Wolf, Betsy; Latham, Gavin; Laurenzano, Mary; Ross, Steven M.; Tam, Winnie; Cheung, Alan C. K. (2016). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED574582
Reviewed: January 2023
This review may not reflect the full body of research evidence for this intervention.
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III): Word Attack subtest |
Around the Corner vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
461.40 |
460.54 |
No |
-- | |
|
Woodcock-Johnson III (WJ-III): Letter-Word Identification Subtest |
Around the Corner vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
402.86 |
404.95 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Test of Language Development (TOLD-4) Sentence Imitation Subtest |
Around the Corner vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
8.80 |
8.88 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
The Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-III) |
Around the Corner vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
95.05 |
97.62 |
Yes |
|
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Black | 17% | |
| Other or unknown | 60% | |
| White | 24% |
| Hispanic | 43% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 57% |
| Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) | 100% |
The study took place in 12 elementary schools in 5 states: Arizona, Louisiana, Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. The schools were located in a variety of settings, including in urban and rural locations.
The researchers randomly assigned 6 schools to the intervention group and 6 schools comparison group. A total of 549 students who were in preschool in the 2014-15 school year and kindergarten in the 2015-16 school year were included in the study. All students were eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. Approximately 49 percent of the students were female, 30 percent were English learners, and 8 percent were receiving special education services. Twenty-four percent were white, 17 percent were Black, and 60 percent did not report race. Forty-three percent were Hispanic or Latino.
Around the Corner is a program designed to improve pre-reading and language development by incorporating technological and multimedia enhancements into the Curiosity Corner and KinderCorner curricula. The program includes computer activities and videos for children to view in school and at home as well as interactive video-based professional development for teachers. In the classroom, the intervention is incorporated into curriculum on a daily basis over two school years in preschool and kindergarten. During this time, students and families were also provided with multi-media materials to reinforce the child’s classroom learning at home.
Comparison group schools continued to use Curiosity Corner in preschools and KinderCorner in kindergarten without using Around the Corner. Comparison teachers did not receive professional development activities in this study but may have participated in other business-as-usual training and professional development offered by their schools or school districts.
Intervention group teachers were supported by Intervention coaches, who received 4 hours of training on use of enhanced media components in each of the two school years. In the first year of the study, the intervention was implemented by preschool teachers who received between 6 and 12 hours of professional development and a minimum of three classroom visits by coaches. In the second year, kindergarten teachers implemented the intervention and were offered between 1 and 4 hours of professional development and between 2 and 4 classroom visits by coaches. Each teacher received a full lesson plan and the technology equipment necessary to implement the intervention in their classroom.
An indicator of the effect of the intervention, the improvement index can be interpreted as the expected change in percentile rank for an average comparison group student if that student had received the intervention.
For more, please see the WWC Glossary entry for improvement index.
An outcome is the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are attained as a result of an activity. An outcome measures is an instrument, device, or method that provides data on the outcome.
A finding that is included in the effectiveness rating. Excluded findings may include subgroups and subscales.
The sample on which the analysis was conducted.
The group to which the intervention group is compared, which may include a different intervention, business as usual, or no services.
The timing of the post-intervention outcome measure.
The number of students included in the analysis.
The mean score of students in the intervention group.
The mean score of students in the comparison group.
The WWC considers a finding to be statistically significant if the likelihood that the finding is due to chance alone, rather than a real difference, is less than five percent.
The WWC reviews studies for WWC products, Department of Education grant competitions, and IES performance measures.
The name and version of the document used to guide the review of the study.
The version of the WWC design standards used to guide the review of the study.
The result of the WWC assessment of the study. The rating is based on the strength of evidence of the effectiveness of the intervention. Studies are given a rating of Meets WWC Design Standards without Reservations, Meets WWC Design Standards with Reservations, or >Does Not Meet WWC Design Standards.
A related publication that was reviewed alongside the main study of interest.
Study findings for this report.
Based on the direction, magnitude, and statistical significance of the findings within a domain, the WWC characterizes the findings from a study as one of the following: statistically significant positive effects, substantively important positive effects, indeterminate effects, substantively important negative effects, and statistically significant negative effects. For more, please see the WWC Handbook.
The WWC may review studies for multiple purposes, including different reports and re-reviews using updated standards. Each WWC review of this study is listed in the dropdown. Details on any review may be accessed by making a selection from the drop down list.
Tier 1 Strong indicates strong evidence of effectiveness,
Tier 2 Moderate indicates moderate evidence of effectiveness, and
Tier 3 Promising indicates promising evidence of effectiveness,
as defined in the
non-regulatory guidance for ESSA
and the regulations for ED discretionary grants (EDGAR Part 77).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube