Interpreting the effectiveness of a summer reading program: The eye of the beholder |
| |
| Institution: | 1. Texas A&M University, College of Education and Human Development, Department of Health and Kinesiology, MS 4243, College Station, TX 77843-4243, United States;2. Baylor University, College of Health and Human Sciences, Department of Health, Human Performance, and Recreation, One Bear Place #97343, Waco, TX 76798, United States;3. Baylor University, Division of Student Life, One Bear Place #97016, Waco, TX 76798, United States;1. Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA;2. Gilling School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA;3. Kilimanjaro Clinical Research Institute, Moshi, Tanzania;4. Kilimanjaro Christian Medical Centre, Moshi, Tanzania;5. Kilimanjaro Christian Medical University College, Moshi, Tanzania;6. London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK;7. Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA;1. School of Social Sciences, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith NSW, 2751, Australia;2. School of Business, Western Sydney University, Locked Bag 1797, Penrith NSW, 2751, Australia;3. School of Allied Health, Australian Catholic University, 25A Barker Rd., Strathfield, NSW, Australia;1. Claremont Graduate University, United States;2. California State University, Los Angeles, United States;1. Department of Nursing, Brock University, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way, St. Catharines, Ontario, L2S 3A1, Canada;2. Department of Geography & Tourism Studies, Brock University, 1812 Sir Isaac Brock Way St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada |
| |
| Abstract: | In applying a methods-oriented approach to evaluation, this study interpreted the effectiveness of a summer reading program from three different stakeholder perspectives: practitioners from the school district, the funding agency supporting the program, and the policymakers considering mandating summer school. Archival data were obtained on 2330 students reading below benchmark in Grades 2–5. After propensity score matching participants to peers who did not attend the summer program, the final sample consisted of 630 students. Pre-to-posttest growth models revealed positive effects in Grades 2–4 (standardized slopes of .40–.54), but fifth graders demonstrated negligible improvement (standardized slope of .15). The standardized mean differences of propensity score matched treatment and control group students indicated null effects in all grade levels (d = −.13 to .05). Achieving proficient reading performance also was not attributable to summer school participation. Findings underscore the importance of operationalizing effectiveness in summative evaluation. |
| |
| Keywords: | Effect sizes Growth modeling Propensity score matching Summer reading Summative evaluation |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
