Only one of 10 identified studies of InsideTrack© Coaching met WWC group design standards without reservations¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2019 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of 10 studies identified, 1 met WWC group design standards without reservations, 0 with reservations, 7 did not meet standards (mostly for undemonstrated group equivalence), and 2 were ineligible for review. → study-screening

Evidence¶

study-screening¶

What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (2019, November). Supporting Postsecondary Success intervention report: InsideTrack© Coaching. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/696

q2 · i? · review · r3

The report's research summary section describes its literature screening under WWC Standards version 3.0 and the Supporting Postsecondary Success protocol version 3.0. Seven studies failed because "equivalence of the analytic intervention and comparison groups is necessary and not demonstrated"; two were ineligible for using an ineligible design.

"The WWC identified 10 studies that investigated the effectiveness of InsideTrack© Coaching (Figure 1): • 1 study meets WWC group design standards without reservations • 0 studies meet WWC group design standards with reservations • 7 studies do not meet WWC group design standards • 2 studies are ineligible for review"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• InsideTrack© Coaching costs roughly $390–$500 per student per semester depending on program scale and intensity — related
• Only three of twelve identified OLI studies met WWC group design standards — 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
• Only one of six identified MTP-S studies met WWC group design standards, and only for general achievement — related
• The evidence base for ASAP rests on two randomized controlled trials meeting WWC standards without reservations, out of eight identified studies — 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
• Only one of seven eligible studies of I CAN Learn® met WWC group design standards, and it met them only with reservations — related
• The evidence base on dual language programs is thin: only two of 122 identified studies met WWC standards — 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 the Lovaas Model is small: only two of 58 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• 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 — related