Borman, Geoffrey D.; Park, So Jung; Min, Sookweon (2015). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED558845
Reviewed: February 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 Achieve3000®.
|
Outcome measure |
Comparison | Period | Sample |
Intervention mean |
Comparison mean |
Significant? |
Improvement index |
Evidence tier |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
California Standards Test English Language Arts (CST-ELA) |
Achieve3000® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grades 4-8;
|
379.71 |
377.36 |
Yes |
|
|
|
| Show Supplemental Findings | |||||||||
|
California Standards Test English Language Arts (CST-ELA) |
Achieve3000® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade 7;
|
402.83 |
384.88 |
Yes |
|
||
|
California Standards Test English Language Arts (CST-ELA) |
Achieve3000® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade 8;
|
382.49 |
374.35 |
-- |
-- | ||
|
California Standards Test English Language Arts (CST-ELA) |
Achieve3000® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade 4;
|
369.45 |
363.49 |
Yes |
|
||
|
California Standards Test English Language Arts (CST-ELA) |
Achieve3000® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade 5;
|
389.50 |
388.82 |
No |
-- | ||
|
California Standards Test English Language Arts (CST-ELA) |
Achieve3000® vs. Business as usual |
1 Year |
Grade 6;
|
378.19 |
379.21 |
No |
-- | ||
Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.
| Asian | 14% | |
| Black | 3% | |
| Other or unknown | 71% | |
| White | 12% |
| Hispanic | 69% | |
| Not Hispanic or Latino | 31% |
The study was conducted in the Chula Vista school district in California.
This study examined the effects of Achieve3000® in 16 schools in the Chula Vista school district and used demographically similar schools in the same school district as a comparison group. The study took place over one school year (2011–12) and included students in grades 4–8. The authors matched Achieve3000® students and comparison students on achievement measures and demographics. The study participants were 69% Hispanic, 14% Asian, 12% White, and 3% African-American. About 30% of students were English learners. About 49% of the study participants received free or reduced-price lunch, and females made up 51% of the sample. The analytic sample included 9,527 students: 1,957 students were in the Achieve3000® group, and 7,570 students were in the comparison group.
Intervention students received the Achieve3000® program over one school year. Most intervention students completed, on average, one or two Achieve3000® activities per week. The Achieve3000® intervention was used to supplement a standard core English language arts curriculum. The authors did not identify which core curriculum was used or provide any other information about the implementation of the Achieve3000® intervention.
The comparison students did not have access to the Achieve3000® program. They received English language arts instruction as usual.
Schools implementing Achieve3000® purchased Professional Learning Services along with the programs. These services included 1–3 days per year of on-site support by trainers, including training for teachers new to the school, familiarizing returning teachers with upgrades to the program, one-on-one consulting with teachers, and modeling of best practices.
Reviewed: July 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.
Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Achieve3000®.
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.
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).
Resources
Newsflash
Contact Us
Facebook
Twitter
YouTube