Effects of Success for All on Reading Achievement - A Secondary Analysis Using Data From the Study of Instructional Improvement (SII)

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Stanley

This study evaluates the impact of the Success for All (SFA) whole-school reform approach on student reading achievement using data from the Study of Instructional Improvement (SII). Researchers applied propensity matching to pair 27 SFA schools with 27 comparable schools on key demographics, then estimated effects with hierarchical linear modeling. SFA students outperformed counterparts in matched schools, including a 3-year longitudinal effect size of +0.26 and a 2-year mean effect size of +0.31. The paper discusses policy implications for evidence-based reform.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages10

Reading Time25 min

AccessFree to download

Effects of Success for All on Reading Achievement

Study design and data source (SII)

Matching and modeling approach

Main results and effect sizes

Policy implications and evidence-based reform context

AERA Open October-December 2016, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 1–10 DOI: 10. 1177/2332858416674902 © The Author(s) 2016. [http://ero.sagepub.com](http://ero.sagepub.com) Effects of Success forAll on Reading Achievement: A Secondary Analysis Using Data From the Study of Instructional Improvement (SII) Alan C. K. Cheung The Chinese University of Hong Kong Robert E. Slavin Johns Hopkins University This study examined the effects of the Success for All (SFA) whole-school reform approach on student reading achievement. The data were collected for the Study of Instructional Improvement by the University of Michigan, which did not previously report the achievement outcomes in detail but did make the data available online. Using propensity matching, we matched 27 SFA with 27 comparable schools based on several key demographic variables. The evaluation used hierarchical linear modeling with students nested within schools. Results showed that SFA students significantly outperformed their counterpartsin the matched schools on reading achievement, with an effect size of +0.26 for students in a 3-year longitudinal comparison. Effect sizes were similar for 2-year cohorts (mean effect size = +0.31). Policy implications are discussed. Keywords: Success for All, Study of Instructional Improvement In recent years, evidence of effectiveness from rigorous evaluations has begun to play an increasing role in educational policy and practice. Evidence-based reform has advanced in the policy arena from the ill-defined emphasis on using practices “based on scientifically based research”enshrined in No Child Left Behind to much clearer definition of what counts as strong, moderate, or promising evidence of effectiveness that appears in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), adopted in 2015. Legislation regarding School Improvement Grants for struggling schools has established an eligible funding category in which low-performing schools may apply for funding to implement wholeschool reform programs supported by moderate to strong evidence of effectiveness, defined as at least one large, rigorous experiment showing positive achievement impacts. These policy developments are increasing the importance of large-scale, especially third-party, evaluations of educational programs. Rigorous, replicated experiments are gradually becoming the gold standard for impact on policy and practice. One program central to the discussions of evidence-based reform is Success for All (SFA), a whole-school reform model focused on improving reading outcomes in high-poverty Title I elementary schools (Slavin, Madden, Chambers, & Haxby, 2009) . SFA provides reading materials, software, and extensive professional development to all teachers in Title I elementary schools. The professional development focuses on building teachers’skills in implementing cooperative learning and providing effective instruction in phonics, metacognitive strategies in reading comprehension and writing, classroom management, and other approaches. It also provides professional development to tutors to work with struggling readers as well as family support and leadership approaches. SFAis composed of elements proven effective in research, and the program itself has been extensively evaluated. Evaluations include a randomized longitudinal study in 35 schools by Borman et al. (2007) and another third-party randomized study in 37 schools by MDRC (Quint et al., 2015) . These, and numerous first-party and third-party quasi-experiments, have clearly established the effectiveness of SFA in increasing reading achievement in the early grades (see Slavin, Lake, Chambers, Cheung, & Davis, 2009). However, the largest study ever done to evaluate SFA has never been fully reported. This was a study carried out by Brian Rowan, Richard Correnti, and their colleagues at the University of Michigan from 1999 to 2004. The study, called the Study of Instructional Improvement (SII), compared SFA and two othe

FAQs

What program is evaluated in the study, and what outcome is measured?

The study evaluates Success for All (SFA), a whole-school reform approach, and measures student reading achievement.

How were SFA schools compared with other schools?

The researchers used propensity matching to match 27 SFA schools with 27 comparable schools based on key demographic variables.

What do the results show about SFA’s effect on reading achievement?

SFA students significantly outperformed students in matched comparison schools, with effect sizes of +0.26 in a 3-year comparison and a mean of +0.31 for 2-year cohorts.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Stanley