Chicago's theory of action for ending social promotion: high-stakes testing combined with multiple chances and progressively targeted intervention¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · 10 claims (3 for, 4 mixed, 3 against) · 3 studies (3 causal), q2 · 0 of 3 report an effect size · 10 claims rest on one study

Description¶

The report describes Chicago's initiative as an integrated set of initiatives rather than a single policy, operating during the testing year, over the summer, and in the retention year. "In total, the policy combines high stakes testing with multiple chances to reach the minimum ITBS score and progressively targeted intervention, all aimed at improving the achievement of students with the lowest skills." Components include the threat of retention as incentive, the Lighthouse after-school program, Summer Bridge, and extra resources in retained years.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• minimum ITBS test-score cutoffs in reading and mathematics at grades three, six, and eight; Summer Bridge participation for students who fail; Lighthouse after-school programming for at-risk students

Constraints¶

• The report states there is little research to support or negate the central premise that minimum test-score cutoffs will lead to more focused instruction and higher achievement

Target Learners¶

• third, sixth, and eighth graders in the Chicago Public Schools, particularly the lowest-skilled students

Target Learning Objectives¶

• raising basic reading and mathematics skills to minimum promotional standards

Claims¶

• Summer Bridge Second Chance Raised Passing 1997 [+M]
• Retained Students Low Second Year Passing [~M]
• In 1997, 31% of third graders and about 20% of sixth and eighth graders were excluded from Chicago's promotional test-score policy, with bilingual education the main exclusion reason in third grade and special education in sixth and eighth [~W]
• Students who failed both reading and math made up the majority of retained students, and fewer than 20% of them passed both subjects in Summer Bridge [~W]
• Passing rates improved from 1997 to 1998 in third and sixth grades, but retention rates did not decline because fewer students received waivers [+W]
• Second-year outcomes were worst for retained eighth graders and Transition Center students: only 27% met the criteria by May 1998 and about 16% of officially retained eighth graders dropped out [-W]
• Mid-year promotions after retention neither helped nor harmed students' tested achievement in basic skills [~W]
• Fewer than 60 percent of retained third and sixth graders in 1998 and 1999 raised their test scores to the promotional cutoff even with an extra January chance to pass [-W]
• Retained students struggled in their second time through the promotional policy, with only about half meeting cutoffs and eighth graders doing worst [-W]
• Passing rates under the Chicago promotional policy increased in all three grades from 1997 to 1999, mostly during the school year rather than Summer Bridge [+W]

Related Theories¶

Examples¶

• Invest early: identify learning problems and intervene before third or sixth grade rather than waiting for promotional gates

Key Sources¶

• Melissa Roderick, Anthony S. Bryk, Brian A. Jacob, John Q. Easton, Elaine Allensworth. (1999). Ending Social Promotion: Results from the First Two Years. Consortium on Chicago School Research. https://consortium.uchicago.edu/publications/ending-social-promotion-results-first-two-years