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)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · checked against its sources 2026-10-08 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2021: baselines and conditions change
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? It was unlikely that a school had a sustained weakness in just one essential support over time, and in the rare cases when that occurred, fewer than 10 percent of such schools showed improvements in student outcomes. → Ehrlich 2016
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 a sustained weakness in one domain ultimately undermined other change efforts. This prior finding motivates measuring all five supports together in early education settings.
"Fewer than 10 percent of schools with a sustained weakness in one essential support showed improvements in student outcomes"
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 — related
- 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) — related
- Schools serving highly disadvantaged students with strong organizational supports improve learning and retain teachers as well as more advantaged schools — related
- The five essential supports reinforce each other and depend on a school environment infused with mutual trust — a broader claim this one bears on
- Schools strong in the essential supports are more likely to improve student learning over time — related
- 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
- Student learning improves most where multiple related essential supports are implemented and evaluated — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
sustained-weakness-one-support-few-improve |
title |
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) |
description |
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) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2016 |
source_checked |
2026-10-08 |
recheck_by |
2021 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-08 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — ehrlich-2016 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.