The What Works Clearinghouse Reports for August

The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) provides detailed reports on individual studies of programs, practices, or policies include a user friendly summary of the study and its findings, along with the WWC’s assessment of the quality of the design of the research.

During August, the WWC released five single study reviews:


Bettinger, E. P., & Baker, R. (2011). The effects of student coaching in college: An evaluation of a randomized experiment in student mentoring (Working Paper No. 16881). Retrieved from: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16881. View the report at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/SingleStudyReview.aspx?sid=179.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it received significant media attention._
Rating: The research on the subset of seven well-executed lotteries described in this report meets WWC evidence standards without reservations. The research for all lotteries described in this report meets WWC evidence standards with reservations.


Drummond, K., Chinen, M., Duncan, T. G., Miller, H. R., Fryer, L., Zmach, C., & Culp, K. (2011). Impact of the Thinking

Reader® software program on grade 6

Reading vocabulary, comprehension, strategies, and motivation (NCEE 2010-4035). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. View the report at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/SingleStudyReview.aspx?sid=10002.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it is an Institute of Education Sciences (IES)-funded study conducted by 2006-11 Regional Education Laboratory Northeast and Islands at Education Development Center (EDC)._
Rating: Meets Evidence Standards without Reservations


Gold, E., Norton, M. H., Good, D., & Levin, S. (2012). Philadelphia’s Renaissance Schools Initiative: 18 Month Interim Report. Philadelphia: Research for Action. View the report at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/SingleStudyReview.aspx?sid=212.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it received significant media attention. This single study review is a more complete review of the quick review on this study that was released on March 15, 2012._
Rating: Does Not Meet Evidence Standards


Kim, J. S., Olson, C. B., Scarcella, R., Kramer, J., Pearson, M., van Dyk, D., . . . Land, R. E. (2011). A randomized experiment of a cognitive strategies approach to text-based analytical writing for mainstreamed Latino English language learners in grades 6 to 12. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(3), 231–263. View the report at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/SingleStudyReview.aspx?sid=10007.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it was supported by a grant from the National Center for Education Research (NCER) at the Institute of Education Sciences (IES). _
Rating: Meets Evidence Standards without Reservations


Witte, J. F., Carlson, D., Cowen, J. M., Fleming, D. J., & Wolf, P. J. (2012). Milwaukee Parental Choice Program longitudinal educational growth study fifth year report. Report of the School Choice Demonstration Project, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville. SCDP Milwaukee Evaluation Report #29. View the report at http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/SingleStudyReview.aspx?sid=214.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it received significant media attention. This single study review is a more complete review of the quick review on this study that was released on April 6, 2012._
Rating: Meets Evidence Standards with Reservations


In addition, four studies were reviewed that did not meet WWC standards. These studies have been included in the WWC database, but a single study report was not produced:

Jackson, C. K. (2007). A little now for a lot later: A look at a Texas advanced placement incentive program. Retrieved from: http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/workingpapers/69/.Related study: Jackson, C. K. (2010). A stitch in time: The effects of a novel incentive-based high school intervention on college outcomes (NBER Working Paper 15722). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Learn more about the review at http://whatworks.ed.gov/ResearchStudies.aspx?f=Publication,16&q=sid=10014.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it was submitted as research evidence to support an Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund grant competition application.

Porowski, A., & Passa, A. (2011). The effect of communities in schools on high school dropout and graduation rates: Results from a multiyear, school-level quasi-experimental study. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 16(1), 24–37. Learn more about the review at http://whatworks.ed.gov/ResearchStudies.aspx?f=Publication,16&q=sid=10016.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it was submitted as research evidence to support an Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund grant competition application.


Saunders, W. M., Goldenberg, C. N., & Gallimore, R. (2009). Inc

Reasing achievement by focusing grade-level teams on improving classroom learning: A prospective, quasi-experimental study of Title I schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 1006–1033. Learn more about the review at http://whatworks.ed.gov/ResearchStudies.aspx?f=Publication,16&q=sid=10018.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it was submitted as research evidence to support an Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund grant competition application.


Tapper, J. (2011). Expeditionary learning: Analysis of a program’s progress toward closing achievement gaps. Hadley, MA: University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute. Learn more about the review at http://whatworks.ed.gov/ResearchStudies.aspx?f=Publication,16&q=sid=10020.

Reason for review: This study was reviewed by the WWC because it was submitted as research evidence to support an Investing in Innovation (i3) Fund grant competition application.