Elementary schools strong in three or more of the five essential supports were ten times more likely to substantially improve student math and reading scores (attributed to Bryk et al., 2010)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 4 studies · 2 associational r2, 1 causal r2, 1 design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-10-16 (automated, 4 of 4 entries) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Elementary schools strong in three or more of the five essential supports were 10 times more likely than schools weak in most supports to substantially improve student math and reading test scores over the next few years. → Ehrlich 2016

q2 i? Schools strong on clusters of the five essential supports were 10 times more likely to improve learning of reading and mathematics than schools weak in these supports. → Sebring P. 2014

q2 i? Schools strong in most of the essential supports were at least ten times more likely than schools weak in most supports to show substantial gains in both reading and mathematics, and were very unlikely to stagnate. → Sebring 2006

q2 i? Not a single school weak in most of the essential supports showed substantial improvements in mathematics. → Sebring 2006

q2 i? CCSR research cited in the report found schools strong on at least three of five essential elements—effective leaders, collaborative teachers, strong family and community ties, ambitious instruction, and safe and orderly learning climate—were 10 times more likely to improve and 30 times less likely to stagnate than schools strong on only one or two. → de la Torre 2013

Evidence¶

Ehrlich 2016¶

Ehrlich, S.B., Pacchiano, D.M., Stein, A.G., & Luppescu, S. (2016). Essential organizational supports for early education: The development of a new survey tool to measure organizational conditions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Consortium on School Research and the Ounce of Prevention Fund. http://consortium.uchicago.edu/surveys

q2 · i? · design · r2

The brief reports, citing Bryk et al. (2010), that responses to the K-12 5Essentials surveys "strongly predicted which schools were most and least likely to improve over time." This is prior research reported as background for the early education adaptation, not a new analysis in this brief.

"elementary schools strong in three or more of these supports were 10 times more likely than schools weak in most supports to substantially improve student math and reading test scores over the next few years"

Sebring P. 2014¶

Sebring P., & Montgomery, N. (2014). The Five Essential Supports for School Improvement: Mobilizing the Findings. Pensamiento Educativo. Revista de Investigación Educacional Latinoamericana, 51(1), 63-85. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/five-essential-supports-school-improvement-mobilizing-findings doi:10.7764/pel.51.1.2014.7

q2 · i? · associational · r?

The UChicago Consortium's 2010 book-length research on public elementary schools compared schools strong on clusters of the five essential supports with schools weak in these supports, reporting a ten-fold difference in likelihood of improving reading and mathematics learning. The overview reports this as the study's headline finding without printing an effect size.

"Schools strong on clusters of these supports were 10 times more likely to improve learning of reading and mathematics, compared to schools weak in these supports."

Sebring 2006¶

Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Bryk, A. S., Easton, J. Q., & Luppescu, S. (2006). The Essential Supports for School Improvement. Research Report, Consortium on Chicago School Research at the University of Chicago. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/essential-supports-school-improvement

q2 · i? · associational · r2

Observational analysis of Chicago public elementary schools, 1990-1996, using ITBS-based academic productivity measures and 1994 CCSR teacher and student surveys to measure the essential supports. The report found schools strong in most supports "at least ten times more likely" to show substantial gains, and very unlikely to stagnate.

"We found that schools strong in most of the essential supports were at least ten times more likely than schools weak in most of the supports to show substantial gains in both reading and mathematics."

de la Torre 2013¶

de la Torre, M., Allensworth, E., Jagesic, S., Sebastian, J., & Salmonowicz, M.; with Meyers, C., & Gerdeman, R. D. (2013). Turning Around Low-Performing Schools in Chicago. University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/turning-around-low-performing-schools-chicago-full-report

q2 · i? · causal · r2

The report attributes this finding to prior CCSR research examining 100 elementary schools that made significant progress over seven years and 100 that did not. It is reported second-hand as supporting context; the underlying study's design is not described in this report.

"schools strong on at least three of five essential elements—effective leaders, collaborative teachers, strong family and community ties, ambitious instruction, and safe and orderly learning climate—were 10 times more likely to improve and 30 times less likely to stagnate than those that were strong on just one or two."

Studies bearing on this claim¶

Are schools strong on several of the five essential supports more likely to improve student learning than schools weak on them? This table gathers the studies behind this claim and the 13 narrower claims that bear on it: 10 distinct studies (7 associational, 1 design, 1 causal, 1 review), q2, 0 of 10 with an effect size coded. One row per study, codes as each entry records them; no effect is averaged and no verdict is drawn. Built by scripts/synthesize_claim.py from eval/synthesis/; a row that looks wrong is fixed on the claim it comes from.

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Chicago schools strong in most of the five essential supports were about 10 times more likely to show substantial gains in reading and mathematics — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Larger elementary and middle schools (600+ students) are more likely to be weak in three or more essentials — related
• Fewer than 10 percent of elementary schools with a sustained weakness in one essential support showed improvements in student outcomes (attributed to Bryk et al., 2010) — related
• Ninety-five Chicago elementary schools showed substantial improvement in academic productivity, accumulating an extra half year of learning in reading and over 1.25 years in mathematics over eight grades — related
• Schools serving highly disadvantaged students with strong organizational supports improve learning and retain teachers as well as more advantaged schools — related
• Schools strong in the essential supports are more likely to improve student learning over time — a broader claim this one bears on
• Schools weak in most essential supports were four to five times more likely to stagnate than schools with strong overall organizational capacity — related
• Only 50% of a school's 5Essentials score is explained by the previous year's score, indicating substantial year-to-year malleability of school climate — related
• Among elementary schools with strong 5Essentials results, high-poverty schools improved more than low-poverty schools on more than one-half of measures — related
• Schools strong in five essential supports were at least ten times more likely to show substantial reading and math gains — related
• The five essential supports matter in combination: strength on clusters of supports, not isolated domains, predicts improvement — a broader claim this one bears on
• Schools with strong essential supports were more likely to sit in communities with strong social capital, low crime, and low density of abused or neglected children — related
• The five essential supports reinforce each other and depend on a school environment infused with mutual trust — related
• School climate functions as a setting-level indicator: students entering schools where they feel safe and supported attend more and earn higher grades, and Chicago's five essential supports survey responses are highly predictive of teacher and school performance — a broader claim this one bears on
• Programs with strong essential supports are more likely to have higher teacher-child interactions and better child attendance than programs with very weak supports — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Schools with high relational trust showed marked gains in student learning while schools with weak trust relations saw virtually no improvement in reading or mathematics scores — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Freshman OnTrack rates improved by as much as 3.25 percentage points more in high schools with strong 5Essentials Survey measures — related
• Student learning improves most where multiple related essential supports are implemented and evaluated — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)