Project Activities
Research question
- What was the impact of CLSD funding on student reading achievement in grades 3–5?
- Did CLSD funding affect grade 3–5 teachers' literacy instruction as intended, in ways that are linked to student achievement?
- How did trends in reading achievement differ for SRCL- and CLSD-funded schools versus similar non-funded schools?
- To what extent did SRCL and CLSD grantees carry out their efforts in ways that are aligned with the programs' goals — such as targeting disadvantaged students or using literacy programs and instructional practices that are comprehensive and supported by research evidence?
Structured Abstract
Design
To assess SRCL implementation the evaluation focused on the last 11 grantees funded (in FY 2017) and drew on: grant application reviews, state grantee interviews, surveys of all district subgrantees in Spring 2019, surveys of teachers in a representative sample of 500 funded schools (Spring 2019 and Spring 2020), surveys of principals in those sampled schools (Spring 2020), and collection of state reading/language arts assessment data. The evaluation also included reviews of programs commonly funded by SRCL to determine whether they are supported by rigorous research evidence.
The CLSD evaluation included the first two rounds of grantees funded in FY 2019 and FY 2020. To document program implementation, the evaluation included interviews of all state grantees and a survey of all district subgrantees. To assess the program's impact, the study recruited and randomly assigned approximately 120 schools to either a group that received CLSD funding right away or a group that received CLSD funding two years later. The experiences and outcomes of the two groups of schools during the first two years would have been compared using data from state reading/language arts assessments, school-level surveys, and video observations of reading instruction.
Key findings
The Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy (SRCL) Program final report found that:
- Uneven targeting of resources to disadvantaged schools suggests that SRCL's funding objectives were not realized in every state, though limited data availability and variation in states' definitions of disadvantage make it difficult to draw firm conclusions. Using a common definition of disadvantage created for the study, not all states funded their most disadvantaged schools consistently in terms of students from low-income families, students with disabilities, English learners, or average English language arts scores.
- Literacy programs supported by rigorous research evidence were not a focus, according to independent reviews of the quality of the research. Most SRCL districts purchased at least one literacy program with SRCL funds, but few of these districts purchased programs supported by rigorous evidence. In addition, few teachers in SRCL schools reported using such programs.
- Teachers used the kinds of comprehensive literacy instruction consistent with research and emphasized by SRCL less widely than expected. Few teachers reported engaging in all six features of high-quality comprehensive literacy instruction measured by the study, although most engaged in at least half of the features.
People and institutions involved
IES program contact(s)
Products and publications
The first report for the study, titled Did the Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Grant Program Reach Its Goals? An Implementation Report, was released in May 2024.
The contract for this study was canceled in February 2025. NCEE is evaluating what further publications, if any, may arise from this work.
Questions about this project?
To answer additional questions about this project or provide feedback, please contact the program officer.
