Evaluations of Technology-Assisted Small-Group Tutoring for Struggling Readers
Madden, Nancy A.; Slavin, Robert E. (2017). Reading & Writing Quarterly, v33 n4 p327-334. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1155720
-
examining478Students, grades1-3
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: August 2018
- Grant Competition (findings for Tutoring With Alphie (TWA))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a compromised randomized controlled trial, but 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 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Success for All assessment |
Tutoring With Alphie (TWA) vs. Tutoring |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
2.37 |
2.10 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Success for All assessment |
Tutoring With Alphie (TWA) vs. Tutoring |
0 Days |
Grade: 2;
|
2.34 |
2.11 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Success for All assessment |
Tutoring With Alphie (TWA) vs. Tutoring |
0 Days |
Grade: 1;
|
1.77 |
1.68 |
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.
-
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
- v
- x
- w
- y
Maryland
Study Details
Setting
This study takes place at 13 schools in Baltimore, Maryland, United States at Baltimore City Public Schools. These 13 schools were using the Success for All (SFA) whole-school reform approach, and principals volunteered their schools to participate in this study. The subjects in the study were students in these schools in Grades 1-3.
Study sample
Sample characteristics for the participants in this study were not broken down into specific numbers. Rather the author reports that the 14 schools served very disadvantaged populations where almost all students qualified for free or reduced-price lunches and almost all students were African American or Hispanic.
Intervention Group
"Tutoring with Alphie (TWA) is a technology-assisted reading tutoring model that utilizes a small-group tutoring approach. Paraprofessionals work as tutors with a maximum of six children at a time; these tutors work in the middle of the school day (starting after a 90-minute reading period). The tutors for TWA were paraprofessionals who have received training from the Success for All Foundation, and work with children in grades 1-3 who are significantly below grade reading level. The tutors worked with students to help them with problems/if they get stuck, ensure that the students are working well together and are on task, and assess children's mastery of specific skills. Each small group worked 30 minutes per day in a group of six that shares three laptops. Children with similar reading skills pair up and take turns as ""coach"" and ""player"" during engaging lessons. Upon completion of the activities, the tutor assesses the responses from the pair of students to provide an external check and ensure that they are making good progress. TWA carried out regular assessments to note progress and help facilitate placement decisions made by teachers and tutors. While the authors did not provide the length of this intervention, the pretest was conducted in November 2013 and the posttest was conducted in May 2014."
Comparison Group
Schools in the comparison group were encouraged to use their existing staff to "do as much tutoring as they could." Tutoring is a standard part of the Success for All whole-school reform approach that all schools used, so this would likely be the same as a business as usual group.
Support for implementation
No support for implementation was documented in this study.
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).