An Evaluation of the Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) i3 Evaluation (Valid 45) Final Report
Wolf, Rebecca; Cook, Michael; Reid, Alan; Neitzel, Amanda; Ross, Steven; Risman, Kelsey (2021). Grantee Submission. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED613901
-
examining2,430Students, grade5
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with high individual-level non-response, but provides evidence of effects on individuals by satisfying 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Science interest survey |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-19 School Year;
|
3.06 |
3.08 |
No |
-- |
|
Science interest survey |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2017-18 School Year;
|
3.12 |
3.19 |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2017-18 School Year;
|
1561.11 |
1558.46 |
No |
-- |
|
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-19 School Year;
|
1568.15 |
1564.06 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Big Ideas in Science Assessment (BISA) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2020-2021 School Year;
|
16.64 |
16.53 |
No |
-- |
|
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Science Subtest |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2017-18 School Year;
|
212.74 |
213.64 |
No |
-- |
|
Big Ideas in Science Assessment (BISA) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2017-18 School Year;
|
19.75 |
19.92 |
No |
-- |
|
Big Ideas in Science Assessment (BISA) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-19 School Year;
|
16.83 |
17.17 |
No |
-- |
|
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) Science Subtest |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-19 School Year;
|
211.13 |
213.28 |
No |
-- |
|
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Science |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2017-18 School Year;
|
3793.64 |
3841.79 |
Yes |
|
|
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Science |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-19 School Year;
|
3832.18 |
3904.85 |
Yes |
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Science Teacher Observation Record (STOR) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2019-2020 School Year;
|
3.22 |
2.62 |
Yes |
|
|
Science Teacher Observation Record (STOR) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2020-2021 School Year;
|
3.09 |
2.68 |
Yes |
|
|
Science Teacher Observation Record (STOR) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-2019 School Year;
|
3.15 |
2.70 |
Yes |
|
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Share of instructional time spent teaching new science content while students performed academic task or received feedback |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2020-2021 School Year;
|
0.20 |
0.11 |
No |
-- |
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Share of instructional time spent teaching new science content while students performed academic task or received feedback |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2019-2020 School Year;
|
0.14 |
0.11 |
No |
-- |
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Share of instructional time spent teaching new science content with an explicit focus on oral language |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2019-2020 School Year;
|
0.23 |
0.20 |
No |
-- |
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Share of instructional time spent teaching new science content with an explicit focus on oral language |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2020-2021 School Year;
|
0.09 |
0.09 |
No |
-- |
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Share of instructional time spent teaching new science content while students performed academic task or received feedback |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-2019 School Year;
|
0.08 |
0.10 |
No |
-- |
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Share of instructional time spent teaching new science content with an explicit focus on oral language |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample: 2018-2019 School Year;
|
0.17 |
0.22 |
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.
-
33% English language learners -
Female: 50%
Male: 50% -
Rural
-
- 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
Texas
-
Race Black 7% Other or unknown 74% Two or more races 2% White 16% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 74% Other or unknown 26% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 75% Other or unknown 25%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in 71 Texas schools across 37 districts, with approximately two-thirds of participating schools located in rural areas. The districts were specifically selected based on having student populations where more than 50 percent qualified as low-income. The study focused on fifth-grade students and their science teachers.
Study sample
Fifth grade students and their 5th grade science teachers in Texas participated in the study. Seventy-one schools in 37 districts in which low-income students comprised more than 50% of the student population were recruited and randomly assigned to either the LISTO intervention condition or the business-as-usual comparison condition. Thirty-five schools (23 of them rural) were assigned to the LISTO condition and 36 schools (24 of them rural) were assigned to the comparison condition. Fifth grade science teachers were then recruited for the study. Up to four classes or rotations of students were selected to participate. Students were included if they were in sampled classrooms and had parent consent to participate. The analytic sample included over 60 teachers and over 2,000 students.
Intervention Group
The intervention condition implemented the Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) program, which provided teachers with standards-aligned curricular materials, virtual professional development (VPD), and virtual mentoring and coaching (VMC). The curricular materials included 25 weeks of lesson plans, scripts, resources, and hands-on science activity supplies for 80-minute classroom blocks. Two additional components were Family Involvement in Science (FIS), which provided take-home booklets for family engagement in science activities, and Scientists as Role Models and Mentors (SRM), which involved pre-recorded video clips from university scientists and opportunities for student questions. Teachers participated in VPD sessions through GoToTraining, an interactive platform enabling screen sharing, webcam sharing, voice/text chat, and breakout sessions. The VPD focused on developing teachers' content knowledge and literacy integration strategies around vocabulary, reading comprehension, and oral/written language development while providing curriculum previews, demonstrations, and teacher feedback. For the VMC component, teachers received Applied Pedagogical Education Xtra Imaging System (APEXIS) hardware and access to the Hoot Education platform, through which coaches provided real-time feedback during LISTO curriculum implementation.
Comparison Group
The comparison condition was business as usual as these teachers did not participate in LISTO.
Support for implementation
Teachers in the LISTO condition received virtual professional development and virtual mentoring and coaching. During year 2, which involved full implementation of the intervention, teachers participated in 60 minutes of virtual training every two weeks from September to April. In subsequent years, teachers were offered fewer virtual professional development sessions (a total of nine in year 3 and four in year 4). Teachers also participated in virtual mentoring and coaching. During year 2, teachers participated in five virtual mentoring and coaching sessions during which the mentors/coaches provided feedback on teachers' science instruction based on recordings of teachers' instruction.
Additional Sources
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.
-
Wolf, Rebecca; Cook, Michael; Grant, Ashley; Reid, Alan; Neitzel, Amanda; Ross, Steven; Risman, Kelsey. (2022). An Evaluation of the Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO): i3 Evaluation (Valid 45) Addendum Report. Center for Research and Reform in Education.
Department-funded evaluation
Review Details
Reviewed: March 2022
- Department-funded evaluation (findings for Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO))
- Randomized Controlled Trial
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with high cluster-level attrition, 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 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) Reading |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 2;
|
N/A |
1564.06 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) Reading |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 1;
|
N/A |
1558.46 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Science |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 2;
|
N/A |
3904.85 |
Yes |
|
||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS): science subtest |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 1;
|
N/A |
213.64 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Big Ideas in Science Assessment (BISA) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 1;
|
N/A |
19.92 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Big Ideas in Science Assessment (BISA) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 2;
|
N/A |
17.17 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS): science subtest |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 2;
|
N/A |
213.28 |
No |
-- | ||
|
State of Texas Assessment of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Science |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample - Year 1;
|
N/A |
3841.79 |
Yes |
|
||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Science Teacher Observation Record (STOR) |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
Yes |
|
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Dimension 1 |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Full sample;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Transitional Bilingual Observation Protocol (TBOP) - Dimension 2 |
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) 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.
-
33% English language learners -
Female: 50%
Male: 50% -
Rural
-
- 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
Texas
-
Race Black 7% Other or unknown 77% White 16% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 74% Not Hispanic or Latino 26%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted in 71 public schools located in 37 different school districts in Texas. Schools were chosen in districts in which low-income students comprised more than 50% of the student population. The schools were predominantly rural. The intervention was implemented in fifth-grade science teacher general education classrooms.
Study sample
The teacher sample was 74% female and 33% bilingual. Teachers had an average of 10.5 years of teaching experience, 7.85 years of teaching science, and 5.35 years of teaching 5th grade. The student sample identified as Latino (74%), White (16%), and Black (7%). Half of the sample was female (50%). Three-quarters (75%) of the sample of students were classified as low-income, 9% had a 504 plan and 33% were English Learners.
Intervention Group
Literacy-Infused Science Using Technology Innovation Opportunity (LISTO) assists teachers and principals in building instructional capacity and improving students’ science and reading achievement via three key components: virtual professional development (VPD), virtual mentoring and coaching (VMC), and standards-aligned literacy-infused science curricula. Teachers are trained to improve instructional delivery of core content, which increases their pedagogical skills. Through this increase in pedagogical skills and the use of the LISTO curricula, students increase achievement in reading and science.
Comparison Group
Schools in the comparison condition offered business-as-usual opportunities for students. Teachers received business as usual professional development and supports. Comparison students were likely exposed to instruction and support services as they had been in the past.
Support for implementation
Teachers in the intervention participated in virtual professional development and virtual mentoring and coaching focused on the Literacy-Infused Science curriculum.
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, statistical significance, and sample size of the findings within a domain, the WWC assigns effectiveness ratings as one of the following: Tier 1 (strong evidence), Tier 2 (moderate evidence), Tier 3 (promising evidence), uncertain effects, and negative effects. For more detail, 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).