Teaching Higher / textbook-effects high-water mark (and its non-survival)
Kane, T. J., et al. · 2016
grade Dquasi-experimentindependentfailed
Sample
~1,500 teachers, 5 states
Population
US grades 4-5 math.
Design
Cross-sectional textbook-school matching.
Key findings
The 'textbooks rival teacher quality' claim at its peak — instructive precisely because it didn't survive better data.
Genetic confound
Correlational adoption; schools choosing texts differ on unobservables.
Replication notes
A caution against building policy on single cross-sectional results.
Effects
| Outcome | Metric | Value | Measure | Timing | Vs | Horizon | Class |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 SD of textbook effectiveness (2016 estimate) | SD | ~0.10 — did NOT survive the same team's 2019-20 six-state replication (~no differences) | standardized | annual | active-alternative | end-of-treatment | domain-skill |
Cited by
- Curriculum choice as a school-level levermixedconf: highgc: low