WWC review of this study

Final Reading Outcomes of the National Randomized Field Trial of Success for All

Borman, Geoffrey D.; Slavin, Robert E.; Cheung, Alan C. K.; Chamberlain, Anne M.; Madden, Nancy A.; Chambers, Bette (2007). American Educational Research Journal, v44 n3 p701-731. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ782058

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    1,425
     Students
    , grades
    K-2

Reviewed: August 2009

At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards without reservations
Alphabetics outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test (WRMT): Word Attack subtest

Success for All® vs. unknown

Posttest

kindergarten;
1,425 students

493.43

487.73

Yes

 
 
13

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test (WRMT): Word Identification subtest

Success for All® vs. unknown

Posttest

kindergarten;
1,425 students

462.96

457.41

Yes

 
 
9
Comprehension outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Woodcock Reading Mastery Test (WRMT): Passage Comprehension subtest

Success for All® vs. unknown

Posttest

kindergarten;
1,425 students

481.41

478.33

Yes

 
 
8


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 7% English language learners

  • Female: 50%
    Male: 50%

  • Rural, Urban
    • B
    • A
    • C
    • D
    • E
    • F
    • G
    • I
    • H
    • J
    • K
    • L
    • P
    • M
    • N
    • O
    • Q
    • R
    • S
    • V
    • U
    • T
    • W
    • X
    • Z
    • Y
    • a
    • h
    • i
    • b
    • d
    • e
    • f
    • c
    • g
    • j
    • k
    • l
    • m
    • n
    • o
    • p
    • q
    • r
    • s
    • t
    • u
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Midwest, South

Setting

The analysis sample included 35 elementary schools across 14 states located in rural and small towns in the South and urban areas of the Midwest.

Study sample

The study piloted the SFA ® program in fall 2001, when three schools were randomly assigned to the SFA ® and three schools to the comparison condition. In fall 2002, 35 new schools were recruited with 18 schools randomly assigned to implement SFA ® in grades K–2, and 17 schools randomly assigned to serve as comparisons. The study presented findings after the intervention students completed one, two, and three years of the program. For the effectiveness ratings, the WWC focused on findings from the longitudinal sample, that is, schools and students who completed three years of the program. After three years, 18 SFA ® schools with 707 students and 17 comparison schools with 718 students remained in the longitudinal sample.

Intervention Group

Intervention students received the SFA ® school reform program, including the SFA ® reading curriculum, tutoring for students’ quarterly assessments, family support teams for students’ parents, a facilitator who worked with school personnel, and training for all intervention teachers. Intervention schools implemented SFA ® in grades K–2 and used their previously planned curriculum in grades 3–5. Some schools took a year to fully implement the program.

Comparison Group

Comparison schools continued using their regular, previously planned curriculum for grades K–2 (SFA ® was implemented in grades 3–5). Authors conducted observations at all schools and indicated that there was no evidence that when SFA ® was implemented in grades 3–5, students in grades K–2 were also exposed to SFA ®. All sample students were pretested with the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT) prior to SFA ® implementation, and schoolwide PPVT scores show equivalence between the program and comparison schools. Researchers also used information from the Common Core of Data (a database maintained by the National Center for Education Statistics) at several points over the course of the study to demonstrate the equivalence between the program and comparison schools on race/ethnicity, gender, English as a second language, special education, and free and reduced-price lunch. All equivalency tests were assessed at the school level, and no statistically significant differences were found.

Outcome descriptions

Three subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test were administered during the period reflected in the intervention rating: Word Identification, Word Attack, and Passage Comprehension.3 (See Appendices A2.1–A2.3 for more detailed descriptions of outcome measures.)

Support for implementation

SFA ® teachers received three days of training during the summer and approximately eight days of on-site follow-up during the first implementation year. Success for All Foundation trainers visited classrooms, met with groups of teachers, looked at data on children’s progress, and provided feedback to school staff on implementation quality and outcomes.

In the case of multiple manuscripts that report on one study, the WWC selects one manuscript as the primary citation and lists other manuscripts that describe the study as additional sources.

  • Borman, Geoffrey D.; Slavin, Robert E.; Cheung, Alan C. K.; Chamberlain, Anne M.; Madden, Nancy A.; Chambers, Bette. (2007). Final Reading Outcomes of the National Randomized Field Trial of Success for All. American Educational Research Journal, v44 n3 p701-731.

  • Borman, G. D., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A. M., Madden, N. A., & Chambers, B. (2005). The national randomized field trial of Success for All: Second-year outcomes. American Educational Research Journal, 42(4), 673–696.

  • Borman, G. D., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A., & Madden, N. A. (2004). Success for All: Preliminary first-year results from the national randomized field trial. Baltimore, MD: Success for All Foundation.

  • Slavin, R. E., Madden, N. A., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A., Chambers, B., & Borman, G. (2005). A randomized evaluation of Success for All: Second-year outcomes. Baltimore, MD: Success for All Foundation.

  • Borman, G. D., Slavin, R. E., Cheung, A., Chamberlain, A. M., Madden, N. A., & Chambers, B. (2005). Success for All: First-year results from the national randomized field trial. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 27(1), 1–22.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top