The Implementation and Effects of the Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC): Early Findings in Sixth-Grade Advanced Reading Courses. CRESST Report 846
Herman, Joan L.; Epstein, Scott; Leon, Seth; Dai, Yunyun; La Torre Matrundola, Deborah; Reber, Sarah; Choi, Kilchan (2015). National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED571802
-
examining19,962Students, grade8
Grant Competition
Review Details
Reviewed: December 2019
- Grant Competition (findings for Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC))
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) Reading |
Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
|
Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) Writing (eighth grade) |
Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- | |
|
Kentucky Performance Rating for Educational Progress (K-PREP) Social Studies (eighth grade) |
Literacy Design Collaborative (LDC) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
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.
-
0% English language learners -
Female: 49%
Male: 51% -
- 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
Kentucky
-
Race Asian 1% Black 4% White 92% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 2% Not Hispanic or Latino 98%
Study Details
Setting
This study was implemented with 36 eighth-grade social studies and science teachers and their students in 11 Kentucky school districts.
Study sample
There were 36 eighth-grade social studies and science teachers and their students in 11 Kentucky school districts in the study. There were over 2,200 students in the intervention group and other 13,000 in the comparison group (these numbers varied by outcome). About half of the sample was female and 90 percent were white. Hispanic and black youth made up about 5 percent of the sample. There were very few English language learners (less than 1 percent), and about 9 percent of the sample qualified for special education.
Intervention Group
The purpose of the Literary Design Collaborative (LDC) is to support the transition of teachers and students in Kentucky to the Common Core State Standards in English language arts. It attempts to do this by providing flexible module templates that enable teachers to integrate reading, research, and writing standards into their content-area instruction. There are extended writing tasks at the end of the modules, which "provide the heart of the approach." Teachers can use templates to design content-oriented tasks for the students. Teachers in the intervention group were required to implement at least two modules during an academic year.
Comparison Group
The comparison group was a business as usual group.
Support for implementation
Teachers in the participated in two to three professional development sessions during the study year.
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).