Examining Implementation and Outcomes of the Project On-Track High-Dosage Tutoring Program

School districts in northeastern Tennessee have had persistently low proficiency rates in grade 3 English language arts, which were exacerbated by disruptions in schooling due to the Covid-19 pandemic. In response, the Niswonger Foundation, a technical assistance provider that supports these districts, developed Project On-Track, a high-dosage, small-group literacy tutoring program for students in grade 1-3. Its online adaptive program, Amplify Reading, groups students by skill level and generates mini-lessons aligned to the science of reading that are delivered by tutors. Although the content of the tutoring sessions is highly structured, Project On-Track offers schools flexibility in how they implement the program, including when they provide tutoring, who provides tutoring, in which grade levels they offer tutoring, and how they identify students within a grade level for tutoring. This flexibility can make it easier for schools to adopt the program, particularly rural schools, which may face greater challenges in hiring tutors or delivering tutoring outside of school hours. However, variation in implementation may also affect program effectiveness. To inform future implementation of the program, this study describes the characteristics of students who participated in a full year of Project On-Track and how schools implemented the program, with a focus on three implementation features: when and how frequently tutoring is offered and who provides it. By reporting on the association between variations in implementation and student literacy scores, the study offers important insights to inform future program implementation.

The study found no differences in student literacy scores based on timing or frequency of tutoring. Most schools (66 percent) offered tutoring during school and more than twice a week (64 percent). Rural schools were more likely to offer tutoring during school (92 percent) than were nonrural schools (47 percent). Most tutors were current teachers (55 percent) or retired teachers (12 percent). This study does not provide evidence of differences in student literacy scores based on tutor qualifications. More than half the students who participated in a full year of Project On-Track tutoring started the year with literacy assessment scores identifying them as most at risk for reading difficulties, and 42 percent of them improved to a lower risk category after one year of tutoring. Although this study uses descriptive methods and cannot assess effectiveness, the findings suggest that schools and districts using a highly structured tutoring program like Project On-Track might be able to exercise flexibility in when and how often tutoring is offered and by whom without compromising program quality and benefits to students.