NEW RESEARCH: A district-wide study of a virtual math and reading tutoring program offers critical lessons for education leaders: 𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝘀—𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗲𝗹𝗹. Our study found that the tutoring program had no effect on math achievement, no effect on a low-stakes reading exam (MAP), and even a moderate negative effect on reading (STAAR) compared to students in different interventions. But the value of these results lies in what they reveal about 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀 districts face when scaling high-impact tutoring: ⚠️ 𝗗𝗼𝘀𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗴𝗮𝗽𝘀: While originally designed for sessions to be five days/week, 81% of students attended only three or fewer days per week. ⚠️ 𝗧𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆: Most students met a different tutor each session as opposed to having a consistent tutor, limiting relationship-building. ⚠️ 𝗟𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝘁𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗲: Delays in staffing and background checks reduced the tutoring time available to students in the school year. ⚠️ 𝗖𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘂𝗹𝘂𝗺 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁: Math content tracked standards more closely than literacy, where weaker alignment likely drove poor results. 💡 The lesson: Tutoring works when it’s consistent, relational, and well-structured — not when districts are forced to scale too fast without support. 👉 Full study: https://lnkd.in/e3ssXA65
-
-
-
-
-
+1