Schools using only teachers, administrators, or paraprofessionals as tutors were more likely to serve students with higher baseline DIBELS scores¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associationalr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? About half of at-risk students attended schools where all tutors were teachers, administrators, or paraprofessionals, versus 82 percent of minimal/negligible-risk students. → Pilchen 2024
Evidence¶
Pilchen 2024¶
Pilchen, A., Klute, M., Mielicki, M., & Kumbroch, H. (2024). Examining implementation and outcomes of the Project On-Track high-dosage literacy tutoring program (REL 2024-005). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/resource-library/report/descriptive-study/examining-implementation-and-outcomes-project-track-high-dosage-tutoring-program
q2 · i? · associational · r2
Chi-square test of tutor qualifications by beginning-of-year reading skill level across 1,126 students found a significant association (χ2(2) = 109.70, p < .01), indicating nonprofessional tutors were more often deployed with the highest-need students.
"About half of full-year Project On-Track students who scored in the at risk for reading difficulties category on the beginning-of-year DIBELS were at schools where all tutors were teachers, administrators, or paraprofessionals compared with 75 percent of students who scored in the some risk category and 82 percent of students who scored in the minimal risk or negligible risk categories."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Slightly fewer than half (42 percent) of students who started the year in the at risk DIBELS category moved to a lower risk category after a full year of Project On-Track tutoring — related
- Among students who started the year most at risk for reading difficulties, none of the three implementation features (timing, frequency, tutor qualifications) was associated with end-of-year literacy progress — related
- Timing of tutoring was significantly associated with tutor qualifications and with student grade level and baseline risk — related
- Education Corps high-dosage literacy tutoring raises end-of-year DIBELS Composite scores more than business-as-usual supports for below-benchmark K-3 students — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
ontrack-tutor-qualifications-baseline-selection |
title |
Schools using only teachers, administrators, or paraprofessionals as tutors were more likely to serve students with higher baseline DIBELS scores |
description |
Schools using only teachers, administrators, or paraprofessionals as tutors were more likely to serve students with higher baseline DIBELS scores |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2024 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — pilchen-2024 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.