A Comparison Group Study of...

California Program To Train K-3 Teachers in the Science of Reading

Reviewed

K-12 Education
Not accurately reported

Annenberg Institute (January 2025) posted a comparison-group study of a California program to train teachers in the “science of reading.” Despite the study abstract’s claims of positive effects (covered by NY Times and others), the study found no discernible impact on 3rd grade English Language Arts (ELA) achievement in its primary analysis.

While legislators have implemented many “science of reading” initiatives in the last two decades, the evidence on the impact of these reforms at scale is limited.  In this pre-registered, quasi-experimental study,  we examine California’s recent initiative to improve early literacy across the state’s lowest-performing schools. The Early Literacy Support Block Grant (ELSBG) provided teacher professional development grounded in the science of reading as well as aligned supports (e.g., assessments and interventions), new funding (about $1000 per student), spending flexibility within specified guidelines, and expert facilitation and oversight of school-based planning.  Our preferred specification finds that ELSBG generated significant (and cost-effective) improvements in ELA achievement in its first two years of implementation (0.14 SD) as well as smaller improvements in math.

Full Study Report

While legislators have implemented many “science of reading” initiatives in the last two decades, the evidence on the impact of these reforms at scale is limited. In this pre-registered, quasi-experimental study, we examine California’s recent initiative to improve early literacy across the state’s lowest-performing schools. The Early Literacy Support Block Grant (ELSBG) provided teacher professional development grounded in the science of reading as well as aligned supports (e.g., assessments and interventions), new funding (about $1000 per student), spending flexibility within specified guidelines, and expert facilitation and oversight of school-based planning. Our preferred  preregistered  specification finds that ELSBG generated significant (and cost-effective)  no discernible improvements  in ELA achievement in its first two years of implementation. (0.14 SD) as well as smaller improvements in math.

No-Spin’s Study Overview

A study of a California program to train teachers in the science of reading compared outcomes for schools just above the threshold for program eligibility (which received the program) to schools just below the threshold (which did not). The study found no discernible impact on 3rd grade English Language Arts (ELA) achievement in its primary, preregistered analysis.

Program:

  • The study evaluated California’s Early Literacy Support Block Grant, providing low-performing elementary schools with teacher training in the science of reading, new funding (~$1100/student), spending flexibility, expert assistance, and other supports to improve K-3 reading.
  • Per the study report, the science of reading includes practices “such as systematic phonics instruction and comprehension-building strategies like summarization and prediction.”

Study Design:

  • The study's primary, preregistered evaluation method was to compare outcomes over 1 year for (i) “treatment” schools that were just above a threshold percentage of struggling readers (and thus received the program) to (ii) “comparison” schools just below that threshold (which were ineligible for the program).
  • This type of comparison-group study is known as “regression discontinuity.”

Findings:

  • The study found no discernible effect on the percent of 3rd graders scoring near-proficient or higher in ELA after 1 school year. (This percent was slightly higher in the comparison schools than the treatment schools, although the difference wasn’t statistically significant.)

Comment:

  • The study received uncritical coverage in the New York Times, Education Week, and elsewhere – coverage that largely repeats the study abstract’s inaccurate claims. (The press coverage was based on an earlier, similar version of the study report, posted in December 2023.) 

Click or tap a highlight to see No-Spin’s comment

Related Reviews