WWC review of this study

English Language and Literacy Acquisition-Validation (ELLA-V) i3 Evaluation (Valid 22). Final Report

Wolf, Rebecca; Latham, Gavin; Armstrong, Clayton; Ross, Steven; Laurenzano, Mary; Daniels, Cecilia; Eisinger, Jane; Reilly, Joseph (2018). Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED598313

  • Randomized Controlled Trial
     examining 
    1,317
     Students
    , grades
    K-3

Reviewed: June 2022

At least one finding shows moderate evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations
Alphabetics outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA-2)

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Kindergarten;
1,123 students

N/A

7.59

Yes

 
 
6
 
More Outcomes

Test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA-2)

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Kindergarten;
1,185 students

N/A

7.59

No

--
English language proficiency outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey oral (WMLS-R Oral)

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Kindergarten;
1,146 students

N/A

66.99

Yes

 
 
6
 
More Outcomes

Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey oral (WMLS-R Oral)

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Kindergarten;
1,192 students

N/A

66.99

Yes

 
 
4
 
General Literacy Achievement outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) Reading

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Grade 3;
1,111 students

1385.84

1369.10

No

--
More Outcomes

Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey Reading (WMLS-R Reading)

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Grade 3;
1,120 students

99.00

99.54

No

--

Woodcock-Muñoz Language Survey Reading (WMLS-R Reading)

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Grade 3;
1,003 students

N/A

99.54

No

--

State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) Reading

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Grade 3;
1,002 students

N/A

1369.10

No

--
General science achievement outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS): science subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Grade 3;
1,317 students

N/A

185.94

No

--
More Outcomes

Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS): science subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Grade 3;
1,186 students

N/A

185.94

No

--
Reading Fluency outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Grade 2;
1,309 students

90.16

87.73

No

--
More Outcomes

DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Grade 1;
1,165 students

N/A

46.53

No

--
Student emotional status outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

SEI Spanish

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Grade 1;
1,164 students

N/A

1.54

No

--
More Outcomes

SEI Spanish

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Grade 1;
1,121 students

N/A

1.54

No

--
Writing Quality outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

TELPAS Writing

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 2, Grade 3;
1,130 students

N/A

2.78

No

--
More Outcomes

TELPAS Writing

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Treatment 1, Grade 3 ;
1,259 students

N/A

2.78

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 100% English language learners

  • Rural, Suburban, 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Texas
  • Race
    Other or unknown
    100%

Setting

The study took place in 78 schools in 10 districts in Texas across urban (10%), suburban (50%), small town (10%), and rural (30%) sites. Study schools in the study sample served a predominantly low-income (91%) and English learner (EL) student population (62%).

Study sample

The sample was 100% EL students. The majority of students in the study were in transitional bilingual classrooms and the teachers were all English as a second language (ESL) teachers. Only EL students and students who did not qualify for special education services were recruited for the study. No student-level demographic information was provided in the study.

Intervention Group

English Language and Literacy Acquisition-Validation (ELLA-V) provided ongoing virtual professional development and coaching and curricula to teachers of English learner (EL) students in 10 school districts at 78 schools in Texas. The evaluation included two treatment groups that provided similar professional development and coaching but different curricula for teachers. Treatment 1 included science-infused literacy curriculum, while Treatment 2 included science-infused oral language curriculum. The evaluation examined the effectiveness of ELLA-V in promoting K-3 students’ overall academic growth in science, oral language, phonological awareness, reading, writing, and English language acquisition; student self-esteem; and teachers’ quality of instruction after one year of exposure in each of four grades.

Comparison Group

Teachers in the comparison condition had access to the standard professional development, coaching, and curricular resources provided by the school and district. Comparison students were likely exposed to instruction and support services as they had been in the past.

Support for implementation

No implementation support was described separate from the intervention components, which included professional development, coaching, and curricula.

Reviewed: October 2020

At least one finding shows moderate evidence of effectiveness
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations
Alphabetics outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Test of Phonological Awareness (TOPA): Phonological Awareness subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: GradesK&1;
2,277 students

0.09

0.00

Yes

 
 
4
 
English language proficiency outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Woodcock Munoz Language Survey-Revised (WMLS-R): Oral Language Subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: Grades K-3;
4,903 students

0.00

0.00

No

--
More Outcomes

Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS): English Language Development

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: Grades K-3;
4,749 students

-0.02

0.00

No

--

Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS): Reading Subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: Grades K-3;
4,743 students

-0.03

0.00

No

--

Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS): Writing Subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: Grades K-3;
4,748 students

-0.04

0.00

No

--

Woodcock Munoz Language Survey-Revised (WMLS-R): Reading Subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: Grades K-3;
student

-0.02

0.00

No

--
General Literacy Achievement outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR): Reading Subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full Sample: Grade 3;
1,111 students

N/A

N/A

No

--
General science achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS): science subtest

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full Sample: Grade 3;
1,317 students

N/A

N/A

Yes

 
 
11
 
Reading Fluency outcomes—Indeterminate effect found for the domain
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
    index
Evidence
tier

DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency

The English Language and Literacy Acquisition–Validation Program (ELLA-V) vs. Business as usual

0 Days

Full sample: Grades 1&2;
2,541 students

-0.01

0.00

No

--


Evidence Tier rating based solely on this study. This intervention may achieve a higher tier when combined with the full body of evidence.

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 62% English language learners

  • Rural, Suburban, 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
    • x
    • w
    • y

    Texas

Setting

The study sample included 79 schools in 10 districts in Texas across urban, suburban, small town, and rural sites. English learner students in both structured English immersion and transitional bilingual programs received the intervention during a 75-minute ESL block in kindergarten and 90-minute ESL block in grades 1–3, while the typical state-mandated ESL block was 45 minutes. Comparison students received instruction in a business-as-usual format (i.e., non-enhanced 45-minute ESL learning block). In each school, there were at least two teachers who were certified in bilingual education. Students in grades K–3 were English learners and did not qualify for special education services.

Study sample

No student demographic information was reported. However, for the ten schools, 62% of the student population were English learners, 91% were low income, and 76% had an English language proficiency rating of intermediate or advanced. The majority of students in the study were in transitional bilingual classrooms. Students were recruited only if they were English learners and did not qualify for special education services.

Intervention Group

ELLA-V provided ongoing virtual professional development and coaching and curricula to teachers of English learner students. ELLA-V was implemented in grade 3 in 2013–14, grade 2 in 2014–15, grade 1 in 2015–16, and kindergarten in 2016–17. Teachers received the intervention for a single year, dependent on grade-level implementation. The curricula used by the teachers differed across grade levels, but all focused on literacy and science content. For Treatment 1, which is the focus of this review, reading was a focus across the grade, compared to Treatment 2's focus on oral language development. Across grades, the curricula for Treatment 1 included Lets Talk Science (LTS), Early Interventions in Reading (EIR-I and EIR-II), and Content Reading Integrating Science for English Language and Literacy Acquisition (CRISELLA). Students in both structured English immersion and transitional bilingual programs received the intervention during a 75-minute ESL block in kindergarten and a 90-minute ESL block in grades 1–3, while the typical state-mandated ESL block was 45 minutes (p.8).

Comparison Group

The comparison condition consisted of teachers of English learner students in each of the four grade levels who may have received professional development, coaching, and used curriculum materials other than those available through ELLA-V (i.e., non-enhanced 45-minute ESL learning block).

Support for implementation

Each school year, intervention teachers in the target grade level received bimonthly 90-minute virtual professional training for 18 sessions between September and May. Intervention teachers were also supported by coaches and observed up to three times a year depending on teacher needs. Coaches provided feedback to teachers specific to teaching English learners. Finally, teachers were provided with curricula that reflected pedagogical best practices and were aligned with content-area standards and the instructional models used in the teacher professional development.

 

Your export should download shortly as a zip archive.

This download will include data files for study and findings review data and a data dictionary.

Connect With the WWC

loading
back to top