Amira Learning® in Louisiana Public Schools: ESSA Level II Study (2023-24)
Meetal Shah; Andrew Scanlan; Avery Wall (2025). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED677055
-
examining79,084Students, gradesK-5
Single Study Review
Review Details
Reviewed: June 2026
- Single Study Review (findings for Amira Learning)
- 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
DIBELS Composite |
Amira Learning vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
Kindergarten;
|
433.04 |
433.77 |
Yes |
|
|
DIBELS Composite |
Amira Learning vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
1st grade;
|
457.89 |
455.14 |
Yes |
|
|
DIBELS Composite |
Amira Learning vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
2nd grade;
|
441.62 |
439.97 |
Yes |
|
|
DIBELS Composite |
Amira Learning vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
3rd grade;
|
445.80 |
444.60 |
Yes |
|
|
Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (LEAP) ELA score |
Amira Learning vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
5th grade;
|
741.04 |
741.49 |
Yes |
|
|
Louisiana Educational Assessment Program (LEAP) ELA score |
Amira Learning vs. Business as usual |
0 Days |
4th grade;
|
740.24 |
741.90 |
Yes |
|
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.
-
10% English language learners -
Female: 50%
Male: 50% -
- 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
Louisiana
-
Race Asian 2% Black 38% Other or unknown 18% Two or more races 4% White 38% -
Ethnicity Hispanic 18% Not Hispanic or Latino 82% -
Eligible for Free and Reduced Price Lunch Other or unknown 100%
Study Details
Setting
The study took place in 12 public school districts in Louisiana.
Study sample
The study included 79,084 kindergarten through grade 5 students, including 39,542 students in the intervention group and 39,542 students in the comparison group.
Intervention Group
Amira is reading software that uses artificial intelligence to assess and support elementary students’ reading. The program gives students reading activities, collects information about their performance, and helps educators understand where students may need additional reading support. Students in the intervention condition used Amira during the study year. Students used the platform individually, and the study measured implementation using the total number of minutes students spent in Amira and, for students in grades 4 and 5, the number of passages they read. Average time on the platform ranged from 190 minutes in grade 5 to 336 minutes in grade 1. In grades 4 and 5, students read an average of 39 and 34 passages, respectively. Across grades, 5%–19% of students met or exceeded Amira’s recommended 20 minutes per week, and 3%–17% met or exceeded 5 passages per week.
Comparison Group
Students in the comparison condition did not use Amira during the study year. The study did not provide additional information about the reading instruction or services comparison students received.
Support for implementation
The manuscript did not provide information about training, coaching, technical assistance, or other supports provided to educators, schools, or districts to implement Amira.
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).