Thirteen of 14 reviewed studies of the program fail WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens, most for lacking comparison-group designs or non-equivalent quasi-experimental groups¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of 14 studies reviewed, only one met WWC evidence standards; the remaining 13 did not meet standards or eligibility screens. → National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program 2010

Evidence¶

National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program 2010¶

National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program. (2010). WWC Intervention Report: National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program. What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/329

q2 · i? · causal · r2

The WWC review of 14 studies found several ineligible because they "does not use a comparison group design or a single-case design" and several performance-accountability reports excluded because quasi-experimental analytic groups were "not shown to be equivalent."

"The remaining 13 studies do not meet either WWC evidence standards or eligibility screens."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base for Facing History and Ourselves is limited: only one of eight reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards, and it used a quasi-experimental rather than randomized design — related
• The evidence base for Core-Plus Mathematics is small: of 17 reviewed studies, only one met WWC standards (with reservations) and 16 did not meet standards or screens — related
• The evidence base for first year experience courses consists only of quasi-experimental studies meeting WWC group design standards with reservations — related
• The evidence base for Everyday Mathematics® on primary mathematics achievement is small: one study of 3,436 students met WWC standards, and 33 of 34 eligible studies did not meet group design standards — related
• The evidence base for Head Start's school-readiness effects is small: only one of 40 eligible studies met WWC group design standards — related
• The guide's recommendations rest on a screened evidence base of 15 studies meeting WWC group design standards drawn from more than 2,800 citations — related
• The evidence base for Waterford Early Reading Program™ is thin: only one of 36 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards, and extent of evidence was rated small for both domains — related
• Only one of seven eligible studies of I CAN Learn® met WWC group design standards, and it met them only with reservations — related
• Only one of 10 identified studies of InsideTrack© Coaching met WWC group design standards without reservations — related
• The evidence base for summer bridge programs on postsecondary outcomes is small: only one of 31 eligible studies met WWC group design standards — related