Collaborative Strategic\
Reading Study

OMB Clearance Request---Part A

[Supporting materials]{.smallcaps}

August 2007

Prepared For:

Institute of Education Sciences

United States Department of Education

Contract No. ED‑06‑CO‑0017

Prepared By:

Regional Educational Laboratory---Southwest

Edvance Research, Inc.

9901 IH‑10 West, Suite 700

San Antonio, Texas 78230

\(210\) 558‑1902

\(210\) 558‑1075 (fax)

# Contents {#contents .unnumbered}

Supporting Statement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submission: Section A
[2](#supporting-statement-for-paperwork-reduction-act-submission-section-a)

A. Justification [2](#a.-justification)

1\. Circumstances Making Collection of Information Necessary
[2](#circumstances-making-collection-of-information-necessary)

Rationale [2](#rationale)

Overview of the Study Design [2](#overview-of-the-study-design)

Overview of Data Collection Plan [2](#overview-of-data-collection-plan)

Recruitment [2](#recruitment)

District Screening Process [2](#district-screening-process)

School Screening Protocol [2](#school-screening-protocol)

Student Background Data Request [2](#student-background-data-request)

Baseline Data [2](#baseline-data)

Students [2](#students)

Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE).
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160856565)

Teachers [2](#teachers)

Teacher Surveys. [2](#__RefHeading___Toc160856567)

Implementation [2](#implementation)

Study Staff [2](#study-staff)

Collaborative Strategic Reading Implementation Validity Checklist
(CSRIVC). [2](#__RefHeading___Toc160856570)

Expository Reading Comprehension Classroom Observation (ERCCO).
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160856571)

Outcomes [2](#outcomes)

Students [2](#students-1)

Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation.
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160856574)

Timeline of Data Collection Plan [2](#timeline-of-data-collection-plan)

2\. Purposes and Uses of the Data [2](#purposes-and-uses-of-the-data)

3\. Use of Technology to Reduce Burden
[2](#use-of-technology-to-reduce-burden)

4\. Efforts to Identify Duplication
[2](#efforts-to-identify-duplication)

Recruitment [2](#recruitment-1)

Implementation [2](#implementation-1)

Teacher Background/Classroom Context
[2](#teacher-backgroundclassroom-context)

Student Outcomes [2](#student-outcomes)

# Contents (Continued) {#contents-continued .unnumbered}

5\. Methods to Minimize Burden on Small Entities
[2](#methods-to-minimize-burden-on-small-entities)

6\. Consequences of Not Collecting the Data
[2](#consequences-of-not-collecting-the-data)

7\. Special Circumstances [2](#special-circumstances)

8\. Federal Register Comments and Persons Consulted Outside the Agency
[2](#federal-register-comments-and-persons-consulted-outside-the-agency)

9\. Payment or Gifts [2](#payment-or-gifts)

10\. Assurances of Confidentiality [2](#assurances-of-confidentiality)

Consent Forms [2](#consent-forms)

11\. Justification of Sensitive Questions
[2](#justification-of-sensitive-questions)

12\. Estimates of Hour Burden [2](#estimates-of-hour-burden)

13\. Estimate of Cost Burden to Respondents
[2](#estimate-of-cost-burden-to-respondents)

14\. Estimate of Annual Cost to the Federal Government
[2](#estimate-of-annual-cost-to-the-federal-government)

15\. Program Changes or Adjustments [2](#program-changes-or-adjustments)

16\. Plans for Tabulation and Publication of Results
[2](#plans-for-tabulation-and-publication-of-results)

17\. Approval to Not Display OMB Expiration Date
[2](#approval-to-not-display-omb-expiration-date)

18\. Explanation of Exceptions [2](#explanation-of-exceptions)

# List of Exhibits {#list-of-exhibits .unnumbered}

Exhibit 1. Study Design [2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604153)

Exhibit 2. School Information Sheet Item Level Justification
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604154)

Exhibit 3. Student Data Request Item Level Justification
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604155)

Exhibit 4. Fall Teacher Survey Item Level Justification
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604156)

Exhibit 5. Spring Teacher Survey Item Level Justification
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604157)

Exhibit 6. Data Collection Instruments and Schedule
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604158)

Exhibit 7. Technical Working Group Members of the CSR Intervention Study
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604159)

Exhibit 8a. District and School Hour Burden, Combined Burden Estimates
for\
Phases 1 and 2 [2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604160)

Exhibit 8b. Teacher and Student Hour Burden, Combined Burden Estimates
for\
Phases 1 and 2 [2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604161)

Exhibit 9. Estimated Annualized Costs [2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604162)

Exhibit 10. Schedule for Dissemination of Study Results
[2](#__RefHeading___Toc160604163)

# Supporting Statement for Paperwork Reduction Act Submission: Section A

## A. Justification

### 1. Circumstances Making Collection of Information Necessary

Elementary school English Language Learners (ELLs) are at‑risk for
academic failure and there is evidence that the number of these students
is on the rise in the Southwestern region of the United States.
Meanwhile, reviews of the literature suggest there are few empirically
supported interventions that meet their academic needs. One promising
intervention is Collaborative Strategic Reading (CSR), which can be
delivered at the classroom level via teacher training. As the name
implies, CSR focuses on reading comprehension and has students
collaborate with each other when learning new material. CSR combines
essential reading comprehension strategies that have been demonstrated
as effective in improving students' understanding of text (Palincsar &
Brown, 1984; Rosenshine & Meister, 1994) with the use of cooperative
learning groups (Johnson & Johnson, 1989; Kagan, 1990). During a CSR
session, students of varying reading abilities work in small groups to
help each other apply four critical reading comprehension strategies
(preview, click and clunk, get the gist, wrap up strategies) to
comprehend expository text. The vast majority of the studies on CSR have
investigated the program impacts on students' comprehension of social
studies text. The proposed study of the effectiveness of the CSR will
focus on three questions: (1) Do CSR classrooms outperform control
classrooms on a measure of reading achievement? (2) What are the impacts
for ELL students? (3) What are the impacts for native English speakers?

CSR incorporates reading comprehension strategies and cooperative
learning techniques. Students are placed in small learning groups and
are presented with a reading passage. They then engage in a four part
approach to the material. Prior to reading the passage, students preview
the text to determine what they know and what they think they are going
to learn. Secondly, they are also trained to recognize when they are
comprehending material and when they are not. In CSR parlance, students
are told that understanding material means the concepts are "clicking."
If students are experiencing difficulties comprehending material, they
are "clunking." The Click and Clunk strategy in CSR is designed to help
students monitor their comprehension by identifying difficult vocabulary
and conceptual information. Students use the "fix‑up" strategies, which
are based on context and structural analysis to determine meaning.
Thirdly, after reading a portion of the text, students use the "Get the
Gist" strategy to ensure they grasp main idea. Wrap up consists of two
parts. First students ask and answer recall questions, as well as
questions that require them to use background knowledge to move "beyond
the text." Students then write a summary of the content.

The Assessing the Impact of Collaborative Strategic Reading on Fifth
Graders' Comprehension and Vocabulary Skills study (hereafter CSR Study)
is the first large-scale randomized control trial testing the
effectiveness of CSR. This study targets 5th grade teachers who teach
both English/language arts (ELA) and social studies. The goal of the
study is to establish whether CSR intervention increases reading
comprehension and vocabulary skills of 5th graders, for both native
English speakers and English Language Learners. The 4th and 5th grades
are particularly troublesome for ELL students because the curriculum
becomes more subject‑matter specific. This study will assess impacts
within social studies curricula because of the greater focus of specific
subject‑matter in the later elementary grades, and because these
curricula tend to be taught primarily in English. Moreover, given the
lack of true experimental data on CSR, it is important that the content
area in this study be consistent with prior research. Assessing impacts
on the comprehension of social studies text also provides the chance to
evaluate whether or not the intervention has an impact on general
reading abilities as well as within a specific academic area.

All research activities refrred to in this document, including data
collection by Regional Educational Laboratories, are authorized by H.R.
3801 The Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002 (Part D, Section 174).
(See Appendix C).

### Rationale

There is some evidence suggesting that CSR can be an effective
intervention for ELL 5th graders (e.g., Klingner & Vaughn, 2000;
Klingner, Vaughn, & Schumm, 1998). Many school districts in the
Southwestern Region of the United States serve a large number of ELLs.
Indeed, Texas serves the second highest enrollment of ELLs among all
states (California is first) and its neighboring states have shown
marked increases in their ELL populations (National Clearinghouse for
English Language Acquisition, 2002; Ruiz‑de‑Velasco & Fix, 2000).
ELL students represent an academically at‑risk group (Baca & Cervantes,
1989; Moss & Puma, 1995), and therefore, research into better ways of
serving ELL students is especially important. Unfortunately, there are
relatively few replicable interventions designed to meet the needs of
these students, and even fewer that have been rigorously evaluated:
Prior studies have only used quasi‑experimental designs to assess
program impacts, or qualitative methodologies to describe how the
intervention works (e.g., Klingner & Vaughn, 2000; Klingner, Vaughn,
Hughes, & Arguelles, 1999; Klingner, Vaughn, & Schumm, 1998).

The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation emphasizes raising
achievement in reading for all students, including those with special
learning needs like ELLs. Since very few studies in the research
literature address ELLs, states and districts need evidence‑based
curricula and strategies that facilitate reading achievement for these
students. Additionally, 5^th^ grade can be a difficult time in the
academic development of ELL students because many are moved from
bilingual to English immersion classrooms at that time. The CSR study's
focus on improving reading achievement particularly for ELLs in this age
group will help inform educators about ways to provide successful
transitions into English‑only instruction while avoiding compromising
students' literacy development. Consistent with the larger goals of
NCLB, this study is a rigorous, large‑scale evaluation of the impact of
a curricular intervention; and the study focuses on the reading
achievement of students who are academecially at risk. Results of this
study will inform teachers, administrators, and researchers about the
effectiveness of one promising approach to reading instruction for ELL
students.

IES and its subcontractors have designed a randomized field trial to
examine the impact of CSR on students' reading abilities. This study,
focusing on 5th grade teachers and students in school districts/schools
where many students are ELLs, will examine two experimental conditions:

*Treatment*: Teachers will be trained to use CSR prior to the beginning
of the school year and will receive subsequent coaching throughout the
school year. Before students are placed in CSR groups, it is imperative
that they are able to implement the strategies with a minimum of teacher
assistance and to function as a cohesive group. To that end, the
teachers in the treatment condition will teach their students the four
reading comprehension strategies and the roles and responsibilities of
CSR group members during the first three weeks of the intervention using
whole group instruction. For the remainder of the intervention,
heterogeneous groups of 4--6 students will implement the CSR strategies
approximately 3 times per week in their social studies class, for\
30--40 minutes using the adopted basal social studies textbook. Note
that the CSR intervention can be used with any existing textbook series
we expect to see in the sampling pool.

*Control*: Using the same adopted social studies textbook as the
students in the treatment condition, the control condition will consist
of the instructional techniques that the teacher normally uses. The
pedagogy in elementary social studies classrooms typically consists of
Round Robin reading, where students take turns reading a portion of the
text aloud, followed by answering questions at the end of the section or
chapter and/or completing an assignment from a workbook or supplementary
activity sheet provided by the publisher.

The underlying theory of action suggests that the CSR intervention and
the professional development related to it will increase teachers'
knowledge about reading comprehension instruction and consequently
affect teacher practice in the classroom during social studies. The
changes in teacher practice (high level of implementation of CSR) as
well as the direct impact of students using CSR, are in turn assumed to
affect students' reading comprehension and vocabulary development.

The underlying theory of the intervention suggests that the strongest
program impacts will be realized only if there is a proper application
of both explicit teaching strategies that focus on comprehension and
cooperative learning techniques. Delivery therefore requires
professional development and subsequent coaching for proper
implementation. It is likely that simple knowledge transfer via training
will not lead to the changes in pedagogy needed for CSR to work. CSR is
a classroom-level intervention and cross-teacher spillover within
schools is of limited concern. The nature of the CSR delivery requires
that proper group instruction take place at the beginning of the
intervention. Furthermore, CSR entails a specific mix of cooperative
learning and explicit reading comprehension instruction in order for
groups to function with only minimal teacher monitoring. It would be
unlikely that the control teachers can learn to implement the
intervention even after extensive conversation with experimental
teachers.

The CSR intervention will be implemented during the 2007--2008 school
year for phase 1, and during the 2008--2009 school year for phase 2.
Teachers and students participating in each phase of the study will be
recruited from different schools. Data will be collected on the
implementation and impact of the interventions during each school year.
Details about the treatment procedures, the design of the study, and
data collection are described in more detail below.

### Overview of the Study Design

This study will use cluster randomized control trial (RCT) with one
treatment and one control group. Students will be randomly assigned to
classrooms, and classrooms/teachers will be assigned to
treatment/control conditions within schools. Random assignment of
students significantly decreases classroom‑level clustering, creating a
statistically powerful design. Treatment and control classrooms will be
distributed evenly in schools such that each school will have the same
number of treatment and control classrooms. The study will analyze
posttest data with regression adjustment for baseline values. The
selected design treats sites (schools) as random effects.

Given the desired Minimum Detectable Effect Size (MDES; Bloom, 2005)
between 0.15 and 0.20, it has been determined that a sample of 80
classrooms from 20 schools will yield adequate statistical power. Each
phase of the study will consist of 40 classrooms: 20 treatment and 20
control. The sample will be drawn from the Southwest region,
specifically urban, high‑poverty school districts with high proportions
of ELL students.

To be included in the study's sample, classrooms must be serving 5th
grade English language learners at the time of the study. Participating
teachers must be willing implement the intervention in the treatment
group, and be willing to participate in the data collection activities.
Individual classrooms should offer both English Language/Arts and social
studies curricula. Each school must have at least two classrooms
participating in the study, so that each school has at minimum, one
treatment and one control classroom. Schools will be excluded if they do
not agree to this condition, and if they do not serve 5th grade ELLs.
Compartmentalization of the ELA and social studies subjects into
separate classrooms will likely bar including the school in the study.

This study has two phases, each phase including a different set of
schools, teachers and students (see Exhibit 1). Schools, teachers and
students for phase 1 will be recruited in spring of 2007, and the study
will commence during the 2007--2008 school year. Phase 1 teachers will
receive CSR training in the late summer of 2007. Phase 1 students will
be pre‑tested in the fall of 2007 and post‑tested in spring 2008.
Classroom observations of phase 1 implementation will occur in fall 2007
and in spring 2008. Phase 2 will be recruited in spring of 2008 for the
2008--2009 school year. Phase 2 teachers will receive CSR training in
the late summer of 2008, and phase 2 students will be pre‑tested in the
fall of 2008 and post‑tested in spring 2009. Classroom observations of
phase 2 implementation will occur in fall 2008 and in spring 2009.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604153 .anchor}Exhibit 1. Study Design

  -------------- ----------- -------------- ------------ ------------------------
  Phase of the   Number of   Experimental   Number of    Number of Students\
  Study          Schools     Conditions     Classrooms   (unit of randomization;
                                                         based on estimate of 25
                                                         students per class)

  1\             10          Treatment      20           500
  (2007--2008)                                           

                             Control        20           500

  2\             10          Treatment      20           500
  (2008--2009)                                           

                             Control        20           500

  Total          20                         80           2,000
  -------------- ----------- -------------- ------------ ------------------------

The intervention consists of four aspects: (1) teachers receiving
training to use the CSR intervention effectively, (2) teachers teaching
students to use CSR comprehension strategies and to work cooperatively
and successfully in CSR groups, (3) coaches supporting teacher learning
and implementation of CSR, and (4) students successfully using CSR
learning strategies in cooperative small groups. In order for students
to implement the strategies in the CSR groups, their teachers need to be
able to teach these strategies well. Consequently, the training that
teachers will receive as a part of the intervention is extremely
important.

Intervention teachers will be trained by project staff with CSR
experience in how to implement the intervention. The CSR training
underscores the importance of using explicit reading comprehension
instruction as the vehicle to teach the metacognitive and
self‑regulation knowledge students need to comprehend text. Explicit
comprehension instruction is based on Vygotsky's (1978) research using
scaffolded instruction (i.e., modeling, teacher‑assisted and independent
practice) and thinking aloud. The teachers learn and practice the
instructional technique. They will also be given a CSR manual containing
explicit lessons in the four comprehension strategies (Preview, Click
and Clunk, Get the Gist, Wrap Up) whose design is based on the tenets of
scaffolded instruction and thinking aloud (Klingner, Vaughn, Dimino,
Schumm, & Bryant, 2001). Each student has a role in the CSR group
(Leader, Timekeeper, Clunk Expert, Gist Expert, Scorekeeper,
Encourager). The second aspect of the training involves teaching
students the CSR cooperative learning roles and how to function as a
group. It is imperative for students to understand the purpose and
function of the roles to ensure an effective use of the comprehension
strategies and an efficient use of time.

To promote a high level of implementation of the CSR intervention, each
treatment teacher will be provided additional school‑based coaching. It
is crucial that a coach visit each classroom during the first three
weeks of the intervention to ensure that explicit reading comprehension
instruction is being implemented to teach the four CSR strategies. After
the students begin working in groups, the coach will visit each
classroom during the second, third and fourth month of the intervention.

### Overview of Data Collection Plan

This section describes the full set of data collection instruments. The
data collections for the CSR Study serve four broad purposes:

**Recruitment,** to identify schools that will participate in the study;

**Documenting the intervention,** to verify the fidelity with which CSR
was implemented;

**Assembling contextual data**, to help understand the results:

data to describe the sample so that differential outcomes for groups
might be elucidated;

data to compare treatment and control schools, teachers, and students
prior to the implementation (i.e. to assess how well randomization has
balanced the samples);

covariates (control variables) that can be included in analyses to
reduce unexplained variance;

variables that may interact with the treatment.

**Measuring the outcome,** student reading achievement.

To address these objectives the study will collect data from the
following types of respondents: principals, teachers, and students. In
addition, study staff, including the CSR coaches and evaluation staff,
will use data collection instruments designed to document CSR
implementation and gather information from teachers.

#### Recruitment

##### District Screening Process

District screening process does not include systematic data collection
from school district personnel.

Initial district identification and recruitment efforts will utilize
existing data sources. Districts with characteristics that meet study
criteria will be identified using data from Market Data Retrieval (MDR),
which utilizes publicly available datasets to describe characteristics
of regions and communities. MDR will be provided with criteria, such as
a high proportion of ELL students and four or more 5th grade classrooms
in schools, that will allow them to produce a list of districts in the
Southwest region that match study eligibility requirements. Study staff
will then utilize their state contacts to learn which of the identified
districts are good fits for the study. Study staff will identify key
personnel in each district and attempt to make contact by telephone and
mail (see Appendix A: Letters). The purpose of the contact with district
personnel is to seek permission to contact and recruit schools in the
district. The approval will be formalized with a Partnering Expectations
Document (see Appendix B: Supporting Materials). Additionally, study
staff will learn whether the district has an IRB or other research board
that needs to approve the study activities and initiate that process, if
necessary.

##### School Screening Protocol

Once a school district has shown interest in participating in the study,
we will use existing data sources, such as Common Core Data (CCD) and
publicly available school report cards to enhance the identification of
a potential pool of participating schools developed with the MDR data.
We will approach schools after gaining documented approval from
district‑level staff. School principals will be contacted first by mail,
and then by telephone. Though initial recruitment efforts will confirm
the schools' eligibility based on existing data, each school principal
will be asked to update/correct our information by filling out a School
Information Sheet with our assistance if the school is willing to
participate in the study. See Exhibit 2 for item‑level justification of
this instrument. The form may be filled out over the telephone, faxed or
completed electronically by either the principal or study staff. The
items in the School Information Sheet will yield contact information for
the school contact person, details about student‑body characteristics,
and information about 5th grade instructional practices. The Sheet
should take the principal about 20 minutes to complete.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604154 .anchor}Exhibit 2. School Information
Sheet Item Level Justification

  --------------------------- -------------------------------------------
  Item                        Purpose

  School Name...e-mail        To provide us with current information with
  address                     which to contact the school.

  Grade levels                To confirm that the school has 5^th^ grade
                              classrooms, for eligibility reasons.

  ...both ELA and social      To confirm that reading and social studies
  studies                     are generally taught in the same classroom
                              by the same teacher for each class, for
                              study eligibility purposes.

  Number of students per      To confirm that there are about 25 students
  class                       per class, for study design reasons.

  ELA and social studies      To provide context information about the
  textbooks, Other            school's curriculum for implementation
  instructional materials...  analysis purposes.

  ELL and reading             To provide context about other activities
  comprehension initiatives   at the school that could conflict with
  in the school               study activities for implementation and
                              data collection purposes.

  Percentage of ELL 5^th^     To confirm that the school serves ELL
  graders                     students, preferably a high proportion, for
                              study design purposes.

  Annual student attrition    To inform the study about student attrition
                              levels to be expected at the school for
                              study design purposes.

  Availability of             To inform study staff whether or not
  Internet/e-mail access      electronic communication and data
                              collection are accessible to the school
                              staff.

  Other information           To provide us with information the staff
                              deem relevant to study activities.
  --------------------------- -------------------------------------------

##### Student Background Data Request

Once district and school recruitment is complete, districts will be
asked to provide background data for the 5th grade students at
participating schools. The Student Background Data Request includes the
following variables:

-   Gender,

-   Birth date,

-   Race/Ethnicity,

-   ELL status (level, competency score, etc.),

-   Free/reduced lunch eligibility status,

-   Special education status,

-   State assessment percentile/standard scores in reading.

See Exhibit 3 for item‑level justification of this instrument. If
necessary, study staff will work with district personnel to retrieve the
requested data and assemble it into an electronic data file that can
then be exchanged electronically in a secure format. It will take a
district analyst approximately 15 hours to assemble the requested data.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604155 .anchor}Exhibit 3. Student Data Request
Item Level Justification

  ------ ----------------------- ----------------------------------------------
  Item   Topic                   Purpose

  1      Gender                  Variable for testing treatment/control group
                                 equivalence at baseline and a potential
                                 control for final analysis to eliminate the
                                 effects of gender in analysis of CSR
                                 effectiveness.

  2      Birth date              To examine the sample for subjects who are
                                 outside the customary age range for 5^th^
                                 grade.

  3      Origin/race/ethnicity   Variable for testing treatment/control group
                                 equivalence at baseline and a potential
                                 control for final analysis to eliminate the
                                 effects of origin/race/ethnicity in analysis
                                 of CSR effectiveness.

  4      Free or reduced‑priced  Poverty indicator variable for testing
         lunch status            treatment/control group equivalence at
                                 baseline and a grouping/control variable in
                                 final analysis to determine whether CSR is
                                 effective particularly for low‑income
                                 students.

  5      ELL status, ELL test    Variables for testing treatment/control group
         scores                  equivalence at baseline and grouping/control
                                 variables for final analysis to determine
                                 whether CSR is effective particularly for ELL
                                 students.

  6      Special education       Variable for testing treatment/control group
         status                  equivalence at baseline and a potential
                                 control variable for final analysis to
                                 eliminate the effects of special education
                                 status in analysis of CSR effectiveness.

  7      Spring 2006 achievement Variable for testing treatment/control group
         test scores             equivalence at baseline*.*
  ------ ----------------------- ----------------------------------------------

#### Baseline Data

##### Students[^1]

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160856565 .anchor}***Group Reading Assessment and
Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE).*** The GRADE will be administered in fall
2007 and spring 2008 to all students in cohort 1 and in fall 2008 and
spring 2009 to all students in cohort 2. The GRADE for 5th grade (Level
5) assesses the following domains:

-   Vocabulary (35 items): Students read a phrase or short sentence in
    which the target word is highlighted, then select the target word's
    meaning from a list of four or five choices.

-   Sentence Comprehension (19 items): Students are presented with a
    single sentence with a missing word and four or five single‑word
    choices.

-   Passage Comprehension (6 passages, 30 items): Students read one‑ to
    two‑ paragraph passages and answer five multiple choice questions
    about each passage.

-   Listening Comprehension (17 items): The test administrator reads a
    sentence aloud and students mark one of four pictures that best
    matches the sentence.

It takes 5th graders one hour, on average, to complete the GRADE.
Struggling readers may need more time, so two administration sessions
will be scheduled to allow all students to finish the test.

GRADE results include total scores, as well as scores for each
subsection, and these scores are provided in the forms of standard
scores, percentile ranks, and grade equivalents. The GRADE has the
advantage of providing detailed information about students' performance
using a group‑administered format. Unlike state assessment tests, the
GRADE provides profiles of students' strengths and weaknesses in several
domains. Fall scores will be used in final analyses as baseline
predictors.

##### Teachers

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160856567 .anchor}***Teacher Surveys.*** The
teacher survey will be administered in two phases and the purpose of the
surveys is to collect descriptive data. The Fall Teacher Survey will
focus on the teacher's background information and recent professional
development experiences in reading instruction. It will take no more
than 40 minutes to complete. See Exhibit 4 for item‑level justification
of this instrument. The consent form will also be distributed and
collected with the Fall Teacher Survey. The Spring Teacher Survey will
focus on the classroom instructional context such as the presence of
aides and specialists and the teachers' perceptions of the classroom
management challenges presented by their classes. It will take no more
than 20 minutes to complete. See Exhibit 5 for item‑level justification
of the Spring Teacher survey.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604156 .anchor}Exhibit 4. Fall Teacher Survey
Item Level Justification

+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| I   | Topic          | Purpose                                      |
| tem |                |                                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 1   | Education      | To determine whether the teachers' levels of |
|     |                | education differ between the treatment and   |
|     |                | control groups.                              |
|     |                |                                              |
|     |                | To investigate whether teachers with         |
|     |                | different levels of education or types of    |
|     |                | degrees implement CSR differently.           |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 2   | Certification  | To determine whether teachers' levels or     |
|     |                | types of certification differ between the    |
|     |                | treatment and control groups.                |
|     |                |                                              |
|     |                | To investigate whether teachers with         |
|     |                | different levels or types of certification   |
|     |                | implement CSR differently.                   |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 3   | Full time/part | To ascertain that all teachers in the study  |
|     | time           | are regular full time teachers.              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 4   | Teaching       | To determine whether teachers' prior         |
| --6 | experience     | teaching experiences differ between          |
|     |                | treatment and control groups.                |
|     |                |                                              |
|     |                | To investigate whether teachers with         |
|     |                | different amounts or types of teaching       |
|     |                | experience implement CSR differently.        |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 7   | Preparation    | To determine whether the amount of teachers' |
|     | time           | prep time differs between treatment and      |
|     |                | control groups.                              |
|     |                |                                              |
|     |                | To investigate whether the amount of teacher |
|     |                | prep time has an impact on CSR               |
|     |                | implementation.                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 8   | Gender         | To determine whether treatment and control   |
|     |                | groups are equivalent at baseline.           |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 9-  | Ethnicity and  | To determine whether treatment and control   |
| -10 | race (separate | groups are equivalent at baseline.           |
|     | questions)     |                                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 11  | Spanish        | To determine whether teachers' Spanish       |
|     | language       | language fluency differs between treatment   |
|     | fluency        | and control groups: In classes with a high   |
|     |                | proportion of Spanish ELL students, Spanish  |
|     |                | language fluency could impact many aspects   |
|     |                | of teaching and learning.                    |
|     |                |                                              |
|     |                | To investigate whether teachers' Spanish     |
|     |                | language fluency has an impact on CSR        |
|     |                | implementation.                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 12- | Professional   | To determine whether the type, duration, and |
| -16 | development    | content of professional development differs  |
|     | relating to    | between treatment and control groups.        |
|     | reading        |                                              |
|     | instruction    | To investigate whether the type, duration,   |
|     |                | and content of professional development has  |
|     |                | an impact on CSR implementation.             |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604157 .anchor}Exhibit 5. Spring Teacher Survey
Item Level Justification

+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| I   | Topic          | Purpose                                      |
| tem |                |                                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 1   | Reading and    | To determine the extent to which the study   |
|     | social studies | teachers have responsibility for teaching    |
|     | instruction    | reading and social studies to their          |
|     |                | students. If, for some reason, another       |
|     |                | teacher teaches these subjects some or all   |
|     |                | of the time, there are implications for CSR  |
|     |                | implementation (treatment group) and         |
|     |                | analysis (both groups).                      |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 2   | Student        | To determine whether the teachers in either  |
|     | teacher        | group had a student teacher, and, if so, the |
|     |                | duration for which the student teacher took  |
|     |                | over the teaching of the class. A student    |
|     |                | teacher taking over the class will have      |
|     |                | implications for CSR implementation and      |
|     |                | analysis (both groups).                      |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 3   | Reading class  | To determine whether the teacher will teach  |
|     | stability      | reading to the same students all year. A     |
|     |                | change in students' reading teachers will    |
|     |                | have implications for data analysis.         |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 4   | Description of | To understand the context, from the          |
|     | students'      | teacher's perspective, for reading           |
|     | reading        | instruction in the class. Teachers'          |
|     | abilities      | perceptions of students' reading abilities   |
|     |                | could have implications for reading          |
|     |                | instruction, including implementation of     |
|     |                | CSR.                                         |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 5   | Class behavior | To understand the extent to which teachers   |
|     |                | find student behavior in the class difficult |
|     |                | to manage. Teachers' perceptions of behavior |
|     |                | management difficulties could have           |
|     |                | implications for implementation of CSR.      |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 6   | Instructional  | To understand the extent to which the        |
|     | resources      | teacher has specialist and paraprofessional  |
|     |                | assistance in the classroom. This could have |
|     |                | implications for CSR implementation and      |
|     |                | instruction. Differences between treatment   |
|     |                | and control classrooms will be examined.     |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 7-  | Reading        | To understand the nature of comprehension    |
| -10 | program/Social | and social studies instruction teachers may  |
|     | studies        | already use in the classroom. This could     |
|     | curriculum     | have implications for CSR implementation,    |
|     |                | and differences between control and          |
|     |                | treatment classrooms will be examined.       |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 11  | Use of CSR     | To understand the extent of implementation   |
| -13 | approach       | and CSR related support that takes place in  |
|     |                | CSR classrooms.                              |
|     | (for treatment |                                              |
|     | group teachers |                                              |
|     | only)          |                                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+
| 14  | Effect of CSR  | Teachers' self-report regarding the          |
|     | (for treatment | effectiveness of the CSR approach in their   |
|     | group teachers | classrooms.                                  |
|     | only)          |                                              |
+-----+----------------+----------------------------------------------+

The purpose of administering the Fall survey is to collect data that
will enable comparisons between the treatment and controls prior to
intervention, and provide covariate and interaction variables for the
impact analyses. The purpose of administering the Spring survey is to to
identify other factors that are likely to affect the level of CSR
implementation or student outcomes.

###### Implementation

##### Study Staff[^2]

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160856570 .anchor}***Collaborative Strategic
Reading Implementation Validity Checklist (CSRIVC).*** The CSRIVC was
designed exclusively to assess the fidelity of a teacher's
implementation of CSR. The instrument is a checklist on which the
observer can indicate that each listed aspect of CSR occurred fully,
occurred with modifications, or was not observed. There are 21 items on
the CSRIVC, 11 that pertain to child behaviors, 7 to teacher behaviors,
and 3 to the classroom setting. Fidelity observations using the CSRIVC
will be conducted two times per year, once prior to the Thanksgiving
break and once before the end of the school year. All teachers
implementing the CSR intervention (treatment group teachers) will be
observed both times. These observations will be conducted by trained
observers. The observations will each last approximately 30--45 minutes.
Implementation observations do not constitute burden to teachers
participating in the study.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160856571 .anchor}***Expository Reading
Comprehension Classroom Observation (ERCCO).*** The ERCCO consists of 5
to 6 10‑minute observation intervals. During each interval, the observer
records the nature of comprehension and vocabulary instruction, grouping
arrangements, type of text, and the occurrence of features of generally
effective instruction. There are 56 items on the ERCCO protocol. A brief
list of items will be added to the ERCCO regarding the nature of any
group instruction that took place during the observation. An additional
30 minutes after the observation period will be needed for the observer
to count tallies, to complete the coversheet and observation summary
items. The ERCCO will be used during social studies instruction (on days
when CSR is not being implemented, for treatment classrooms). The ERCCO
requires the use of expository text, which is most likely during social
studies.

All teachers participating in the study (treatment and control teachers)
will be observed once using the ERCCO in the spring, between February
and April. The purpose of this observation is to document if CSR
training impacts teachers' use of comprehension teaching strategies in
contexts external to the intervention, to assess the extent to which
collaborative learning and explicit comprehension instruction occur in
control classrooms and to describe 'business as usual' control
classrooms. It should be noted that fidelity observations and ERCCO
observations cannot be conducted simultaneously. Observations will be
conducted by observers who have previous experience using the ERCCO
protocol.

###### Outcomes

##### Students

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160856574 .anchor}***Group Reading Assessment and
Diagnostic Evaluation.*** The GRADE (described above) will be
administered again in the spring to all students participating in the
study to capture potential growth in reading achievement. Fall scores
will be used in final analyses as baseline predictors, allowing for the
isolation of variance in spring outcome scores attributable to CSR
treatment as opposed to pre‑existing reading abilities.

### Timeline of Data Collection Plan

This request is for the administration of student, teacher, and
classroom data collection instruments that are included in the
appendices and described under the Overview to Data Collection section
of this package. The data collections and their timing in the study are
displayed in Exhibit 6.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604158 .anchor}Exhibit 6. Data Collection
Instruments and Schedule

+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Data Collection Instrument      | Su    | Fa | Win   | Fa | Win   |
|                                 | mmer/ | ll | ter/\ | ll | ter/\ |
|                                 |       | 20 | S     | 20 | S     |
|                                 | Fall  | 07 | pring | 08 | pring |
|                                 |       |    | 2008  |    | 2009  |
|                                 | 2007  |    |       |    |       |
+=================================+=======+====+=======+====+=======+
| District and School Information |       |    |       |    |       |
| for Recruitment Purposes        |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Student Background Data Request | P1\*  |    | P2\*  |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| School Screening Protocol       | P1    |    | P2    |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Students                        |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Group Reading Assessment and    |       | P1 | P1    | P2 | P2    |
| Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE)   |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Teachers                        |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Fall Teacher Survey             |       | P1 |       | P2 |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Spring Teacher Survey           |       |    | P1    |    | P2    |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Classroom Observations          |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Classroom Observation:          |       | P1 | P1    | P2 | P2    |
| Collaborative Strategic Reading |       |    |       |    |       |
| Implementation Validity         |       |    |       |    |       |
| Checklist                       |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+
| Expository Reading              |       |    | P1    |    | P2    |
| Comprehension Classroom         |       |    |       |    |       |
| Observation (ERCCO)             |       |    |       |    |       |
+---------------------------------+-------+----+-------+----+-------+

\* P1 = Phase 1, P2 = Phase 2

### 2. Purposes and Uses of the Data

The CSR study is designed to evaluate the effectiveness of CSR
intervention in 5th grade classrooms with a large percentage of ELL
students. Thus, the primary research question of interest is whether CSR
classrooms outperform control classrooms on the proposed outcome
measure: the Group Reading Assessment and Diagnostic Evaluation (GRADE).
As discussed previously, the primary research question is based on
impact analyses using the full sample, which includes native English
speakers as well as English Language Learners.

There are two research questions of secondary interest in this study.
The first is whether the CSR intervention has a positive effect for ELL
students. For the purpose of this study we classify students to three
subgroups (students who have been previously classified as ELL,
currently assigned an ELL status, and native English speakers) because
most ELL students are placed in English emersion classes by the 5th
grade. However, depending on their English language fluency they may
still be in a position to benefit more from explicit comprehension
instruction than native English speakers.

The other secondary research question is based on the presumption that
the level of implementation of the CSR intervention is positively
related to the student outcomes. Therefore, it is of interest to ask
whether classrooms with higher level of implementation benefit more from
the intervention. Fidelity of the intervention will be measured by
conducting observations using the Collaborative Strategic Reading
Intervention Validity Checklist (CSRIVC) developed by Vaughn, Hughes,
Schumm, and Klinger (1998). These observations will be conducted
two times per year. The purpose of this observation measure is to
determine the extent to which the components of CSR are being
implemented. The degree of correlation between level of implementation
and each of the outcome measures will be reviewed, and should there be a
significant relationship, the relationship will be further studied by
analyzing the data from the treatment classrooms only.

The collected data will be used by IES and its subcontractors to study
the effects of CSR intervention, to answer the research questions stated
above. Student achievement data will be collected evaluate the effect of
CSR intervention on students' reading comprehension and vocabulary
development. Classroom observation will be conducted to evaluate the
level of CSR implementation and potential contamination of control
classrooms. In addition, both student‑ and teacher-level demographic
data will be collected to enhance the estimation of the potential effect
of CSR and the interpretation of the study results. The study results
will assist states and districts as they choose strategies to raise
achievement for a variety of students. This evidence will be of
immediate interest and import for policymakers, researchers, and
practitioners because of the paucity of strategies that have been
empirically tested with ELL students*.*

### 3. Use of Technology to Reduce Burden

Whenever possible, we will use information technologies to maximize the
efficiency and completeness of the information gathered for this
evaluation and to minimize the burden on respondents. Initial
recruitment at the district level will begin with electronic searches of
existing data sources to identify eligible districts. Study staff will
then use telephone and other electronic communication as necessary, in
addition to mail, to gain district approval for school recruitment.
Additionally, the Student Data Background Request will be managed by
telephone and e-mail, to the maximum extent possible, so that school or
district staff can provide us with student data in electronic format if
their systems permit. Study staff will use telephone, e-mail, and other
electronic resources to complete the School Information Sheet so that
school staff does not need to track and mail any forms.

The Teacher Survey will not involve information technology, as
developing web‑based methods would not be cost‑effective given the
relatively modest sample size of the study and the lack of access to the
Internet for elementary school teachers in high poverty schools.
Additionally study staff will be on‑site with teachers for training and
classroom observations and can administer surveys in person at no extra
cost and with a higher response rate than via telephone or electronic
means. The Spring Teacher Survey may be administered electronically only
if it can be determined that all teachers have access to the Internet
and that personal administration will not yield a higher response rate
than electronic administration.

### 4. Efforts to Identify Duplication

We will utilize existing data sources whenever feasible. However, there
are no equivalent sources of data available currently for
measures/information required for successful completion of the study. As
is discussed above in the Overview of Data Collection Plan, data are
collected for four purposes: recruitment, documentation of the
intervention, documentation of the study context, and measurement of
student outcomes.

#### Recruitment

We have developed a customized School Information Sheet to summarize
publicly available data and to collect information that is not readily
available in public sources. The School Information Sheet will be
administered to those principals only whose school fits the initial
recruitment criteria and who are willing to make a commitment to
participate in the study.

#### Implementation

The level of implementation and potential contamination across
classrooms will be captured by an implementation checklist
(Collaborative Strategic Reading Implementation Validity Checklist) and
observation protocol (Expository Reading Comprehension Classroom
Observation) tailored to the CSR intervention.

#### Teacher Background/Classroom Context

We will be collecting demographic information from teachers by
administering Fall and Spring Teacher Surveys, because no reliable and
up‑to‑date source of data on teachers' background characteristics,
including their education and most recent professional development
experiences exists. Moreover, the instructional context in classrooms
changes each year, so it will be necessary to ask teachers about the
circumstances of their current class. Thus, it will be necessary to
create and administer teacher background surveys for the study.

#### Student Outcomes

Reading achievement data cannot be obtained from state assessments
because (1) the assessments are administered only once during the year,
and we require assessment that occurs specifically before the
intervention begins and at the end of the school year, and (2) all
students in the study must take the same reading assessment for the
study, and the existing assessment data will be from different
instruments used in different states.

### 5. Methods to Minimize Burden on Small Entities

Existing data about districts, schools, and students will be utilized
whenever possible. MDR and study staff will utilize publicly available
datasets to identify districts and schools that meet study eligibility
criteria. Study staff will use personal contacts, websites, and other
publicly available information sources to learn about schools and
districts prior to contacting them. This will make recruitment efforts
more straightforward, and it will reduce the burden on school principals
to the extent that school‑specific information can be pre‑loaded into
the School Information Sheet so that they will only need to confirm that
the information is current.

### 6. Consequences of Not Collecting the Data

The CSR Study is one of only a few experimental studies that focus on a
strategy to improve reading achievement of ELL students. As required by
NCLB, states must improve achievement, particularly in reading, for all
students. Since ELLs are a large and expanding group of academically
at‑risk students, evidence of strategies that are effective for this
group is needed. Without this study, states and districts will have
almost no basis on which to choose appropriate reading interventions for
late‑elementary ELL students.

The data collections for which we are requesting clearance---School
Information Sheet, Student Background Data Request, and Teacher
Surveys---are vital to this study because they will yield important
contextual variables that will help us understand the results. For
example, student background data will be used to determine if CSR is
more or less effective for certain groups of students, and both student
background snd teacher survey data will be used compare control and
treatment groups to see if we can assume that the groups are similar
enough to yield causal inferences. Meanwhile, information about 5th
grade instructional practices from the School Information Sheet will be
important for understanding the context of CSR implementation and
control classroom instruction. All of these data collections will result
in information that will broaden understanding of results and strengthen
the conclusions of the study.

### 7. Special Circumstances

No special circumstances apply to this study.

### 8. Federal Register Comments and Persons Consulted Outside the Agency

[The notice for the full study data collection was announced in the
Federal Register on XXX. No public comments have been received. **PLACE
HOLDER FOR FINAL TEXT**]{.mark}

To assist with the development the CSR Evaluation Study, project staff
have drawn on the experience and expertise of a network of outside
experts. The consultants and their affiliations are listed in Exhibit 7.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604159 .anchor}Exhibit 7. Technical Working
Group Members of the\
CSR Intervention Study

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Technical Working    
  Group Members        
  -------------------- --------------------------------------------------
  Expert               Affiliation

  Dr. Roger Bybee      Biological Sciences Curriculum Study (BSCS)

  Dr. David Chard      University of Oregon

  Dr. David Francis    University of Houston

  Dr. Jeremy           University of Georgia
  Kilpatrick           

  Dr. David Myers      American Institutes for Research
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------

To date the project advisors and TWG members have convened twice---in
June and September 2006---and provided comments on the study design, the
treatment, and the data collection instruments. Additional meetings will
be scheduled throughout the life of the project as deemed appropriate.
Project staff also will use outside experts individually for
consultation on an as‑needed basis.

### 9. Payment or Gifts

Teachers will be compensated \$30 in the beginning of the study for data
collection activities, specifically for filling out the Fall Teacher
Survey and the Spring Teacher Survey. This is consistent with teachers'
estimated average hourly rate of \$29 given that the Fall Survey will
take a maximum of 40 minutes and the Spring Survey 20 minutes to
complete

### 10. Assurances of Confidentiality

REL Southwest follows the confidentiality and data protection
requirements of IES (The Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002, Title I,
Part E, Section 183).  REL Southwest will protect the confidentiality of
all information collected for the study and will use it for research
purposes only.  No information that identifies any study participant
will be released.  Information from participating institutions and
respondents will be presented at aggregate levels in reports. 
Information on respondents will be linked to their institution but not
to any individually identifiable information.  No individually
identifiable information will be maintained by the study team.  All
institution-level identifiable information will be kept in secured
locations and identifiers will be destroyed as soon as they are no
longer required REL Southwest obtains signed NCEE Affidavits of
Nondisclosure from all employees, subcontractors, and consultants that
may have access to this data and submits them to our NCEE COR.

#### Consent Forms

Teachers who participate in the study will be requested to sign a
consent form that provides information about the study (roles and
responsibilities of study participants) and study related data
collection (see Appendix A: Letters). The CSR intervention and
randomization will be conducted as a part of the regular curriculum
offered by a school district, hence we will not be requesting parental
consent for the randomization of students to intervention or control
classrooms. However, we will be collecting parental consent forms
regarding testing students and using the collected test data and
demographic data collected by the school districts (see Appendix A:
Letters). This study will be conducted in close partnerships with the
school districts, which will aid the process of collecting parental
consent forms. We will also ask help from the school staff, both school
administrators and teachers. Specifically, we will ask the teachers to
distribute and collect the consent forms. Teachers in the treatment
group will be informed about the parental consent forms during their CSR
training, while the control school teachers will receive this
information during an informational meeting about the study. If
possible, the request for parental consent will come from the school
district on the behalf of REL-Southwest. Students can decline to
participate in any data collection activity during the study.

### 11. Justification of Sensitive Questions

No questions of a sensitive nature will be included in the CSR
Evaluation Study.

### 12. Estimates of Hour Burden

Exhibits 8a and 8b below provide annual hour burden estimates for
district, school, and teacher data collections[^3]. The total estimated
hour burden for the full CSR Study is 138 hours; or 69 hours per each
year of the study. Based on average hourly wages for participants the
burden (138 hours) amounts to a total monetary burden of \$4,788
(\$2,394 per year). The total burden estimate includes:

-   Time for 100 percent of district personnel to respond to the Student
    Background Data Request;

-   Time for 90 percent of principals to complete, with study staff
    assistance, the School Information Sheet;

-   Time for 90 percent of 80 teachers in the study to respond to:

A 40‑minute Fall Teacher Survey;

A 20‑minute Spring Teacher Survey;

Teachers will be compensated for the burden of completing the surveys,
which should facilitate a high response rate. District and school staff
will not be compensated for the hour burden of study participation
because the tasks we ask of them will not be outside the realm of the
duties for which they are already compensated through their employment

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604160 .anchor}Exhibit 8a. District and School
Hour Burden, Combined Burden Estimates for Phases 1 and 2 (2 years)

  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Task                Number of     Estimated   Number of     Time        Total   Hourly   Estimated   Suggested
                      Respondents   Response    Respondents   Estimate\   Hours   Rate     Monetary    Respondent
                                    Rate                      (in hours)                   Cost of     Compensation
                                                                                           Burden      
  ------------------- ------------- ----------- ------------- ----------- ------- -------- ----------- --------------
  Districts                                                                                            

  Student Background  4             100%        4             15          60      \$40     \$2,400     \$0
  Data Request                                                                                         

  Schools                                                                                              

  School Information  20            90%         18            .33         6       \$50     \$300       \$0
  Sheet                                                                                                
  -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604161 .anchor}Exhibit 8b. Teacher and Student
Hour Burden, Combined Burden Estimates for Phases 1 and 2 (2 Years)[^4]

  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Task        Number of     Estimated   Number of         Number of     Time        Total   Hourly   Estimated   Suggested
              Respondents   Response    Administrations   Total         Estimate\   Hours   Rate     Monetary    Respondent
                            Rate                          Respondents   (in hours)                   Cost of     Compensation
                                                                                                     Burden      
  ----------- ------------- ----------- ----------------- ------------- ----------- ------- -------- ----------- --------------
  Teachers                                                                                                       

  Fall        80            90%         1                 72            .67         48      \$29     \$1,392     \$20
  Teacher                                                                                                        
  Survey                                                                                                         

  Spring      80            90%         1                 72            .33         24      \$29     \$696       \$10
  Teacher                                                                                                        
  Survey                                                                                                         
  (recall                                                                                                        
  there is                                                                                                       
  version A                                                                                                      
  for                                                                                                            
  treatment                                                                                                      
  teachers                                                                                                       
  and B for                                                                                                      
  control,                                                                                                       
  estimate 36                                                                                                    
  per group                                                                                                      
  for a total                                                                                                    
  of 72)                                                                                                         
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

### 13. Estimate of Cost Burden to Respondents

There are no additional respondent costs associated with this data
collection other than the hour burden accounted for in item 12.

### 14. Estimate of Annual Cost to the Federal Government

Exhibit 9 displays the estimated total annual cost to the Federal
Government. Estimated year one expenditures include study planning
(study design and study material development) and recruitment
preparation (recruitment planning and development of recruitment
material development). Project costs for year two and three include site
recruitment and management activities, CSR intervention related
activities (training and coaching as well as classroom observations),
and data related activities (pretest/posttest data collection, data
entry). ). For example, teachers will be paid the district hourly rate
for any study related activities they complete outside the hours of the
school day, such as coaching that takes place in the evening or training
that takes place on a weekend. Teachers whose school districts will not
pay them their regular salaries for training that takes place during a
weekday will also be compensated at the district daily rate.

Project costs in years four and five include completion of data
collection, data clean up, data analysis and final product development
(including dissemination efforts).

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604162 .anchor}Exhibit 9. Estimated Annualized
Costs

  --------------------------------------- -------------------------------
  **Study Year (dates)**                  **Total Study Costs per Year**

  Year 1 (3-15- 2006\-\--03-14-2007)      \$707,462

  Year 2 (3-15- 2007\-\--03-14-2008)      \$1,215,907

  Year 3 (3-15- 2008\-\--03-14-2009)      \$1,147,798

  Year 4 (3-15- 2009\-\--03-14-2010)      \$808,581

  Year 5 (3-15- 2010\-\--03-14-2011)      \$67,604

  **Total**                               **\$3,947,352**
  --------------------------------------- -------------------------------

[]{.mark}

### 15. Program Changes or Adjustments

No changes or adjustments are requested at this time.

### 16. Plans for Tabulation and Publication of Results

This study will result in a final report, which will be submitted to IES
after internal and TWG review in March, 2009 (see Exhibit 10). The final
report will include results of analyses outlined under the Estimation
Procedures/Analysis Methods heading of Section B.

A dissemination plan will be created in coordination with the REL
Southwest Marketing department. Multiple products will be created and
various dissemination channels will be utilized dependent on the
relevant target audience identified for each product. A product
announcement will be developed prior to the start of the study and
periodic interim research bulletins will be created and distributed
throughout the life of the study.

Members of the study team may, in coordination with REL Southwest
Marketing, and as per any relevant IES guidelines, submit articles to
peer‑reviewed journals, though specific results of the current study
will first have to be disseminated to IES.

Members of the study team may submit proposals for conference
presentations subject to appropriate IES guidelines and contract
restrictions. Presentations of preliminary data may be made at national
scholarly conferences pending approval by REL Southwest, and following
REL Southwest contract guidelines.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc160604163 .anchor}Exhibit 10. Schedule for
Dissemination of Study Results

  ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------
  Activity/Deliverable                           Due Date

  Intermediate Data Report                       August 2008

  Final Report                                   March 2010
  ---------------------------------------------- ------------------------

### 17. Approval to Not Display OMB Expiration Date

All data collection instruments will include the OMB expiration date.

### 18. Explanation of Exceptions

No exceptions are requested.

[^1]: Based on 5 CFR 1320.3(d) we provide a discussion of student
    achievement measures used in the study, but do not seek clearance
    for them. The student assessments described here do not pose any
    burden to teachers because study personnel will administer them.

[^2]: The two instruments described in this section (CSRIVC and ERCCO)
    do not pose any burden to teachers, thus we are not seeking
    clearance for them; we are only seeking clearance for the Fall and
    Spring Teacher Surveys.

[^3]: Based on 5 CFR 1320.3(d) we provided a discussion of student
    achievement measures used in the study in section 1 but do not seek
    clearance or declare burden for them. The student assessments
    described do not pose any burden to teachers because study personnel
    will administer them. In addition, we do not state burden for
    observational measures, because they do not pose burden to the
    teachers.

[^4]: Note that we list 47 for the number of respondents in item 16a of
    the IC Part 1 Information Request. This is based on 72 teachers, 4
    Student Background Data Requests, and 20 School Information Sheets.
    This yields 94 respondents, or an average of 47 per year. This same
    approach should be used for understanding our response to item 16b
    (72+72+18+4=166. 166/2=83).