Effects of a Low-Cost, High-Dosage Tutoring Program on Early Grade Achievement

• In Event: Equalizing Learning Opportunities Through High-Impact Tutoring: Results From Four Randomized Controlled Trials

Abstract

Background
An estimated two-thirds of US students will not be proficient readers by the time they reach fourth grade (U.S. Department of Education, 2022; Lesnick et al., 2010). During the pandemic, reading performance further declined, with particularly large drops for students in younger grades, students from historically marginalized groups, and students attending high-poverty schools (Kuhfeld, Lewis, & Peltier, 2023). Increasingly, districts are leveraging high-impact tutoring to improve reading in the early grades, based on evidence that tutoring is one of the most effective academic interventions (more effective than class-size reduction or technology support) for improving student outcomes (Kraft, 2020; Neitzel et al., 2022). Despite this, challenges remain in effectively scaling early literacy interventions (e.g., Duke & Block, 2012; Gamse, Jacob, Horst, Bouley, & Unlu, 2008), due to the costliness of such programs and a lack of understanding of the features necessary for effective scaling.

Methods
To help address this gap, we conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) at a large, urban school district on the East Coast. Researchers randomly assigned 304 kindergarten and 1st grade students across 13 participating schools into the treatment (n=105) or control (n=199) group, stratifying by grade level and beginning-of-year performance on the Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills (DIBELS) assessment. 95 percent of the sample identified as either Black or Hispanic and a significant portion (22 percent) were designated as English Learner; treatment conditions were balanced on baseline characteristics (Table 1).

Students randomly assigned to the treatment group received in-person tutoring for 15 minutes, five days a week from school paraprofessionals (such as instructional aides), who used a scripted curriculum to teach early literacy skills in one-to-one tutoring settings. Tutoring sessions were recorded and used by tutoring coaches to provide instructional support and training for paraprofessionals once weekly. Students assigned to the control group did not receive any tutoring and continued on with business-as-usual activities in their classroom.

Data
Researchers collected student demographic data (gender, race/ethnicity, grade level) and achievement data (beginning-, mid-, and end-of-year scores on DIBELS as well as the i-Ready Math assessment) from the school district, linking them to tutoring sessions data from the tutoring provider. Prior to analysis, researchers preregistered the study design, hypotheses, and analytic plan on the Open Science Framework.

Results
While there are indications that paraprofessional-led tutoring leads to positive impacts on students’ early literacy skills, continued research is needed to understand its effects more broadly. Tutoring throughout the school year led to a 0.05 SD increase in end-of-year DIBELS assessments amongst those who participated in tutoring, with most of the progress occurring by the middle-of-year DIBELS assessment (Table 2). Because the study began later than initially planned, students in the study received far less amount of tutoring – 42 15-minute sessions, on average – than what would be considered ideal (140 sessions). Nonetheless, there are indications that tutoring provided additional instruction where it was most needed. All participating students attended schools that qualified for free lunch and had demonstrated early literacy skills at levels below where we would expect at their grade level. Additionally, students with needs for enhanced learning support–such as those designated for Special Education or classified as English Learners–received more sessions than their counterparts.

The findings have several implications. First, as evidenced in literature, early literacy interventions have the strong potential to increase student achievement across multiple subjects, as reading is a fundamental skill required to be successful overall (Henry, Baltes, & Nistor, 2014; Roslan & Chen, 2023). Second, this suggests that low-cost programs can still be highly successful if done correctly with easy-to-implement features. Given that the program cost approximately $23,000 to run for the first three months of the school year, we can estimate a cost of approximately $177 per student to increase early literacy skills by 0.10 SD in that time frame. Continued research can examine whether features, such as customized instructional coaching and use of a pre-existing instructor supply (i.e, school-based paraprofessionals) are particularly effective in the early grade context.

Figures and Tables

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics, Experimental Sample


 
Table 2. Effect of Early Literacy Tutoring on End-of-Year and Middle-of-Year DIBELS Performance for Kindergarten and First Grade Students



 
References
Duke, N. K., & Block, M. K. (2012). Improving reading in the primary grades. The Future of Children, 55-72.
Gamse, B. C., Jacob, R. T., Horst, M., Boulay, B., & Unlu, F. (2008). Reading First Impact Study. Final Report. NCEE 2009-4038. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance.
Henry, D. L., Baltes, B., & Nistor, N. (2014). Examining the relationship between math scores and English language proficiency. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 4(1), 2.
Kraft, M. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational Researcher, 49(4), 241-253.
Kuhfeld, M., Lewis, K., & Peltier, T. (2023). Reading achievement declines during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from 5 million US students in grades 3–8. Reading and Writing, 36(2), 245-261.
Lesnick, J., George, R.M., Smithgall, C., & Gwynne, J. (2010). Reading on grade level in third grade: How is it related to high school performance and college enrollment? Chicago: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.
Neitzel, A. J., Lake, C., Pellegrini, M., & Slavin, R. E. (2022). A synthesis of quantitative research on programs for struggling readers in elementary schools. Reading Research Quarterly, 57(1), 149-179.
Roslan, M. H. B., & Chen, C. J. (2023). Predicting students’ performance in English and Mathematics using data mining techniques. Education and Information Technologies, 28(2), 1427-1453.
U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2022 Reading Assessment.

Authors

• Monica G. Lee, Stanford University

• Carly D. Robinson, Stanford University

• Susanna Loeb, Stanford University