Læst 5 gange
eric.ed.gov har udgivet:
The primary purpose of this study is to determine whether providing structured academic instruction in reading or math to students in grades two to five during their afterschool hours–instead of the less formal academic supports offered in regular after-school programs– improves their academic performance in the subject. This is the second and final report from the Evaluation of Enhanced Academic Instruction in After-School Programs–a two-year demonstration and random assignment evaluation of structured approaches to teaching math and reading in after-school settings. This report includes two parallel impact studies, a math program study (“Mathletics” developed by Harcourt School Publishers) and a reading program study (“Adventure Island” developed by the Success for All Foundation) in which students attending an afterschool program are assigned by lottery to either receive the structured academic programming or the afterschool programming regularly offered. For each academic program, the evaluation design allows for information about the one-year impact in the first and second years of operation as well as the two-year impact in which the program was offered to students for two consecutive years. Data on after-school staff characteristics, program implementation, and student outcomes were collected in the first and second years in 27 centers (12 providing the reading program and 15 providing the math program). Key findings for the enhanced math program were: (1) One year of enhanced instruction produces positive and statistically significant impacts on student achievement; (2) Two years of the enhanced program produces no additional achieve-ment benefit beyond the one-year impact; (3) There was program fidelity across both years of implementation; (4) Students in the enhanced program received math instruction that was more structured and intensive than regular after-school program students; and (5) No clear lessons emerge for program improvement or targeting the program in particular types of schools. Key findings for the enhanced reading program were: (1) The enhanced program has no impact on total reading test scores after one year of participation; (2) Two years of participation produces significantly fewer gains in reading achievement for students in the enhanced program group; (3) Though the reading program was staffed and supported as planned, implementation issues–especially related to the pacing of lessons–occurred in both years; (4) Students in the enhanced program received reading instruction that was more structured and intensive than regular after-school program students; and (5) No systematic relationship exists between center-level impacts and program implementation or the local school context. (Appended are: (1) Findings after the First Implementation Year and Differences between Centers that Participated in Both Years of the Study and Centers that Participated Only in the First Year; (2) Statistical Precision and Minimum Detectable Effect Size; (3) Creation of the Analysis Sample (Math Centers); (4) Creation of the Analysis Sample (Reading Centers); (5) Implementation Measures from Structured Protocol Observations and Class Record Forms; (6) Outcome Measures; (7) Statistical Model and Sensitivity Analyses (Impact of Offering One Year of Service); (8) Statistical Model and Sensitivity Analyses (Impact of Offering Two Years of Service); (9) Exploratory Analysis: The Association Between Receiving Two Years of Enhanced After-School Academic Instruction and Student Achievement; and (10) Exploratory Analysis: Linking the Impact of One Year of Enhanced Services on Student Achievement with School and Program Characteristics. Contains 68 tables, 21 figures, 4 boxes, and 18 footnotes.)