No abstract

In the past two decades, a new form of scholarship has appeared in which researchers present an overview of previously conducted research syntheses on the same topic. In these efforts, research syntheses are the principal units of evidence. Overviews of reviews introduce unique problems that require unique solutions. This article describes what methods overviewers have developed or have adopted from other forms of scholarship. These methods concern how to (a) define the broader problem space of an overview, (b) conduct literature searches that specifically look for research syntheses, (c) address the overlap in evidence in related reviews, (d) evaluate the quality of both primary research and research syntheses, (e) integrate the outcomes of research syntheses, especially when they produce discordant results, (f) conduct a second-order meta-analysis, and (g) present findings. The limitations of overviews are also discussed, especially with regard to the age of the included evidence.

A complete description of the literature search, including the criteria used for the inclusion of reports after they have been located, used in a research synthesis or meta-analysis is critical if subsequent researchers are to accurately evaluate and reproduce a synthesis' methods and results. Based on previous guidelines and new suggestions, we present a set of focused and detailed standards for reporting the methods used in a literature search. The guidelines cover five search strategies: reference database searches, journal and bibliography searches, searches of the reference lists of reports, citation searches, and direct contact searches. First, we bring together all the unique recommendations made in existing guidelines for research synthesis. Second, we identify gaps in reporting standards for search strategies. Third, we address these gaps by providing new reporting recommendations. Our hope is to facilitate successful evaluation and replication of research synthesis results.

The "assessment for learning" movement in education has increased attention to self-grading and peer-grading practices in primary and secondary schools. This research synthesis examined several questions pertaining to the use of self-grading and peer-grading in conjunction with criterion-referenced testing in 3rd-through 12th-grade-level classrooms. We investigated (a) the effects of students' participation in grading on subsequent test performance, (b) the difference between grades when assigned by students or teachers, and (c) the correlation between grades assigned by students and teachers. Students who engaged in self-grading performed better (g ϭ .34) on subsequent tests than did students who did not. Moderator analyses suggested that the benefits of self-grading were estimated to be greater when the study controlled for group differences through random assignment. Students who engaged in peergrading performed better on subsequent tests than did students who did not (g ϭ .29). On average, students did not grade themselves or peers significantly differently than teachers (self-grades, g ϭ .04; peer-grades, g ϭ .04) and showed moderate correlation (self-grading, r ϭ .67; peer-grading, r ϭ .68) with teacher grades. Further, other moderator analyses and examination of studies suggested that self-and peer-grading practices can be implemented to positive effect in primary and secondary schools with the use of rubrics and training for students in a formative assessment environment. However, because of a limited number of studies, these mediating variables need more research to allow more conclusive findings.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract