Jump to:Page Content
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
Program Description
Overview | Save the Children’s Model Literacy Initiative supports afterschool and in-school programming designed to improve reading skills among struggling students in grades K–6. Programs are in rural locations in the states of Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, Nevada, South Carolina, and Tennessee. |
Start Date | Fall 2003 |
Scope | national |
Type | afterschool |
Location | rural |
Setting | public school |
Participants | kindergarten through elementary school students |
Number of Sites/Grantees | 118 sites in 2008–2009; 147 sites in 2009–2010 |
Number Served | 12,001 youth across all 118 sites (2008–2009); 11,082 youth across the 122 study sites (2009¬–2010) |
Components | The initiative includes two primary “Literacy Blocks”: Emergent Readers (ER) and Developing Readers (DR). ER serves children in kindergarten and first grade during and/or after school. It includes an extended read-aloud with developmentally appropriate follow-up activities, a reading-together period, and hands-on learning to support growth in phonemic awareness, letter recognition, sound–symbol correspondence, and beginning sight words. When assessments show a child has successfully mastered ER, the child moves on to DR, which targets children in grades 2–6 and takes place during and/or after school. The central component of DR is a guided independent reading program (GIRP), which uses Renaissance Learning’s Accelerated Reader books and software to provide regular opportunities for children to read books at an appropriate difficulty level for their reading skill level. As part of the Accelerated Reader program, children can read a book independently or with a teacher, or listen to the book being read aloud. In addition to GIRP, the DR Literacy Block also includes fluency-building support and read-alouds. Some schools also offer DR participants an in-school program that provides small-group tutorials that target phonics, sight words, vocabulary, and comprehension growth. |
Funding Level | $13.5 million for 2009–10 |
Funding Sources | Various grantors to Save the Children. |
Other | Save the Children and Renaissance Learning provided training, technical assistance, and ongoing support in literacy services to literacy program staff. |
Evaluation
Overview | This evaluation examined the literacy programs’ implementation, as well as outcomes related to participants’ literacy gains. |
Evaluators | Policy Studies Associates, Inc. |
Evaluations Profiled | Results from the 2008–09 School Year Results from the 2009–10 School Year Results from the Comparative Pilot Study, 2009–10 |
Evaluations Planned | Annual evaluations continue to be conducted. |
Report Availability | White, R. N., & Reisner, E. R. (2007). Model literacy programs. Save the Children: Evaluation findings from the 2005–06 school year. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED498796 Palmiter, A. S., Arcaira, E. R., White, R. N., & Reisner, E. R. (2009). The literacy programs of Save the Children: Results from the 2008–09 school year. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates. Available at: www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED508135 White, R. N., White, E. A., Palmiter, A. S., & Reisner, E. R. (2010). The literacy programs of Save the Children: Results from the 2009–10 school year. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates. Romash, R. A., White, R. N., & Reisner, E. R. (2010). Save the Children Literacy Programs: Results from the comparative pilot study, 2009–10. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates. |
Contacts
Evaluation | Andrea Palmiter Research Analyst Policy Studies Associates, Inc. 1718 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400 Washington, DC 20009 Tel: 202-939-5332 Fax: 202-939-5732 Email: apalmiter@policystudies.com |
|
Program | John Farden Director, Programs and Results Save the Children 2000 L Street NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: 202-640-6614 E-mail: jfarden@savechildren.org |
|
Profile Updated | March 31, 2011 |
Evaluation 2: Results from the 2009–10 School Year
Evaluation Description
Evaluation Purpose | To address the following: What opportunities were provided for targeted children to participate in literacy instruction and for staff to develop instructional skills? What were the program enrollment and attendance patterns? Did participants’ literacy skills improve? What factors were associated with changes in reading proficiency? What were participants’ other academic outcomes? |
Evaluation Design |
Quasi-Experimental: Of the 147 program sites operating during the 2009–10 school year, 122 were selected for the evaluation. Of the evaluated sites, 38 were in their first or second year of operation; the rest had been operating for up to 6 years. Partner school enrollment ranged from under 100 to over 800 students. The majority of partner schools served grades K–8. Of the 122 sites, 69 offered ER programming and 121 offered DR programming. Data were collected on participants at the beginning, middle, and end of the school year through two reading assessments: STAR Early Literacy, administered to ER participants in 65 of the 69 sites offering ER activities, and STAR Reading assessment, administered to DR participants at all 121 sites offering DR activities. Analysis of outcomes was limited to the 2,246 ER participants (75% of ER participants) who completed at least two STAR Early Literacy assessments over the course of the year, and 9,700 DR participants (88% of DR participants) who completed two or more STAR Reading assessments at least 90 days apart. In addition, data were collected on program attendance for all participants) as well as on the number of books read by each DR participant (data on the number of books read was not available at one site). DR participant data were also collected from Accelerated Reader quizzes (number taken, percent passed, and quiz scores). |
Data Collection Methods |
Secondary Source/Data Review: Program attendance data were collected through a web-based data collection system. These data were used to calculate the number of days that each site provided services, the number of program days each participant attended during the year (those who attended at least 55 days were considered “regular” participants), and attendance rates (i.e., the number of days attended as a proportion of the number of days it was possible to attend). The number of books read was calculated for each DR participant. After completing a book, children took an Accelerated Reader quiz on that book’s content. Participants who answered 60% of the questions about the book correctly passed the quiz. Quiz results helped track changes in reading proficiency and identify additional books appropriate for the child’s skill level. The goal was for participants at each site to pass at least 85% of the quizzes they attempted and to read an average of 25 or more books during the school year. Test/Assessments: Results of the STAR Early Literary assessment are presented as scaled scores, literacy-skills classification levels (i.e., level of reading proficiency), and risk levels (i.e., the degree of risk that the child will not gain reading proficiency). To help identify specific strengths and weaknesses, scores are also reported for seven literacy domains:
The STAR Reading assessment measures reading proficiency. Results are presented as scaled scores, grade equivalents, percentiles, and normal curve equivalents (NCEs). An increase of more than 2 NCEs is considered a meaningful increase by Renaissance Learning, the publisher of the STAR Reading assessment. The child’s grade level and month of school within that grade are factored into the scores. |
Data Collection Timeframe | Data were collected over the 2009–2010 school year. |
Findings:
Formative/Process Findings
Activity Implementation |
ER activities were offered on an average of 108 days, while DR activities were offered on an average of 125 days over the course of the year. DR participants read an average of 63 books over the course of the year. Across sites, 76% of participants read at least 25 books. In 88% of sites, participants read an average of 25 books or higher. |
Recruitment/ Participation |
Over the course of the year, a total of 2,975 children enrolled in ER activities and 11,082 children enrolled in DR activities. Sites had an average enrollment of 43 children for ER activities and 92 children for DR activities. Of ER participants, 47% were in kindergarten, and 53% were in first grade. Of DR participants, 5% were in first grade, 21% were in second grade, 23% were in third grade, 23% were in fourth grade, 18% were in fifth grade, and 9% were in sixth grade. Each child participating in ER activities attended an average of 78 days over the course of the year while each child participating in DR activities attended an average of 70 days. The average attendance rate was 81% for ER and 79% for DR. In addition, 71% of ER participants and 62% of DR participants attended activities regularly. |
Staffing/Training | Sites received an average of 40 hours of staff training, technical assistance, and coaching over the school year, which included an average of: 14 hours of literacy instruction training by Save the Children at 121 sites, 27 hours of technical assistance by Save the Children at 114 sites, and 2 hours of coaching by Renaissance Learning at 40 sites. |
Findings:
Summative/Outcome Findings
Academic |
ER participants improved significantly in their STAR Early Literacy scores (average gain = 139 scaled-score points, p < .05). The proportion of ER participants classified as transitional or probable readers (the two highest levels of reading proficiency) increased from 13% in the fall to 61% in the spring. These improvements were significant (p < .05). Children who participated in ER activities for a full year were significantly more likely to meet the expected growth goal than were those who participated for only a semester (62% vs. 57%, p < .05). Overall, 61% of ER participants met the goal for expected growth in STAR Early Literacy scale scores. ER participants exhibited average score gains on all seven literacy domains on the STAR Early Literacy assessment between the fall and spring (p < .05). The largest gains were observed on structural analysis, which averaged a gain of 25 scaled-score points. The smallest change was on the general readiness domain, where the average change was 18 scaled-score points. The percentage of ER participants identified as “on track” or “at low risk of academic failure” increased significantly from 25% in the fall to 77% in the spring (p < .05). The average STAR Reading score increased significantly from 32 NCEs on the first assessment to 40 NCEs on the final assessment (p < .05), with the average improvement equivalent to approximately four additional months of schooling. The proportion of DR participants reading at grade level or above, as measured by the STAR Reading assessment, increased significantly from 16% to 29% over the course of the year (p < .05). Both the attendance rates and number of days attended for DR activities had a positive significant relationship with improved STAR Reading scores (p < .05 for each). In particular, regular participants had larger average gains in reading scores than those who did not attend regularly (8.8 NCEs vs. 4.1 NCEs). A significantly larger percentage of DR regular participants gained at least 2 NCEs on the STAR Reading assessment than those who did not attend regularly (68% vs. 54%, p < .05). Gains of 2 NCEs or greater were achieved by 64% of DR participants overall and 68% those who scored below grade level on their initial assessment. The largest average gains in STAR Reading assessment scores were observed among youth attending DR activities at sites using the in-school-only model, and the smallest gains were observed at sites using the afterschool-only model; these differences were significant (p < . 05). In addition, regardless of the literacy model employed by the site, youth who attended DR activities during the school day—alone or in conjunction with afterschool attendance—showed significantly larger improvements on the STAR Reading assessment than DR participants who attended only afterschool (p < .05). A significant positive relationship was found between the number of books read by DR participants during the year and gains on the STAR Reading assessment (p < .05). On average, DR participants achieved a passing score on 92% of their Accelerated Reader quizzes. Across sites, 66% of participants correctly answered 85% or more of the total questions asked. A significant positive relationship was found between the percent of Accelerated Reader quizzes passed and gains on the STAR Reading assessment (p < .05). DR participants who passed at least 85% of their quizzes gained an average of 8.6 NCEs on the reading assessment compared with 5.3 NCEs for participants who passed less than 85% of their quizzes. Initial STAR Reading scores, number of days of DR activities attended, number of books read, and the average percent of questions answered correctly on Accelerated Reader quizzes all had significant positive relationships with DR participants’ performances on the final STAR Reading assessment (p < .05). |