A Randomized Efficacy Trial of the Second Step Early Learning (SSEL) Curriculum [Second Step: Social-Emotional Skills for Early Learning vs. business as usual (Creative Curriculum)]
Upshur, Carole C.; Wenz-Gross, Melodie; Rhoads, Christopher; Heyman, Miriam; Yoo, Yeonsoo; Sawosik, Gail (2019). Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology v62 p145-159. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED593534
-
examining770Students, gradePK
Practice Guide
Review Details
Reviewed: July 2022
- Practice Guide (findings for Second Step Early Learning (SSEL))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a compromised cluster randomized controlled trial, but it satisfies the baseline equivalence requirement for the individuals in the analytic intervention and comparison groups.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement (WJ-III) Letter-Word Identification Subtest |
Second Step Early Learning (SSEL) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
95.80 |
97.28 |
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.
-
Female: 49%
Male: 51% -
Race Asian 2% Black 26% Other or unknown 30% White 42% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 41% Not Hispanic or Latino 59% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted across seven community-based preschools and six Head Start programs.
Study sample
The analytic sample was 50.8 percent male; the overall mean age was 53.0 months. Of these students, 42 percent are reported as Anglo-American, 26 percent are African American, 2 percent are Asian American, 3 percent are classified as ‘other race,’ and no race information was provided for the remaining 27 percent of children and families. About 41 percent of the students were Hispanic.
Intervention Group
Students assigned to the intervention condition received the Second Step Early Learning Curriculum (SSEL), which aims to develop social-emotional competencies and self-regulation skills among students considered at risk. SSEL includes five units and has scripted, five day-a-week, brief large and small group lessons with 28 weekly themes; there are also suggested extension and generalization activities. Intervention teachers implemented SSEL in addition to the existing curriculum, Creative Curriculum. SSEL does not provide specific instruction on pre-math or pre-literacy skills.
Comparison Group
Comparison teachers continued the business-as-usual curriculum, which was Creative Curriculum.
Support for implementation
Teachers assigned to implement Second Step participated in monthly, 2-hour cross-site training sessions during their first year. During their second year of implementation, teachers attend bi-monthly meetings to ask questions and share successes and challenges regarding the program. Members of the intervention development team also visited classrooms monthly to lead a SSEL lesson and provide coaching to teachers. The program developers also provided all training session materials, curriculum kits, and related story books.
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).