Literacy Now Reading Intervention Program: A Cohort Analysis of Reading Achievement at Selected HISD Campuses, 2020-2021. Research Educational Program Report
Graham, Georgia (2021). Houston Independent School District. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED614673
-
examining151Students, gradesK-2
Publication
Review Details
Reviewed: January 2024
- Publication (findings for Literacy Now Reading Intervention Program)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Istation Indicators of Progress (ISIP) |
Literacy Now Reading Intervention Program vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Grade 1, Cohort 2;
|
215.70 |
210.80 |
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.
-
13% English language learners -
Female: 48%
Male: 52% -
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
Texas
-
Race Black 44% Other or unknown 56% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 44% Other or unknown 56% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Free or reduced price lunch (FRPL) 84% No FRPL 16%
Study Details
Setting
The study was conducted at 11 campuses in Houston Independent School District that participated in Literacy Now between the 2015/16 and 2016/17 school years.
Study sample
The study included 88 students in the intervention group and 63 students in the comparison group. Sample characteristics for the main analytic sample (Grade 2 Cohort 2) were not reported; however, the overall study population was 48 percent female and 44 percent Hispanic. Moreover, 44 percent of students were Black and race was not reported for 56 percent of students. Eighty-four percent of students were economically disadvantaged, 13 percent were English learners, and 4 percent were in special education.
Intervention Group
Literacy Now provides reading tutorials for students in kindergarten through grade 2 and is designed to address the academic, social, and emotional needs of at-risk students. Students in the intervention group received individualized small group tutoring two to four times per week over 25 weeks outside of the classroom. Sessions were 45 minutes long and were delivered during the school day by a trained reading interventionist. The student-to-tutor ratio was typically 4:1. Parents were also provided strategies to promote reading at home through parent engagement workshops, book distribution, and family literacy nights.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition are presumed to have received business-as-usual instruction.
Support for implementation
Literacy Now interventionists are trained on the Neuhaus Reading Readiness program curriculum. Parents received books from GROW (now Book Distribution), which were age-appropriate and culturally sensitive.
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).