Prior randomized studies of Future Forward/SPARK met WWC standards Without Reservations and found positive impacts on literacy and attendance¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · design r? · q2–q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2021 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Three prior impact studies of FF/SPARK met WWC evidence standards Without Reservations, with reported impacts including 0.12 SD on reading, 0.23 SD on literacy, and 4.53 fewer days absent. → Jones 2021

q2 i? The report states, citing Jones & Christian (2020), that after two years of tutoring, participants' literacy assessment scores improved by 0.23 standard deviations and SPARK/FF students were absent 4.5 fewer days than BAU students. → Curtis J. Jones and DongMei Li 2021

Evidence¶

Jones 2021¶

Jones, C. J., & Li, D. (2021). Testing the Impact and Scalability of the Future Forward Literacy Program. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. https://uwm.edu/sreed

q3 · i1 · review · r?

The report's summary of its own prior evaluations (Table 1): the 2011-13 pilot found a 0.12 SD reading impact; the 2013-15 RCT found 0.23 SD literacy gains and 4.53 fewer days absent; the 2018-19 RD study found a non-significant literacy impact (β = 0.16, p = 0.394).

"Each of these three studies meets the Institute for Education Sciences What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards Without Reservations (WWC, 2020)."

Curtis J. Jones and DongMei Li 2021¶

Curtis J. Jones and DongMei Li, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. (2021). Testing the Impact and Scalability of the Future Forward Literacy Program. https://uwm.edu/sreed

q2 · i? · design · r?

This report narrates the prior i3-funded RCT by Jones & Christian (2020), which found literacy gains of "0.23 standard deviations" and 4.5 fewer days absent after two years of tutoring; the report states the study met WWC standards Without Reservations.

"Specifically, after two years of tutoring, participants’ literacy assessment scores improved by 0.23 standard deviations. Further, SPARK/FF students were absent from school 4.5 fewer days than students in the BAU condition."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• A COVID-19-modified version of Future Forward yielded a non-significant but positive effect of +0.09 — related
• One year of Future Forward participation raises regular-school-day attendance of lower-primary students relative to business-as-usual literacy instruction — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• A one-semester version of Future Forward showed significant reading gains on Star Reading and DIBELS — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The attendance impact of Future Forward is larger for Black students, male students, and students with low baseline attendance — related
• Black male students with low baseline attendance show the largest Future Forward attendance gains, though not statistically significant — related
• The tutoring component of Future Forward scaled up successfully to 14 schools, with 89.7% of participants receiving the intended sessions — related
• The family engagement component of Future Forward did not fully scale up, with only about 30% of families receiving intended contacts — related
• Future Forward produces statistically significant gains in foundational literacy skills in a two-year RCT — related
• A regression discontinuity study found a positive but non-significant effect of +0.16 on standardized literacy growth — related
• FF's attendance impact was greatest for Black male students, and especially Black male students with low baseline attendance — related
• Regression discontinuity impact estimates for two education interventions were not significantly different from experimental impact estimates, though point-estimate differences were sometimes nontrivial — related
• The case study cannot distinguish which program elements caused the positive impacts — related
• The Kauffman School raised student attendance by approximately 1 percentage point relative to comparison students — related