Effectiveness
Findings
The WWC review of interventions for Adolescent Literacy addresses student outcomes in four domains: alphabetics, reading fluency, comprehension, and general literacy achievement. The studies included in this report cover two domains: comprehension and general literacy achievement. The findings below present the authors’ estimates and WWC-calculated estimates of the size and the statistical significance of the effects of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on adolescent learners.9
Comprehension. Stevens and Slavin (1995) reported, and the WWC confirmed, statistically significant positive effects of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on the Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary subtests of the California Achievement Test (CAT) for students in grades 2 through 6. Jewell (1994) did not find statistically significant effects of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on the Reading Comprehension and Vocabulary subtests of the Gates–MacGinitie Reading Test for students in grades 2 through 6, and the WWC-calculated average effect across the two measures was not statistically significant or large enough to be considered substantively important according to WWC criteria (i.e., an effect size of at least 0.25).10 Thus, for the comprehension domain, one study showed statistically significant positive effects, and one study showed indeterminate effects.
General literacy achievement. Stevens and Slavin (1995) reported, and the WWC confirmed, a statistically significant positive effect of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on the Language Expression subtest of the CAT for students in grades 2 through 6 but did not find statistically significant effects on the CAT Language Mechanics subtest. Jewell (1994) did not find statistically significant effects of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on the Reading Proficiency subtest of the Bass Academic Skills Sample for students in grades 2 through 6. According to WWC calculations, the effect was not large enough to be considered substantively important according to WWC criteria. Thus, for the general literacy achievement domain, one study showed statistically significant positive effects, and one study showed indeterminate effects.
Rating of effectiveness
The WWC rates the effects of an intervention in a given outcome domain as positive, potentially positive, mixed, no discernible effects, potentially negative, or negative. The rating of effectiveness takes into account four factors: the quality of the research design, the statistical significance of the findings, the size of the difference between participants in the intervention and the comparison conditions, and the consistency in findings across studies (see the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Appendix E).
9 The level of statistical significance was reported by the study authors or, when necessary, calculated by the WWC to correct for clustering within classrooms or schools and for multiple comparisons. For the formulas the WWC used to calculate the statistical significance, see WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Appendix C for clustering and WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Appendix D for multiple comparisons. In the case of Stevens and Slavin (1995), a correction for multiple comparisons was needed, so the significance levels may differ from those reported in the original study. As the authors used hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) analyses, which accounted for multi-level data (of students nested within classrooms and schools), correction for clustering was not needed. In the case of Jewell (1994), no corrections for clustering or multiple comparisons were needed.
10 The WWC computes an average effect size as a simple average of the effect sizes across all individual findings within the study domain.