Study: 85516

Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) Intervention Report - Charter Schools

Review Details

Reviewed: January 2018

At least one finding shows moderate evidence of effectiveness

At least one statistically significant positive finding

Meets WWC standards with reservations

For:

Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) Intervention Report - Charter Schools

Using:

Rating:

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.

Please see the WWC summary of evidence for Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP).

Findings

English language arts achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Statewide assessment of reading achievement (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	4 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 14,551 students	0.08	-0.09	Yes	6
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings
End-of-Year Reading Assessments	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	3 Years	Tuttle 2010 Full sample; 5,442 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	9
Statewide assessment of reading achievement (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	3 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 22,155 students	0.06	-0.09	Yes	6
End-of-Year Reading Assessments	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	2 Years	Tuttle 2010 Full sample; 8,041 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	6
End-of-Year Reading Assessments	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	4 Years	Tuttle 2010 Full sample; 2,570 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	6
Statewide assessment of reading achievement (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	2 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 27,758 students	-0.01	-0.11	Yes	4
Statewide assessment of reading achievement (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	1 Year	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample (new KIPP middle schools); 2,360 students	-0.22	-0.27	Yes	2
Reading test score	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	1 Year	Tuttle 2013 Full matched comparison sample; 31,832 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	2
Statewide assessment of reading achievement (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	1 Year	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 34,915 students	-0.11	-0.11	No	--

General Mathematics Achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Statewide mathematics assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	4 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 13,624 students	0.14	-0.13	Yes	11
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings
Achievement in mathematics	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	3 Years	Tuttle 2010 Full sample; 5,439 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	16
Achievement in mathematics	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	2 Years	Tuttle 2010 Full sample; 8,020 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	14
Achievement in mathematics	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	4 Years	Tuttle 2010 Full sample; 2,576 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	14
Statewide mathematics assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	3 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 21,926 students	0.17	-0.12	Yes	11
Statewide mathematics assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	2 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 27,736 students	0.09	-0.14	Yes	9
Math test score	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	1 Year	Tuttle 2013 Full matched comparison sample; 31,832 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	6
Statewide mathematics assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	1 Year	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 34,938 students	-0.05	-0.11	Yes	2
Statewide mathematics assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	1 Year	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample (new KIPP middle schools); 2,366 students	-0.19	-0.23	No	--

Science achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Statewide science assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	4 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 17,413 students	0.08	-0.17	Yes	10
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings
Science	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	3 Years	Tuttle 2013 full matched comparison sample; 8,699 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	13

Social studies achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome measure	Comparison	Period	Sample	Intervention mean	Comparison mean	Significant?	Improvement index
Statewide assessments of history achievement (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	4 Years	Tuttle 2015 Middle school: matched-student sample; 9,762 students	0.11	-0.13	Yes	9
More Outcomes
Show Supplemental Findings
Statewide social studies assessments (z-score)	Knowledge is Power Program (KIPP) vs. Business as usual	3 Years	Tuttle 2013 Full matched comparison sample; 6,904 students	N/A	N/A	Yes	10

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.

7% English language learners
Female: 51%
Male: 49%
Urban
- 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
Arkansas, Colorado, District of Columbia, Georgia, Massachusetts, North Carolina, New York, Tennessee, Texas

Race
Black		58%
Other or unknown		42%

Ethnicity
Hispanic		39%
Not Hispanic or Latino		61%

Study Details

Setting

This analysis includes students and schools in multiple states and districts in the United States where KIPP charter schools operate. The study took place in 43 middle schools in the KIPP network in 20 cities across the following 12 states and the District of Columbia: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Texas.

Study sample

The study used a matched-student quasi-experimental design, where the intervention group consisted of students who attended 37 KIPP middle schools, and the comparison group was a sample matched based on student baseline characteristics: baseline reading and math test scores; gender, race, special education, limited English proficiency, and free or reduced-price lunch status; and whether the student repeated a grade in the baseline year. Sample characteristics for the analysis samples with non-imputed baseline data, on which the WWC based the intervention’s effectiveness rating, are not reported.

Intervention Group

Students in the intervention condition attended a KIPP middle school at some point over the period 2001–13.

Comparison Group

Students in the comparison condition attended non-KIPP middle schools.

Support for implementation

The study did not provide information about implementation support; however, authors noted that staff at KIPP schools had considerable autonomy in the implementation process to set the direction of the school (p. 22).

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.

Tuttle, C. C., Gleason, P., Knechtel, V., Nichols-Barrer, I., Booker, K., Chojnacki, G., ... Goble, L. (2015). Going to scale: As KIPP network grows, positive impacts are sustained (In Focus brief). Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
Gleason, P. M., Tuttle, C. C., Gill, B., Nichols-Barrer, I., & Teh, B. (2014). Do KIPP schools boost student achievement?. Education Finance and Policy, 9(1), 36–58.
Tuttle, C. C., Teh, B., Nichols-Barrer, I., Gill, B., & Gleason, P. (2010). Supplemental analytic sample equivalence tables for student characteristics and achievement in 22 KIPP middle schools: A report from the National Evaluation of KIPP Middle Schools. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research.
Tuttle, Christina Clark; Teh, Bing-ru; Nichols-Barrer, Ira; Gill, Brian P.; Gleason, Philip. (2010). Student Characteristics and Achievement in 22 KIPP Middle Schools: Final Report. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.
Tuttle, Christina Clark; Gill, Brian; Gleason, Philip; Knechtel, Virginia; Nichols-Barrer, Ira; Resch, Alexandra. (2013). KIPP Middle Schools: Impacts on Achievement and Other Outcomes. Final Report. Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.

Understanding the Effect of KIPP as It Scales: Volume I, Impacts on Achievement and Other Outcomes. Final Report of KIPP's "Investing in Innovation Grant Evaluation"