The Success for All Model of School Reform: Interim Findings from the Investing in Innovation (i3) Scale-Up

This is the second of three reports from MDRC's evaluation of the Success for All (SFA) scale-up demonstration, funded under the U.S. Department of Education's Investing in Innovation (i3) competition. The report presents updated findings on SFA's implementation and impacts in the scale-up sites participating in the evaluation. The i3 evaluation of SFA employs an experimental design, in which 37 schools in five school districts that are participating in the scale-up effort were assigned at random to a program group or to a control group. The two groups of schools were similar on all school-level characteristics at baseline, although they were not fully representative of all schools participating in SFA's i3 scale-up. The 19 program group schools received SFA. The 18 control group schools did not get the intervention and, instead, either continued with the same reading program that they had used previously or, in the case of some schools, adopted a new one. The study compares the experiences of adults and the performance of students in the two groups of schools. This second report tracks the literacy growth of the initial group of kindergartners as they advanced through first grade, and it also measures the reading skills of students in grades 3 through 5. Like the first report, this report uses quantitative and qualitative data from a variety of sources. Through teacher and principal surveys, implementation summaries completed by SFA staff, logs completed by teachers to describe the instruction that they provided to individual students, interviews and focus groups with school personnel conducted in the course of site visits, school district databases, and individual and group assessments of students' reading skills, it addresses three main questions: (1) To what extent were SFA's features implemented during the program's second year? (2) How distinct were the program group schools and the control group schools in various aspects of school functioning? (3) Did SFA continue to produce impacts on students' reading skills as the students progressed through first grade? In brief, the report finds that, during the second year, schools strengthened their implementation of SFA, and teachers were more at ease with it. Reading instruction in SFA schools continued to differ from instruction in control group schools in a number of respects, although in other ways the two groups of schools were similar. Finally, first-graders who had been enrolled in SFA schools since kindergarten significantly outperformed their counterparts who had been continuously enrolled in control group schools on two measures of phonetic and decoding skills, although not on measures of higher-order reading skills. At this point, the impact findings about the students' academic trajectories are consistent with those reported in the major previous experimental study of SFA. Four appendices include: (1) Data Sources and Response Rates; (2) Subgroup Impacts; (3) Full-Sample Impacts; and (4) Auxiliary-Sample Impacts. [This report was written with Emma Alterman and Emily Pramik.]