Empirical Reporting Practices in Community College Journal of Research and Practice and Journal of Developmental Education From 2002 to 2011: A Systematic Review

• Published in: Community college journal of research and practice 2014-01, Vol.38 (10), p.927-946
• Main Authors: Skidmore, Susan Troncoso, Zientek, Linda Reichwein, Combs, Julie P., Fuller, Matthew B., Hirai, Michiyo, Price, Debra P., Moore, George W.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Community Colleges; Community Relations; Comparative Analysis; Correlation; Correlation analysis; Developmental Studies Programs; Evaluation Criteria; Evidence; Illustrations; Measures (Individuals); Periodicals; Regression (Statistics); Research Methodology; Research Reports; Review (Reexamination); Sampling techniques; Statistical Analysis; Two Year Colleges; Variance analysis
• ISSN: 1066-8926; 1521-0413
• DOI: 10.1080/10668926.2013.843478

The empirical reporting practices of developmental education and community college researchers who published in the Community College Journal of Research and Practice (CCJRP) and the Journal of Developmental Education (JDE) from 2002 to 2011 were investigated. Of the 1,165 articles available, 181 articles met the inclusion criteria and were subjected to full review. Authors identified the following components in the published research studies: problem formulation, theoretical framework, sources of evidence, measurement, statistical analyses, and figures and correlation matrices. Though more than half of the reviewed article authors provided research questions, more than half of those phrased at least one research question in a dichotomous response format. A theoretical framework was reported only 36.5% of the time. The setting for the majority of the reviewed articles was a two-year college; however, this finding varied by journal type. At least 20% of the reviewed article authors did not report the sampling method. The majority of the reviewed article authors did not use a proprietary instrument. Polynomial trend lines were used to describe the fit of the observed frequency of reported statistical techniques in each of the journals. The values of the r 2 were greatest for the t test (CCJRP r 2 quadratic = 89.8%), ANOVA (CCJRP r 2 cubic = 75.0%), and regression (CCJRP r 2 quadratic = 72.6%). The most frequently used analysis across both journals was ANOVA (24.5%). Figures (18.2%) and correlation matrices (8.3%) frequently were not reported. Recommendations for improved empirical reporting practices in developmental education research are presented.