Exploring the Benefits of Applied Learning and Comprehensive Support in Alternative High Schools: Impact of the PREP Intervention
Vazquez Cano, Manuel; Roccograndi, Angela (2023). Education Northwest. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED632517
-
examining1,575Students, grades9-12
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: May 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP))
- Quasi-Experimental Design
- Meets WWC standards with reservations because it uses a cluster quasi-experimental design that satisfies the baseline equivalence requirement for the clusters 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 |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Met credit requirements |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Portland Public Schools sample;
|
35.17 |
44.41 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Severe chronic absenteeism |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Years |
Statewide school sample;
|
30.40 |
52.48 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Chronic absenteeism |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
0 Years |
Statewide school sample;
|
62.27 |
70.69 |
No |
-- | ||
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Severe chronic absenteeism |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Statewide school sample;
|
35.72 |
52.56 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Chronic absenteeism |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Portland Public Schools sample;
|
64.13 |
71.63 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Severe chronic absenteeism |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Portland Public Schools sample;
|
45.48 |
52.08 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Chronic absenteeism |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Statewide school sample;
|
68.36 |
70.57 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
Annual retention |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Portland Public Schools sample;
|
76.49 |
76.44 |
No |
-- | ||
|
Year-to-year retention |
Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) vs. Business as usual |
-1 Years |
Portland Public Schools sample;
|
78.10 |
82.83 |
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.
-
3% English language learners -
Other or unknown: 100% -
Rural, Urban
-
Race Other or unknown 49% White 51% -
Ethnicity Other or unknown 100% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 22 alternative high schools in Oregon, including schools in Portland Public Schools and other school districts across the state. These schools served students in alternative high school settings rather than in comprehensive high schools.
Study sample
The study examined students attending the participating alternative high schools. The study did not report an exact number of students, but it is likely close to 2,000 students contributed outcomes to the analysis in the largest sample across six intervention schools and 16 comparison schools. The numbers of schools and students included in the study analyses varied across time points. In particular, some findings are reported only for the schools in Portland Public Schools.
Intervention Group
The Personalized, Relevant, Engaged for Postsecondary (PREP) program was a schoolwide approach designed to improve student engagement, help students stay in high school, and prepare for postsecondary education and careers. It is intended for students in alternative high school settings who may be experiencing challenges such as poverty, homelessness, foster care involvement, juvenile justice involvement, or disabilities. School administrators were expected to join cross-site meetings and develop site plans, teachers were expected to use project-based learning and strengthen career-focused offerings, and schools offered advisory and social and emotional supports led in part by school social workers. The intervention provided leadership support for implementation, project-based learning, expanded career and technical education and career-related learning experiences, and social and emotional learning supports. The intervention was implemented over two school years, but some findings were measured after only one year, including for the full sample of schools. The intervention was implemented with less fidelity in the second year, in part due to pandemic-related disruptions, staffing shortages, and leadership turnover.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition attended alternative high schools that did not implement PREP. The comparison schools provided business-as-usual services. The manuscript reported that some comparison schools appeared to offer services similar to individual parts of PREP, such as career and technical education, project-based learning, or social and emotional learning supports, but not the same combined approach.
Support for implementation
PREP included substantial support for implementation. School leaders participated in cross-site meetings and developed site plans. Teachers had access to project-based learning training, coaching, and cross-site professional learning communities. Staff members involved in career and technical education received support through district partnerships, training, and cross-site collaboration. The grant also funded school social workers and offered training and coaching related to social and emotional learning for social workers and school teams. Much of this support was delivered virtually during the study because of pandemic-related changes to instruction.
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).