3/6/2023

ESSA Ratings: Evidence-Based Reading Intervention Programs

Due to disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, more students are experiencing the effects of unfinished learning—especially students of color and students in low-income areas. Additionally, the teacher shortage has been exacerbated following the pandemic, and it has become even more difficult to get insight into student performance and standards due to disruptions in testing and assessment.

One of the best ways for educators (and students) to get the support they need—without compounding the amount of work they already do—is by ensuring funding is put toward evidence-based, high-quality intervention programs. At Lexia®, we have more than 20 externally reviewed research studies that meet the standards of Evidence for ESSA, allowing us to not only enhance teacher effectiveness, but also support students struggling after the pandemic.

Understanding ESSA Ratings: What Does Evidence-Based Mean?

One clear shift in thinking between the 2015 Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and its predecessor, No Child Left Behind, is: ESSA prompts schools to use evidence-based interventions with students, particularly if those students qualify for Title I funding (intended to provide extra support to students living in poverty, according to federal guidelines). While the No Child Left Behind federal law first enacted in 2001 asked schools to use “scientifically based” interventions, ESSA has taken it a step further by encouraging schools and districts to put money and effort into programs and strategies backed by evidence, not just theory.

This may seem like a fine point of distinction, but it comes down to a newly expressed hope that anyone affiliated with students—including schools, educators, districts, and partner organizations—will adopt proven strategies for providing academic support or interventions. (The government, even under ESSA, does not mandate any specific approach or program.) To explain this, the Department of Education has provided a detailed, four-tiered evaluation guide designed to inform evidence-based decision-making.

Overview of the ESSA Rating System

So, what exactly do "evidence-based" and "proven" results mean when it comes to ESSA? Here is a brief overview, according to ESSA ratings: A four-tiered method of evaluation as outlined in the Department of Education’s 2016 guide:

1. Strong Evidence

This is the highest ranking for any intervention, product, or program, and is dependent upon the inclusion of “at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study.” This rigorous framework includes the use of a “random control trial,” meaning the results will not be driven solely by a pre-selected sample group. The Department of Education also emphasizes any intervention or strategy that meets this standard should have “statistically significant and positive” outcomes for students.

2. Moderate Evidence

This is the second-highest bar for any intervention, product, or program, according to the government’s ESSA guide. This evaluation category requires any intervention be subject first to “at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study.” Quasi-experimental means there is no random control group, unlike the “strong evidence” category.

 3. Promising evidence

This is an evaluation framework that requires the use of “at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias.” The requirements for this standard are less rigorous and do not mandate the use of a large sample group, although the expectation is still that any study will result in “statistically significant and positive” outcomes for students.

4. Demonstrates a rationale

This category applies to theories of action or “well-defined logic models” that education professionals are in the process of supporting with further research. The root of this category is that any theory of action or intervention will be supported by “promising evidence” at some point.

How to Meet ESSA’s Preference for Proven Interventions

For educators hoping to abide by ESSA’s framework, this four-tiered evaluation system may be just a starting point. Although there are websites—such as the Evidence for ESSA site run by Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Research and Reform in Education—that attempt to walk school leaders through the evaluation process, the Evidence for ESSA guide uses evaluation standards that differ from those provided by the federal government. This means some studies that meet ESSA’s rigorous guidelines do not meet Johns Hopkins’ criteria.

There are other comprehensive guides, such as Florida State University’s Center for Reading Research. This extensive document is geared toward local education agencies (LEAs) and state education agencies (SEAs), the two central decision-making bodies that tend to control what programs and strategies get recommended for schools. Although the guide is long, it includes five clear categories to consider when trying to meet ESSA’s preference for proven interventions.

Here is a quick look at Florida State’s approach:

• Identify local needs. This is a reminder to conduct a needs-assessment (as advised by ESAA) first to determine the most pressing needs or issues on a local level.
• Select relevant, evidence-based interventions. Once local needs have been identified, it’s time to find the right interventions. Using ESSA’s guidelines, the strongest interventions will have been tested through “at least one well-designed and well-implemented” study that results in overwhelmingly positive outcomes for students.
• Plan for intervention. This involves identifying how progress will be measured after an intervention has been selected. Of course, states do have to adhere to standardized test-based accountability systems, but these should be paired with frequent, site-specific assessments. On a basic level, it comes down to this: Is the intervention working? Why or why not?
• Implement. The plan for intervention should also include implementation specifics such as whether a school’s infrastructure is adequate or whether technology needs are up to date. Then, guided questions surrounding how well the intervention is working are necessary to provide that “local” look at whether the strategies or programs are a good fit for the targeted need or audience.
• Examine and reflect. This step is part of the continuous improvement and evaluation process that composes any strong professional development program. Making time to stop and assess, to ask questions and revisit goals, or perhaps to readjust goals, should be part of any intervention plan.

While it is encouraging to know ESSA has put a new emphasis on the importance of using evidence-based strategies, it is largely up to individual states, schools, and districts to decide which interventions meet ESSA criteria and which do not.

Take a look at this 2020 study about Lexia® PowerUp Literacy®, which provides students in grades 6–12 with high-quality literacy support. Lexia® Core5® Reading has achieved similar recognition, with studies on both programs receiving “strong” ESSA ratings. At Lexia, we work directly with teachers to help them become more effective in their literacy instruction, while also supporting students through the obstacles that come with receiving a post-pandemic education.