WWC review of this study

Improving student literacy in the Phoenix Union High School District 2003–04 and 2004–05.

White, R., Haslam, B. M., & Hewes, G. (2006). Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.

  • Quasi-Experimental Design
     examining 
    3,688
     Students
    , grades
    9-10
At least one statistically significant positive finding
Meets WWC standards with reservations

Reviewed: November 2016

Literacy achievement outcomes—Statistically significant positive effects found
Outcome
measure
Comparison Period Sample Intervention
mean
Comparison
mean
Significant? Improvement
index

TerraNova Reading Test

READ 180® vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Cohort 2;
1,630 students

41.2

38.3

Yes

 
 
11
More Outcomes

TerraNova Reading Test

READ 180® vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Cohort 3;
2,058 students

39

38.1

Yes

 
 
3
Show Supplemental Findings

TerraNova Reading Test

READ 180® vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Cohort 2 EL;
686 students

39.9

35.4

Yes

 
 
18

TerraNova Reading Test

READ 180® vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Cohort 2 Low Score;
1,268 students

39.8

36.2

Yes

 
 
13

TerraNova Reading Test

READ 180® vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Cohort 2 Non-EL;
944 students

42

40.5

Yes

 
 
6

TerraNova Reading Test

READ 180® vs. Business as usual

2 Semesters

Cohort 2 High Score;
362 students

46.1

45.6

No

--

Characteristics of study sample as reported by study author.


  • 42% English language learners

  • Female: 48%
    Male: 52%
  • Ethnicity
    Hispanic
    85%
    Not Hispanic
    15%

  • 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

    Arizona

Setting

The study took place in the Phoenix Union High School District in Arizona.

Study sample

All students in grades 9 and 10 who were reading one or more grade levels below their assigned grade level were considered for the study; however, the READ 180® program did not have space for all eligible students. Students in the READ 180® program were included in the study if they met all of the following criteria: • had two or more SRI scores at least 45 days apart (to allow for analysis of changes in SRI scores). • had Stanford 9 and/or TerraNova scores from both eighth and ninth grades. • had a matched nonparticipant available for the purposes of comparison. Students were matched on eighth-grade reading proficiency (measured by the Stanford 9 in 2003–04 and 2004–05 and the TerraNova in 2004–05 and 2005–06), EL status, special education eligibility, gender, and ethnicity. Four cohorts of students were studied: Cohort 1: This cohort included ninth graders in the 2003–04 school year. This cohort did not meet eligibility requirements specified in the Adolescent Literacy protocol because 53% of students from this cohort were eligible for EL services. Cohort 2: This cohort included 1,630 students in grade 9 in the 2004–05 school year. The sample included 815 students in each condition, among whom: 40% of the intervention (READ 180®) group and 44% of comparison group students were eligible for EL services, 7% of the intervention group and 10% of comparison group students were eligible for special education, 48% of the intervention group and 49% of comparison group were female, and 84% of the intervention group and 86% of comparison group students were Hispanic. Follow-up outcomes were collected 1 year later in tenth grade (2005–06). Although the additional source for this study (Scholastic Research and Results, 2008) indicated that there were 821 students in each condition, a query response received from the authors confirmed that there were 815 students in each group (as reported in White et al., 2006). Cohort 3: This cohort included 2,058 students in grade 9 in the 2005–06 school year. Although the White et al. (2006) article indicated that this cohort included only the intervention group, This cohort is discussed in Scholastic Research and Results (2008) but not in White et al. (2006). Scholastic Research and Results (2008) indicated that there was a comparison group for this cohort. The presence of a comparison group was confirmed by the authors’ response to a WWC query. Outcomes for this cohort are only available for ninth grade; tenth-grade follow-up outcomes are not available. Cohort 4: This cohort did not have a comparison group, and therefore, is ineligible for review.

Intervention Group

No information was provided in the report about the intervention except its name and version: Scholastic READ 180 program, Stage C, Version 1.6.

Comparison Group

No information was provided about the comparison condition.

Support for implementation

Support for implementation was not described in the report.

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.

  • Scholastic Research and Results. (2008). READ 180: Longitudinal evaluation of a ninth-grade reading intervention (2003–2006). New York, NY: Scholastic, Inc.

 

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