Philp, J. D. (2015). Columbia, SC: The Evaluation Group. https://manateetakestock.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/FLIGHT_tsic_flight__y4_evalreport-final.pdf.
Reviewed: June 2018
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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Facilitating Long-term Improvements in Graduation and Higher Education for Tomorrow (FLIGHT).
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
College enrollment |
Facilitating Long-term Improvements in Graduation and Higher Education for Tomorrow (FLIGHT) vs. Business as usual |
2 Years |
Grade: 9, 11 cohorts;
|
97.48 |
83.30 |
Yes |
|
|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Absences (days) |
Facilitating Long-term Improvements in Graduation and Higher Education for Tomorrow (FLIGHT) vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Grade: 7, 9 cohorts;
|
12.37 |
12.45 |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Weighted Grade Point Average |
Facilitating Long-term Improvements in Graduation and Higher Education for Tomorrow (FLIGHT) vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Grade: 7, 9 cohorts;
|
3.90 |
3.95 |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| White | 20% |
| Hispanic | 47% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 53% |
The study took place in four Florida school districts (Broward, Highlands, Hardee, and DeSoto). Broward is a large urban county in southeast Florida, and Highlands, Hardee, and Desoto are rural counties in south-central Florida.
At baseline, the average age of students in the sample was 14.8 years, 65% were female, 80% were minority, and 47% were Hispanic. Just over one-third (37%) came from single parent homes, all students were eligible for free or reduced price lunch, 54% were eligible to receive social services such as food stamps or Medicaid, and 78% had a mother who was a high school graduate. Forty percent of students reported that they have (or had) a sibling enrolled in college.
FLIGHT was implemented during three school years. The intervention included five components aimed at increasing the likelihood of students applying for, being accepted to, and enrolling in college. The first component was a pre-paid college scholarship for students who remained in good academic standing throughout high school. The second through fourth components were one-on-one mentoring from adult volunteers, intensive case-management services from school staff, and academic and college preparation workshops for students and their parents. The fifth component was a Student Detail Report of students’ grades, attendance, test scores, and status in the intervention that was provided at year-end to parents, teachers, and guidance counselors.
Students assigned to the comparison group did not receive the FLIGHT intervention and received business-as-usual college preparation support.
FLIGHT staff were trained to create and distribute the year-end Student Detail Reports. New mentors are provided with a 2-hour orientation and training session before being assigned as a mentor. New and returning mentors are also asked to participate in at least one 1-hour enrichment event during the year. These enrichment events are informal and can be in the form of a lunchtime online webinar or a mentor appreciation breakfast with FLIGHT staff.
Reviewed: January 2017
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.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
GPA |
Facilitating Long-term Improvements in Graduation and Higher Education for Tomorrow (FLIGHT) vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Grades 7 and 9;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Absences |
Facilitating Long-term Improvements in Graduation and Higher Education for Tomorrow (FLIGHT) vs. Business as usual |
3 Years |
Grades 7 and 9;
|
N/A |
N/A |
No |
-- |
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Hispanic | 24% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 76% |
This study took place in four school districts in Florida: Broward County and Highland, Hardee, and Desoto districts.
For GPA, 32.8% of the comparison group and 36.8% of the intervention group are male; 51.5% of the comparison group and 43.4% of the intervention group are Hispanic; and 54.5% of the comparison group and 56.7% of the intervention group are eligible for social services. For Absences, 33.1% of the comparison group and 36.1% of the intervention group are male; 51.1% of the comparison group and 43.5% of the intervention group are Hispanic; and 55% of the comparison group and 56.6% of the intervention group are eligible for social services.
Students in the intervention condition are provided structured high school and college preparatory workshops, wrap-around services to provide more intensive case-management and standardized feedback with parents and guidance counselors during their high school years. There are several key components that comprise FLIGHT, including pre-service activities and student-service activities which include: mentor training and enrichment, training of FLIGHT staff in creation and distribution of the Student Detail Report, lesson plans for each college access and supplemental workshop, wrap-around case management services, one-on-one student mentoring, college access and success workshops and field experiences, supplemental student workshops, and student detail reports.
The students in the comparison group did not receive any sort of intervention as they were 'business as usual'.
The authors evaluated the implementation based on adherence (the extent to which activities were provided) and reach (the extent to which targeted participants attended or received the activity in the prescribed dosage). The summary of fidelity ratings for the implementation all were rated as adequate according to these standards.
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.
Evidence Tier
The Department of Education’s evidence tiers. For more information, please see the WWC Glossary entry for evidence tiers.
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube