In response to widespread concerns about learning loss due to the COVID-19 pandemic, educators at the Niswonger Foundation in northeastern Tennessee created Project On-Track, a high-dosage, small-group literacy tutoring program for students in grades 1–3. Launched in summer 2021 in about 25 sites, the program has more than doubled in size since then.
When Project On-Track started, its leaders wanted to make sure that they could make tutoring available to as many students who needed it. To make adopting the program easier for schools during a challenging time, the program’s leaders carefully considered what they would require of educators at participating schools and where they could provide flexibility. They decided to require only a few program elements:
- Use of a highly structured and prescribed curriculum, which included regular progress monitoring and computer-generated lessons tailored to students’ needs.
- In-person tutoring at least two days per week for at least 30 minutes per session.
- At least 12 weeks of tutoring.
Educators at participating schools had flexibility to make other decisions about how to implement tutoring, including:
- Which grade levels to provide tutoring in and which students to serve within those grade levels.
- Whom to hire as tutors.
- When to provide tutoring (that is, during the school day or outside of school hours).
- Whether to provide tutoring more often than the minimum of twice per week.
Offering educators flexibility can make it easier to adopt a program. This can be particularly important for rural schools, where leaders may face greater challenges with matters such as hiring tutors or delivering tutoring after school. However, offering educators flexibility also has the potential to compromise program effectiveness.
To inform future program implementation Project On-Track, leaders partnered with REL Appalachia to study Project On-Track implementation and outcomes during the 2022/23 school year. The study examined how 56 schools implemented Project On-Track, including whether rural and nonrural schools tended to implement the program differently. It also examined whether particular approaches to implementing the program were associated with better student outcomes.
What did the study find?
Here are some key findings from the report:
- Timing of tutoring. Two-thirds of schools offered tutoring only during the school day. However, this varied by the rurality of schools: Rural schools were more likely than nonrural schools to offer tutoring only during the school day (figure 1). One site coordinator pointed out, “[Our district] is exceptionally rural. Transportation is a huge barrier to our kids. If we don’t get them to and from [tutoring sessions], then we don’t get them [to attend].”
Source: Analysis of data provided by Project On-Track staff and National Center for Education Statistics (2021/22). Figure 1: Rural schools were more likely than nonrural schools to offer Project On-Track tutoring during school (values do not add up to 100 due to rounding)
- Frequency of tutoring. Nearly two-thirds of schools offered tutoring more than twice per week (figure 2). One school leader explained her rationale for that decision: “We figured more [tutoring] is better. We know we only had to do it two days a week, but if we can get kids to do it and teachers to show up, I’m all for doing it [more frequently].”
Source: Analysis of data provided by Project On-Track staff. Figure 2: Most Project On-Track schools offered tutoring sessions more than two days a week, 2022/23
- Tutor qualifications. Most tutors were current (55%) or retired (12%) teachers. It is noteworthy that tutor qualifications were associated with the timing of tutoring (figure 3). Schools that implemented tutoring outside of school hours used only teachers, administrators, or paraprofessionals, while schools that implemented the program during the school day also used tutors with other qualifications (for example, college students). School leaders described the challenges of finding teachers willing to tutor after school. One said, “We were lucky to find the teachers that wanted to [tutor after school]. We also have other afterschool programs. We were competing against that. [Identifying tutors required asking] who wants to work after school and is not too tired to do it.”
Note: Chi-square tests of independence conducted to examine associations between pairs of tutoring implementation features found a significant association between the timing of tutoring and tutor qualifications (x2(2) = 6.20, p = .04). Source: Analysis of data provided by Project On-Track staff. Figure 3: Timing of Project On-Track tutoring varied by tutor qualifications, 2022/23
- Association between how schools implemented Project On-Track and student outcomes. The study found no association between how tutoring was implemented and changes in student literacy scores. The study’s research design cannot support firm conclusions about the effectiveness of different approaches to implementing tutoring.
Overall, the study findings suggest that when schools and districts use a high-quality, highly structured tutoring program like Project On-Track, they may be able to exercise some flexibility in when and how tutoring is offered without compromising program quality and benefits to students. Project On-Track continues to provide flexibility to sites, particularly with respect to who provides tutoring. Consistent with the results of the study, a Project On-Track leader shared her observation that with strong training, ongoing support, and high-quality materials, tutors with a variety of qualifications can be successful. Project On-Track leaders also continue to collect and monitor data on how the program is working for tutors and students to inform continuous improvement of the program.
To learn more, you can access the full report as well as a one-page study snapshot.
