Research
Fifty-two studies reviewed by the WWC investigated the effects of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on adolescent learners. Two studies (Jewell, 1994; Stevens & Slavin, 1995) are quasi-experimental designs that meet WWC evidence standards with reservations. The remaining 50 studies do not meet either WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens.
Meets evidence standards with reservations
The studies included in this report evaluated Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® either as part of a cooperative elementary whole-school reform model (Stevens & Slavin, 1995) or as a stand-alone reading program (Jewell, 1994).
Stevens and Slavin (1995) conducted a quasi-experiment that examined the effects of the Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® curriculum on students in grades 2 through 6 attending five elementary schools in Maryland. Investigators matched two treatment schools with three comparison schools based on academic achievement, ethnicity, and socioeconomic background. Treatment schools implemented the Cooperative Elementary School model, a whole-school reform model that uses cooperative learning strategies across multiple content areas, in which Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® was taught as a language arts/reading curriculum. Comparison schools implemented some components of the Cooperative Elementary School model but not the Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® curriculum. The WWC based its effectiveness ratings on findings from comparisons of 411 students in two schools who received Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® and 462 comparison group students in three schools who received regular instruction. The study reported students’ outcomes after one and two years of program implementation.7
Jewell (1994) conducted a quasi-experiment that examined the effects of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® on students in grades 2 through 6 attending four elementary schools in one school district in the United States. Teachers volunteered to participate in the study; however, a number of these teachers were placed in the comparison group because they elected not to implement Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition®. The analytical sample included 15 classrooms whose students received Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® and 15 comparison classrooms whose students received the regular district-adopted reading and language arts program. The study reported students’ outcomes after seven to eight months of program implementation.
Extent of evidence
The WWC categorizes the extent of evidence in each domain as small or medium to large (see the WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook, Appendix G). The extent of evidence takes into account the number of studies and the total sample size across the studies that meet WWC evidence standards with or without reservations.8
The WWC considers the extent of evidence for Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® to be medium to large for comprehension and general literacy achievement for adolescent learners. No studies that meet WWC evidence standards with or without reservations examined the effectiveness of Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® in the alphabetics or reading fluency domains for adolescent learners.
7 Two-year findings are considered for the effectiveness rating because these findings reflect the maximum exposure to the program. One-year findings are not included in this rating but are reported in Appendices A4.1 and A4.2.
8 The extent of evidence categorization was developed to tell readers how much evidence was used to determine the intervention rating, focusing on the number and size of studies. Additional factors associated with a related concept—external validity, such as the students’ demographics and the types of settings in which studies took place—are not taken into account for the categorization. Information about how the extent of evidence rating was determined for Cooperative Integrated Reading and Composition® is in Appendix A6.