The Data-Driven School Transformation Partnership: A project of the Bay State Reading Institute (BSRI) and 17 Massachusetts elementary schools.
Philp, J. D. (2015). Columbia, SC: The Evaluation Group.
-
examining183Students, grades3-11
Department-funded evaluation
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2017
- Department-funded evaluation (findings for Bay Street Reading Initiative (BSRI))
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it uses a quasi-experimental design in which the analytic intervention and comparison groups satisfy the baseline equivalence requirement.
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.
Findings
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) English Language Arts (ELA) assessment |
Bay Street Reading Initiative (BSRI) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) English Language Arts (ELA) assessment |
Bay Street Reading Initiative (BSRI) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 4;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
|
Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) English Language Arts (ELA) assessment |
Bay Street Reading Initiative (BSRI) vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade: 3;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | ||
Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.
Sample Characteristics
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
-
35% Minority -
- 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
- v
- x
- w
- y
Massachusetts
Study Details
Setting
The study took place within 17 i3 participant elementary schools across 7 districts located in Massachusetts. These schools were defined as in need of support and willing to participate in the study.
Study sample
The 17 intervention schools had roughly 50% of their students proficient in ELA in grades 3 5. These schools have an average percentage of 34% minority students and 52% students receiving free/reduced price lunch. Students average CPI scores in grades 3-5 was 79.24%. The 166 comparison schools had roughly 51% of their students proficient in ELA in grades 3 5. These schools have an average percentage of 35 minority students and 49% students receiving free/reduced price lunch. Students average CPI scores in grades 3-5 was 79.69%.
Intervention Group
This model is a whole-school reform model. BSRI focuses on reading instruction by providing a research-based core curriculum and instruction with fidelity, differentiation, and problem solving. The use of data is also important in this initiative and required of teachers and schools. Leadership also plays a large role in this initiative.
Comparison Group
Comparison schools implemented reading instruction with traditional processes and curriculum.
Support for implementation
BSRI provides supports for schools by offering a BSRI principal coach, BSRI literacy consultant, and professional development.
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).