy Act. Therefore, the
discussion is item 2 is not applicable to this study, because ESRA does not have a set of routine
uses as the Privacy Act does.
The study will abide by the provisions stated in ESRA. References to
Privacy Act have been removed in Part A, item 2.
3.
Item 2c in Part B (page 5) indicates that ED's "prevailing standard of precision for RCTs....is
in a state of flux..." Similarly on page 8, it does "there is a discussion about whether to adjust
determinations of statistical significant based on multiple hypothesis tests..." Please provide
more information about these requirements and the changes underway.
The reference to the precision standard being in a "state of flux" has
been removed. In Part B, item 2c the following standard is cited:
"The prevailing standard of precision for randomized
controlled trials funded by the U.S. Department of
Education (ED) is a minimum detectable effect size of
approximately 0.20 standard deviations."
The following text has been added to Part B, item 2c:
"The analyses will adjust for multiple hypothesis testing
in line with What Works Clearinghouse standards. For
precision, REL RCTs are powered conservatively and in
consideration of prior research, to account for the fact
that non-RCT designs often find larger impacts and also
to protect against attrition and non-response."

4.
Project support - in Part B, item 3, it says that "The participation of the control schools...will
be supported at the district level." What specific costs or of other supports will a typical district
incur?
The following text has been added to Part B, item 3:
"The participation of the control schools in data
collection activities will be supported at the district level.
Data collection activities that will require district support
include the compilation of electronic student data
records as well as interactions with the research team to
determine logistics surrounding data collection activities
(such as coordinating site visits). Additionally, control
schools will receive compensation from treatment
schools for their study participation. (See Supporting
Statement A, item 9.)"
5.
Incentives - the REL indicates that the incentive structure is in use in a 2007 study on
teacher professional development in mathematics. Please provide specific citations and/or
documentation of the study, including sponsor(s).
The following text has been added to Part A, item 9:
"The REL Midwest is not contributing to the incentive
pool."
[In footnote] "The 2007 Mathematics: Professional
Development Impact Study currently being conducted by
the American Institutes for Research for the Institute for
Education Sciences/US Department of Education
(Contract No. ED-01-CO-0026/0020)"