Only three of twelve identified OLI studies met WWC group design standards¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · quant-synthesis r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2020 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Of 12 identified studies, 2 met standards without reservations, 1 with reservations, 3 did not meet standards, and 6 were ineligible for review. → screening

Evidence¶

screening¶

What Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. (2020, January). Supporting Postsecondary Success intervention report: Open Learning Initiative (OLI). https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/InterventionReport/698

q2 · i? · quant-synthesis · r1

The report's research summary section describes its literature search reflecting documents publicly available by March 2019, reviewed under WWC Procedures and Standards Handbook version 3.0. The screening yielded "12 studies" with the stated distribution across standards categories.

"The WWC identified 12 studies that investigated the effectiveness of OLI (Figure 1): • 2 studies meet WWC group design standards without reservations • 1 study meets WWC group design standards with reservations • 3 studies do not meet WWC group design standards • 6 studies are ineligible for review"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The evidence base on dual language programs is thin: only two of 122 identified studies met WWC standards — related
• OLI evidence base covers community college and postsecondary students across diverse racial and ethnic groups — 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 supporting evidence for TEEMSS comes from a quasi-experimental study meeting WWC standards only with reservations — 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 evidence base for PALS in the Adolescent Literacy review rests on a single randomized trial of 120 students across 12 schools, rated as meeting standards with reservations — related
• The evidence base for CWPT in beginning reading is small, with no standards-meeting studies of alphabetics, fluency, or comprehension — related
• 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 extent of evidence for Reading Plus® on adolescent learners is small, resting on a single study that met WWC standards with reservations — related
• No rigorous evaluations of trauma-informed approaches in schools met inclusion criteria in a comprehensive systematic review search — related
• The number and proportion of studies excluded due to ineligible design are decreasing over time — 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 ASAP rests on two randomized controlled trials meeting WWC standards without reservations, out of eight identified studies — related
• Only one of 10 identified studies of InsideTrack© Coaching met WWC group design standards without reservations — related
• The evidence base for the Lovaas Model is small: only two of 58 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related