Results From the Zoology One Multisite Randomized Experiment

• In Event: Integrating Literacy and Science in Kindergarten: Results From a Large-Scale Mixed-Methods Evaluation

Abstract

Objectives or purposes. This paper will share the impact findings from the RCT evaluation of Zoology One, and will include impacts on reading, writing, and science achievement in kindergarten. The evaluation design for the IES-funded efficacy trial of Zoology One includes a rigorous experimental research design (i.e., a multi-site cluster randomized controlled trial) that supports strong causal inferences about program impacts. Cluster randomization was selected because Zoology One is a whole-class intervention. Randomization was conducted at the classroom level with entire classrooms—including teacher and all students— in September in each year, after students and teachers have been assigned to classrooms.

Perspective(s) or theoretical framework. A growing body of empirical research suggests that science engagement helps build young children’s general knowledge, vocabulary, and motivation to learn—all of which have been demonstrated to predict long-term achievement across multiple domains (Grissmer et al., 2010; Strickland & Riley-Ayers, 2006; French, 2004). Zoology One builds on this prior evidence by combining intensive engagement with science content and research-based best practices in literacy instruction in a comprehensive integrated curriculum for kindergarten. Its primary goal is to accelerate all students’ progress in reading. Increasing students’ writing skill and science content knowledge are secondary goals.

Methods, techniques, or modes of inquiry. Treatment-control differences are estimated using a three-level hierarchical linear model (Raudenbush & Bryk, 2002), with students nested within classrooms and classrooms nested within schools. This HLM includes pretest scores as a covariate, along with random effects for classroom, a random effect for overall school performance (i.e., random school intercepts), and a random effect for the impact of Zoology One (i.e., random treatment effects across schools). The primary impact analyses utilizes four subscales from the Woodcock Reading Mastery Test as the confirmatory posttest outcome measure and Readiness subscale scores as the pretest covariate.

Data sources, evidence, objects, or materials. This paper will detail our timeline for assessment in the first year of the project and will document our decisions about and use of the following assessments: Woodcock Reading Mastery Test; Math and Writing subtests of the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement, Third Edition (KTEA-3); Science Learning Assessment (Samarapungavan, Patrick, & Matzicoupolis, 2006); Sentence Writing Assessment (Coker & Ritchie, 2012); and Kindergarten Reading Motivation Scale (Castillo & Gray, 2017)

Results and/or substantiated conclusions or warrants for arguments/point of view. Baseline equivalence was confirmed for gender, race, and prior reading level. End of year impacts on reading, writing, science and math are presented. Analyses revealed overall significant effects of Zoology One, including a treatment effect of .28 standard deviations for the WRMT passage comprehension subscale and .28 standard deviations for reading motivation.

Scientific or scholarly significance of the study or work. This paper presents results for the very time from this large federally funded evaluation. Findings will be useful to policymakers, practitioners, and researchers inter¬ested in the relationship between achievement in science and literacy, and the effects of engaging students in integrated literacy and science programming from the earliest days of school.

Authors

• Abigail Gray, School District of Philadelphia

• Philip M. Sirinides, The Pennsylvania State University - Harrisburg