Scaling and Sustaining Effective Summer Literacy Reforms in High-Poverty Schools and Districts

• In Event: 52.044 - Recent Research Insights Into Summer Learning Losses and Gains

Abstract

In this study, we illustrate the role that experimental evidence can play in helping policymakers scale and sustain effective literacy reforms in high poverty schools. We focus on a teacher-scaffolded voluntary summer reading program called READS (Reading Enhances Achievement During Summer). READS provides elementary school children with (a) summer books that are matched to students’ reading levels and interests and (b) teacher scaffolding and parent support for summer reading in the form of teacher lessons and family nights at the end of the school year, as well as materials and messages sent to students and parents in the summer. READS has been implemented in North Carolina schools as part of an Investing in Innovation (i3) validation grant that began in fall 2010. Since 2010, the Durham Public Schools have participated in three consecutive experimental studies of READS. We included the same Grade 3 outcome (Iowa Test of Basic Skills, Reading Comprehension) in each of the three evaluations to compare effects across studies.

In summer 2012, we conducted a randomized controlled trial of READS in 19 elementary schools in the Durham, NC public schools. Students in the treatment condition received both summer books matched to their reading levels and interests and teacher scaffolding in the form of end-of-year comprehension lessons. Students in one of the two treatment conditions also received phone calls from a teacher during the summer. Overall, there were no significant treatment effects. However, there was a significant interaction between the treatment conditions and school poverty, yielding positive effects of d = .11 and d = .08 in high-poverty schools (i.e., 75–100% of the students were receiving free or reduced-price lunch). For moderate poverty schools (45–74% FRL), the effects of the treatments were negative (Cohen’s d = −.11 and −.12, respectively). In addition, implementation data showed that only 11% of the children in the enhanced treatment received the full dose of three teacher phone calls. Given the challenge of reaching children at home during the summer, we modified the treatment by including an afterschool family literacy event to inform parents about the READS program activities.

In 2012, 10 high-poverty schools in Durham, NC participated in a randomized trial of the basic treatment and the enhanced treatment, involving follow-up phone calls. The magnitude of the effects on the ITBS was comparable to the summer 2012 effects in high poverty schools. Finally, in summer 2013, we conducted a replication experiment of the enhanced treatment in Durham and six other North Carolina districts. There were positive effects in Grade 3 (d = .12) for the Durham site, and children in the Durham schools showed more evidence of summer loss in reading than children in the other study sites. Study results underscore the important role of using experimental evidence to modify treatments for the contexts in which they are likely to work best.

Authors

• James S. Kim, Harvard University

• Jonathan Guryan, University of Chicago

• David Quinn, Harvard University