Visible Learning plus is a professional development programme for teachers. It provides an in-depth review and change model for schools based on John Hattie's research. With a seminar and support series the Visible Learning plus team helps schools to find out about the impact they are having on student achievement. www.visiblelearningplus.com
It looks like bulkying has a positive effect: 0.24 on the site with all the rankings, but in an article quoting Hattie (I think) he said this was a negative effect: -0.24. This seems like an important one to correct or clarify.
Dear Dante,
Thanks for pointing this out.
I found the Hattie interview you mentioned: http://www.workingoutwhatworks.com/en-GB/Magazine/2015/2/John_Hattie_interview Hattie says: “Yes I am now close to 1200 meta-analyses (up from the 800 in VL). What is remarkable since I published the first study (in 1989 based on 134) is that the “story” underlying the data has hardly changed. Some of the more interesting (new) effects include Bullying (-.24), parental employment (.03), sleep (.07), single sex compared to coed schools (.08).”
But the data I visualized is based on this paper: “The applicability of Visible Learning to higher education.” There, Hattie lists “bullying” with an effect of 0.24. http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/stl/1/1/79/
Unfortunately none of the two texts provides the original meta-study to double-check the effect size. We should ask John Hattie for clarification.
Best wishes,
Sebastian
Where can I find a clear explanation of the categories?
I am very interested in the mobility category and what is actually included and considered. How do I find that out?
Changing schools has a negative effect size. “Mobility” means mobility between schools and includes 3 meta-studies: Mehana (1997), Jones (1989), Galton & Willcocks (1983). Source: John Hattie (2009) Visible Learning, pp. 81/82.
I have heard that 0.7 effect size equates to a student moving ahead about 1.5 years in 1 year’s time. Is this true?