[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-585507-105":59,"doc-detail-585507-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","literacy-design-collaborative-2018-2019-evaluation-report-april-2020-cresst-report-867","Literacy Design Collaborative 2018-2019 Evaluation Report - April 2020 CRESST Report 867","","Literacy Design Collaborative 2018-2019 Evaluation Report presents an evaluation of the Literacy Design Collaborative implementation and its learning impact. Authored by Jia Wang and colleagues, the report describes study methodology, evaluation questions, and logic model components guiding the analysis. It summarizes survey findings from teachers, teacher leaders, and administrators, evaluates LDC CoreTools participation and engagement, and analyzes module artifacts and fidelity of implementation across key components. The report also includes exploratory analyses linking implementation metrics to student outcomes and provides results summaries across chapters.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/literacy-design-collaborative-2018-2019-evaluation-report-april-2020-cresst-report-867/585507/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/literacy-design-collaborative-2018-2019-evaluation-report-april-2020-cresst-report-867/585507.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Alex Sinclair","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-05","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What is the purpose of the Literacy Design Collaborative 2018-2019 evaluation report?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The report evaluates the Literacy Design Collaborative’s 2018-2019 implementation, covering study design, data sources, and findings related to teacher-facing supports, CoreTools engagement, module artifacts, fidelity, and outcome-linked metrics.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What data sources and instruments does the report use?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The table of contents indicates that the study methodology includes data and instruments, survey administration procedures, participation and engagement measures, module artifact analysis, and fidelity of implementation scoring at school and program levels.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How does the report connect implementation fidelity to results?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The fidelity section includes analyses of fidelity scores across key components and change from 2017-2018 to 2018-2019, followed by exploratory analysis of the relationship between implementation metrics and student outcomes.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},585507,1792166024,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},1099523882182,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","LITERACY DESIGN COLLABORATIVE 2018–2019 EVALUATION REPORT  \nJia Wang, Joan L . Herman, Scott Epstein, Seth Leon, Deborah La Torre, and Velette Bozeman  \nAPRIL 2020 CRESST REPORT 867  \nCopyright © 2020 The Regents of the University of California.  \nThe work reported herein was supported by grant number 20145515 from the Literacy Design Collaborative with funding to the National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) .  \nThe findings and opinions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of the Literacy Design Collaborative.  \nTo cite from this report, please use the following as your APA reference: Wang, J., Herman, J. L., Epstein, S., Leon, S., La Torre, D., & Bozeman, V. (2020) . Literacy Design Collaborative 201 8–2019 evaluation report (CRESST Report 867) . University of California, Los Angeles, National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST) .  \nTable of Contents  \nExecutive Summary .................................................................................................................v  \n1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................................................1  \n1.1 Logic Model .......................................................................................................................... 3  \n1.2 Evaluation Questions............................................................................................................ 4  \n2.0 Study Methodology ...........................................................................................................6  \n2.1 Data and Instruments........................................................................................................... 6  \n2.2 Study Population and Generalizability ................................................................................. 9  \n2.3 Sample for Implementation and Outcomes Analyses ........................................................ 13  \n2.4 Survey Recruitment and Administration ............................................................................ 18  \n2.5 Module Rating Process ....................................................................................................... 18  \n2.6 Analytical Approaches ........................................................................................................ 19  \n3.0 Survey Analysis ................................................................................................................26  \n3.1 Teacher Survey Results ...................................................................................................... 26  \n3.2 Teacher Leader Survey Results........................................................................................... 39  \n3.3 Administrator Survey Results ............................................................................................. 50  \n3.4 Open-Ended Responses for All Participants ....................................................................... 57  \n3.5 Exploratory Analysis ........................................................................................................... 61  \n3.6 Summary of Results............................................................................................................ 66  \n4.0 Analyses of LDC CoreTools Data .......................................................................................68  \n4.1 CoreTools Activity Participation Rates ............................................................................... 68  \n4.2 Engagement With Key CoreTools Activities ....................................................................... 69  \n4.3 CoreTools Engagement as an Implementation Variable .................................................... 73  \n4.4 Summary of Results..............................................................................","cbCaiuyNPi6dc0He","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiuyNPi6dc0He","pdf",2807558,241,"English","# Executive Summary\n## Introduction\n## Logic Model\n## Evaluation Questions\n# Study Methodology\n## Data and Instruments\n## Study Population and Generalizability\n## Survey Recruitment and Administration\n## Analytical Approaches\n# Survey Analysis\n## Teacher Survey Results\n## Teacher Leader Survey Results\n## Administrator Survey Results\n## Open-Ended Responses for All Participants\n# Analyses of LDC CoreTools Data\n## CoreTools Activity Participation Rates\n## Engagement With Key CoreTools Activities\n## CoreTools Engagement as an Implementation Variable\n# Module Artifact Analysis\n## Analysis of Elementary Modules\n## Analysis of Secondary Modules\n## Qualitative Results\n# Fidelity of Implementation Analysis\n## School-and Program-Level Fidelity of Implementation Scores\n## Change in Fidelity of Implementation From 2017–2018 to 2018–2019\n## Relationship Between Implementation Metrics and Student Outcomes","[{\"question\":\"What is the purpose of the Literacy Design Collaborative 2018-2019 evaluation report?\",\"answer\":\"The report evaluates the Literacy Design Collaborative’s 2018-2019 implementation, covering study design, data sources, and findings related to teacher-facing supports, CoreTools engagement, module artifacts, fidelity, and outcome-linked metrics.\"},{\"question\":\"What data sources and instruments does the report use?\",\"answer\":\"The table of contents indicates that the study methodology includes data and instruments, survey administration procedures, participation and engagement measures, module artifact analysis, and fidelity of implementation scoring at school and program levels.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the report connect implementation fidelity to results?\",\"answer\":\"The fidelity section includes analyses of fidelity scores across key components and change from 2017-2018 to 2018-2019, followed by exploratory analysis of the relationship between implementation metrics and student outcomes.\"}]","Literacy Design Collaborative 2018-2019 Evaluation Report - April 2020 CRESST Report 867 | PDF",1792054910,607]