Study: 77453

Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) Intervention Report - Adolescent Literacy

Review Details

Reviewed: March 2020

At least one finding shows strong evidence of effectiveness

At least one statistically significant positive finding

Meets WWC standards without reservations

For:

Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) Intervention Report - Adolescent Literacy

Using:

Rating:

Meets WWC standards without reservations because it is a cluster randomized controlled trial with low cluster-level attrition and individual-level non-response.

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 Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS).

Findings

Comprehension outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Short Comparison Text: Main Idea Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Aggregated sample; 4,035 students	3.46	2.65	Yes	20
Short Comparison Text: Competence Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Aggregated sample; 4,040 students	4.25	3.71	Yes	9
Short Comparison Text: Total Recall Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Aggregated sample; 4,073 students	26.17	22.37	Yes	9
Problem/Solution Text: Total Recall Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Aggregated sample; 4,090 students	17.93	15.76	Yes	7
Gray Silent Reading Test (GSRT)	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Aggregated sample; 4,856 students	32.12	30.42	Yes	6
Problem/Solution Text: Competence Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Aggregated sample; 4,084 students	3.54	3.21	Yes	6
Show Supplemental Findings
Short Comparison Text: Main Idea Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Months	Grade: 4; 1,875 students	3.22	2.44	Yes	43
Problem/Solution Text: Total Recall Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 4; 1,910 students	15.36	13.48	Yes	23
Short Comparison Text: Competence Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 4; 1,877 students	3.79	3.38	Yes	21
Short Comparison Text: Main Idea Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 5; 2,160 students	3.66	2.84	Yes	20
Problem/Solution Text: Competence Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 4; 1,904 students	3.07	2.79	Yes	17
Short Comparison Text: Total Recall Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 4; 1,900 students	21.21	19.57	Yes	13
Short Comparison Text: Total Recall Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 5; 2,173 students	30.44	24.87	Yes	12
Short Comparison Text: Competence Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 5; 2,163 students	4.65	4.01	Yes	10
Gray Silent Reading Test (GSRT)	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 5; 2,485 students	35.18	32.84	Yes	8
Problem/Solution Text: Total Recall Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 5; 2,180 students	20.16	17.78	Yes	8
Problem/Solution Text: Competence Test	Intelligent Tutoring for Structure Strategy (ITSS) vs. Business as usual	0 Days	Grade: 5; 2,180 students	3.95	3.58	Yes	6

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.

Rural, Suburban

Study Details

Setting

The study included fourth- and fifth-grade classrooms from 45 rural and suburban elementary schools, 12 school districts, and two states in the United States.

Study sample

The number of students in the analytic sample, including both fourth- and fifth-grade students, differs by outcome, ranging from 4,035 to 4,856 students. No demographic or sample characteristics were provided on the fourth-grade analytic sample; however, the authors stated that the intervention and comparison groups were balanced on student socioeconomic status, number of English learners, percentage of racial/ethnic minorities, and gender. The 45 schools in the fifth-grade sample are composed of 8% to 14% racial/ethnic minorities and 39% to 44% socioeconomically disadvantaged students.

Intervention Group

Students in the intervention group received the ITSS program over the course of the 2009–10 school year. ITSS sessions took place for 30 to 45 minutes a week over 6 to 7 months, which was lower than the developer-recommended dosage, as a partial substitute for the regular language arts curriculum. In fourth-grade classrooms, the recall task of ITSS was removed from the lesson sequence after the first month of instruction because students had difficulty typing. In fifth-grade classrooms, the recall task was implemented as intended.

Comparison Group

Students in comparison classrooms received the typical language arts curriculum, which was the same curriculum used by the intervention group classrooms within the same school except for the partial substitution of ITSS. Total daily and weekly amounts of language arts instruction were the same for both intervention and comparison classrooms.

Support for implementation

The research team conducted ITSS training sessions for the teachers of intervention classrooms during the 2009–10 academic year. Teachers in comparison classrooms were offered the same professional development after the study was completed.

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.

Wijekumar, K., Meyer, B.J.F., & Lei, P. (2013). High-fidelity implementation of web-based intelligent tutoring system improves fourth and fifth graders content area reading comprehension. Computers & Education, 68, 366-379.
Meyer, Bonnie J. F.; Wijekumar, Kausalai; Lei, Puiwa. (2018). Comparative Signaling Generated for Expository Texts by 4th-8th Graders: Variations by Text Structure Strategy Instruction, Comprehension Skill, and Signal Word. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, v31 n9 p1937-1968.
Wijekumar, Kausalai; Meyer, Bonnie J. F.; Lei, Pui-Wa; Lin, Yu-Chu; Johnson, Lori A.; Spielvogel, James A.; Shurmatz, Kathryn M.; Ray, Melissa; Cook, Michael. (2014). Multisite Randomized Controlled Trial Examining Intelligent Tutoring of Structure Strategy for Fifth-Grade Readers. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, v7 n4 p331-357.

Large-Scale Randomized Controlled Trial with 4th Graders Using Intelligent Tutoring of the Structure Strategy to Improve Nonfiction Reading Comprehension