READ 180

Study: Scholastic Research (2008); White & Haslam (2005a); White & Haslam (2005b)

1) Scholastic Research (2008). Longitudinal Evaluation of a Ninth-Grade Reading Intervention. Retrieved from http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/research/pdfs/PhoenixHS_ERfinal.pdf; 2) White, R. N., & Haslam, M. B. (2005a). Improving Student Literacy in the Phoenix Union High School District, SY 2003-2006. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates, Inc.

Descriptive Information

Usage

Acquisition and Cost

Program Specifications and Requirements

Training

READ 180 is a comprehensive system of curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development to raise reading achievement of struggling readers.

READ 180 integrates principles of cognition and learning with practices for instructional effectiveness for older struggling readers.

The READ 180 instructional model facilitates a blended model of instruction with clear organization for the classroom.

READ 180 leverages adaptive technology to individualize instruction for students and provide powerful data for differentiation to teachers. Respectful of students of all ages, READ 180 is available in three Stages each with rigorous, age-appropriate content: Stage A (Grades 4—6), Stage B (Grades 6—8), and Stage C (Grades 9 and Up).

READ 180 is intended for use in grades four through high school. The program is designed for students with disabilities (particularly behavioral disabilities), English language learners, and any student at risk of academic failure. The academic areas of focus are reading (including phonological awareness, phonics/word study, comprehension, fluency, vocabulary, and spelling) and handwriting (including spelling, sentence construction, and planning and revising).

READ 180 is currently used in all 50 states and in over 40,000 classrooms. There are over one million active students’ licenses currently being used every day.

Where to Obtain:
Scholastic Inc.
557 Broadway
New York, NY 10012
Phone #: 877-234-READ
Website: http://www.hmhco.com/products/read-180

Cost: READ 180 pricing is determined by the number of students being served and number of classrooms set up. At the basic level, the cost is $43,000 for a Stage of READ 180 service of 60 student licenses. READ 180 can also be purchased for 30 students.

  • Initial cost per student for implementing program: Year 1: $716 per student (based on 60 students)
  • Replacement cost per student for subsequent use: Year 2 and Beyond: $29.95
  • Licenses are sold on a perpetual basis.
  • Volume discounts are available.

Included with Purchase of License:

  • Teacher Materials
  • Implementation Training
  • Leadership Materials
  • Leadership Training
  • Student Materials

READ 180 is designed for individual students and small groups. Class size for READ 180 should be 15-24 students, with three small groups of 5-8 students.

READ 180 takes 90 minutes per session with a recommended 5 sessions per week.

The program includes highly specified teacher manuals.

READ 180 is a blended instructional model, where a third of the class is on the computer during the small group rotations. Therefore, the number of computers depends on the number of students in the READ 180 classroom.

The program requires training for the instructor over the course of a few days. The teachers in READ 180 receive two full days of in-person training in order to implement the program.

Scholastic provides comprehensive professional development in person and online. Scholastic provides two-and-a-half days of in-person professional development with the purchase of a complete stage of READ 180.

  • Embedded professional development resources – a collection of professional development strategies is embedded within all of the teacher’s materials.
  • Additional resources exist for READ 180 teachers – Purchase of READ 180 includes a one-year subscription to the online course Best Practices in Reading Intervention.

The minimum qualifications of the instructor are that they are a professional, but the program does not assume the instructor has expertise in a given area.

Training manuals and materials are available by READ 180. The READ 180 training materials and teacher implementation guides are reviewed by Scholastic consultants and field-tested by consultants who work with teachers using READ 180 across the country.

Practitioners may obtain ongoing professional/technical support.

Additional Training Available:

  • Coordinator Training
  • Certified Support Specialist Training
  • In-Classroom Support
  • Scholastic Training Zone
  • Scholastic U

 

Participants: Convincing Evidence

Sample size: 5,353 students (2,676 program, 2,676 control)

Risk Status: Students were identified as “at risk” based on their SAT 9 Reading Comprehension Subtest score. Incoming ninth graders reading below a grade equivalent of 8.0, and incoming tenth graders reading below a grade level equivalent of 9.0 met the definition of “at risk.”

Demographics: When READ 180 was implemented in 2003, 21% of the students were classified as English Language learners and over 60% of the students qualified for free or reduced-price lunch. The student population was 73% Hispanic, 12% Caucasian, 10% African American, 2% Asian, and 3% Native American.

  Cohort I
(ninth graders in 2003-2004)
Cohort II  (ninth graders in 2004-2005) Cohort III (ninth graders in 2005-2006) p of chi square
READ 180
n / (%)
Control
n / (%)
READ 180
n / (%)
Control
n / (%)
READ 180
n / (%)
Control
n / (%)
Grade level
  Grade 9 826
(100%)
826
(100%)
815
(100%)
815
(100%)
1,029
(100%)
1,029
(100%)
 
Race-ethnicity
  African-American         76
(7%)
86
(8%)
 
  American Indian         40
(4%)
33
(3%)
 
  Asian/Pacific Islander         6
(<1%)
7
(<1%)
 
  Hispanic     685
(84%)
701
(86%)
873
(85%)
870
(84%)
 
  White         34
(3%)
33
(3%)
 
  Other              
Socioeconomic status
  Subsidized lunch              
  No subsidized lunch              
Disability status
  Speech-language impairments              
  Learning disabilities              
  Behavior disorders              
  Intellectual disabilities              
  Other (General SPED) 62
(8%)
64
(7%)
57
(7%)
84
(10%)
75
(7%)
155 (15%)  
  Not identified with a disability 760
(92%)
760
(92%)
758
(93%)
733
(90%)
954
(93%)
874 (85%)  
ELL status
  English language learner 419
(51%)
456
(55%)
325
(40%)
361
(44%)
100
(10%)
100
(10%)
 
  Not English language learner 407
(49%)
370
(45%)
490
(60%)
454
(56%)
929
(90%)
929
(90%)
 
Gender
Female     391
(48%)
399
(49%)
     
Male     424
(52%)
416
(51%)
     

Training of Instructors: Teachers received in-depth summer training and continuous on-site support during the school year.

Design: Partially Convincing Evidence

Did the study use random assignment?: No.

If not, was it a tenable quasi-experiment?: Yes.

If the study used random assignment, at pretreatment, were the program and control groups not statistically significantly different and had a mean standardized difference that fell within 0.25 SD on measures used as covariates or on pretest measures also used as outcomes?: Not applicable.

If not, at pretreatment, were the program and control groups not statistically significantly different and had a mean standardized difference that fell within 0.25 SD on measures central to the study (i.e., pretest measures also used as outcomes), and outcomes were analyzed to adjust for pretreatment differences? Yes.

Were the program and control groups demographically comparable at pretreatment?: Yes.

Was there attrition bias1? No.

Did the unit of analysis match the unit for random assignment (for randomized studies) or the assignment strategy (for quasi-experiments)?: Yes.

1 NCII follows guidance from the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) in determining attrition bias. The WWC model for determining bias based on a combination of differential and overall attrition rates can be found on pages 13-14 of this document: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/reference_resources/wwc_procedures_v2_1_standards_handbook.pdf

 

Fidelity of Implementation: Unconvincing Evidence

Describe when and how fidelity of treatment information was obtained: District administrators met with Scholastic consultants and support staff throughout the implementation to ensure the program was implemented with fidelity and integrity.

Provide documentation (i.e., in terms of numbers) of fidelity of treatment implementation: No fidelity data were provided.

Measures Targeted: Data Unavailable

Measures Broader: Convincing Evidence

Targeted Measure Score type and range of measure Reliability statistics Relevance to program instructional content
Not applicable      


 

Broader Measure Score type and range of measure Reliability statistics Relevance to program instructional content
SAT 9 Reading / ELA
Scale Score, 300 - 900
9th Grade
SS Mean = 700.5
SS SD = 39.1
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86
General Reading Comprehension
TerraNova Number Correct, 0 - 39
Stanine, 1 - 9
2005 9th Grade
Mean Stanine = 5.6
Mean NCE = 56.7
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90
Test-retest w/ equiv forms = 0.67 - 0.84

2006 9th Grade
Mean Stanine = 5.6
Mean NCE = 56.6
Cronbach’s alpha = 0.90
General Reading Comprehension
Arizona Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) Scale Score, 500 - 900
Raw Score, 0 - 54
2005 10th Grade
Mean RS = 38.5
Mean SS = 699.75
SS SD = 50.35
KR-20 = 0.90

2006 10th Grade
Mean RS = 37
Mean SS = 703.19
SS SD = 48.13
KR-20 alpha = 0.92
General Reading Comprehension

 

 

Number of Outcome Measures: 3 Reading

Mean ES - Targeted: Data Unavailable

Mean ES - Broader: Data Unavailable*u

Effect Size:

Targeted Measures

Construct Measure Effect Size
  Not Applicable  

 Broader Measures

Construct Measure Effect Size
Reading SAT 9 Cohort I 0.13*, u
Reading SAT 9 Cohort II -0.27***, u
Reading SAT 9 Cohort III

 

Key
*      p ≤ .05
**    p ≤ .01
***       p ≤ .001
–      Developer was unable to provide necessary data for NCII to calculate effect sizes
u      Effect size is based on unadjusted means
†      Effect size based on unadjusted means not reported due to lack of pretest group equivalency, and effect size based on adjusted means is not available

 

Visual Analysis (Single Subject Design): N/A

Disaggregated Data for Demographic Subgroups: Yes

Targeted Measures

Construct Measure Effect Size
  Not Applicable  

 Broader Measures

Construct Measure Effect Size
Reading SAT 9 Cohort I – ELL 0.36***, u
Reading AIMS Reading Cohort I – ELL -
Reading Terra Nova Cohort II – ELL
Reading AIMS Reading Cohort II – ELL -
Reading Terra Nova Cohort III – ELL -

 

Key
*      p ≤ 0.05
**    p ≤ 0.01
***  p ≤ 0.001
–      Developer was unable to provide necessary data for NCII to calculate effect sizes
u      Effect size is based on unadjusted means
†      Effect size based on unadjusted means not reported due to lack of pretest group equivalency, and effect size based on adjusted means is not available

 

Disaggregated Data for <20th Percentile: No

Administration Group Size: Individual, Small Group

Duration of Intervention: 90 minutes, 5 times a week, 1 year

Minimum Interventionist Requirements: Professional, 2 days of in-person training in order to implement the program

Reviewed by WWC or E-ESSA: WWC & E-ESSA

What Works Clearinghouse Review

Adolescent Literacy Evidence Protocol

EffectivenessREAD 180 was found to have potentially positive effects on comprehension and general literacy achievement for adolescent learners.

Studies Reviewed: 9 studies meet standards out of 39 studies total

Full Report

Students with Learning Disabilities Evidence Protocol

Effectiveness: No studies of READ 180® that fall within the scope of the Students with Learning Disabilities review protocol meet What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) evidence standards. The lack of studies meeting WWC evidence standards means that, at this time, the WWC is unable to draw any conclusions based on research about the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of READ 180® on students with learning disabilities.

Studies Reviewed: N/A

Full Report

 

Evidence for ESSA

Program Outcomes: Five studies of READ 180 met inclusion standards. Two of these had statistically significant positive effects in comparison to control groups, qualifying READ 180 for the ESSA “Strong” category. These were studies in Western Massachusetts (effect size =+0.18) and Milwaukee (effect size =+0.14). A Florida study found positive outcomes for students at moderate risk, but negative effects for students at high risk, with an average effect size of +0.12. Studies in Newark (NJ) and Memphis found no differences. The average effect size across all studies was a modest +0.08.

Number of Studies: 5

Average Effect Size: 0.08

Full Report

 

Other Research: Potentially Eligible for NCII Review: 5 studies

Interactive Inc. (2002). An efficacy study of READ 180, a print and electronic adaptive intervention program, grades 4 and above. New York, NY: Scholastic Inc.
 

Scholastic Research. (2008). Desert Sands Unified School District, CA. New York, NY: Scholastic Inc.
 

White, R. N., Haslam, M. B., & Hewes, G. M. (2006). Improving student literacy: READ 180 in the Phoenix Union High School District, 2003–04 and 2004–05. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.
 

White, R. N., Williams, I. J., & Haslam, M. B. (2005). Performance of District 23 students participating in Scholastic READ 180. Washington, DC: Policy Studies Associates.
 

Woods, D. E. (2007). An investigation of the effects of a middle school reading intervention on school dropout rates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg.