Effects of Data-Based Decision-Making on Low-Performing Readers in General Education Classrooms: Cumulative Evidence From Six Intervention Studies

Abstract

In most general education classrooms in Germany, students with and without special educational needs are taught together. To support teachers in adapting instruction to these heterogeneous classrooms, we have developed learning progress assessment (LPA) and reading instructional materials, the Reading Sportsman (RS) in line with the theoretical framework of data-based decision-making, which has led to beneficial effects in several studies. However, data from these studies have not been analyzed to examine effects for low-performing readers. Data within and across six quasi-experimental studies conducted by our team in Grades 2 to 4 were reanalyzed to examine the effects of LPA on students whose reading fluency scores were at or below the 25th percentile ( n = 1,346 students from 264 classes). In each study, students had been assigned to a control group (with business-as-usual instruction), an LPA group only, or an LPA-RS group (i.e., with teachers provided with LPA and the RS). Separate multilevel regression results were integrated by means of meta-analytical methods to investigate the consistency of results. Overall, findings from the single studies indicated no positive effects of LPA with or without the RS compared with the control group. The integrated analyses showed small positive effect trends on reading fluency and intrinsic reading motivation.

To use or not to use learning data: A survey study to explain German primary school teachers’ usage of data from digital learning platforms for purposes of individualization

“…For example, identifying struggling students' learning needs led to great consent among the teachers. This emphasizes the added value of DBDM in the school context: Theoretical articles and empirical studies have cited the determination of appropriate instructional steps for students' individual learning needs as a reason for data usage (Mandinach and Gummer, 2016;Prenger and Schildkamp, 2018;Peters et al, 2021). Similarly, research on educational technologies has reported on the potential of DLP to provide information about students' needs from learning data (Greller et al, 2014;Schaumburg, 2021).…”

“…Under the term of DBDM-which refers to "the systematic collection and analysis of different kinds of data to inform educational decisions" (Mandinach and Schildkamp, 2020, p. 1)-learning data in teaching and learning processes became a major focus of research. Among others, DBDM can help teachers determine instructional steps that meet learners' diverse needs (Mandinach and Gummer, 2016;Prenger and Schildkamp, 2018;Peters et al, 2021). Because DBDM focuses on every child, not just children with identified special educational needs, it is consistent with the idea of an inclusive school environment (Mandinach and Gummer, 2013;Knickenberg et al, 2020).…”

“…Further, Souvignier et al (2021) reported that student achievement in reading and mathematics improved after a progress monitoring intervention. Peters et al (2021) identified the potential of DBDM for teachers dealing with particularly low-performing students. Molenaar and Knoop-van Campen (2018) observed teachers' usage of learning data from DLP and found that Dutch teachers referred to the learning data multiple times during their instruction and that the data influenced their pedagogical actions.…”

Can reading practitioners and researchers improve intensive reading support systems in a large urban school system?

“…In Britain, students with reading difficulty have shown little evidence of improvement even when schools implement support systems (Ofsted, 2010). In Germany, there are no federal systems to improve outcomes for individual students (Blumenthal et al, 2021), and evidence suggests that efforts to support students with intensive reading needs at the classroom level do not improve reading outcomes (e.g., Peters et al, 2021). Globally, Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) data show that the gap between students with and without reading difficulty is persistent and may be growing (Mullis et al, 2017).…”

“…At the same time, the data supporting the value of DBDM systems have come mostly from studies of school‐wide implementation, not from studies of DBDM systems like DBI designed to support individual students. Moreover, extant data are not especially positive: A study of DBDM implementation in Germany showed that implementation led to improved reading outcomes for most students but not those with disabilities (Peters et al, 2021). In short, DBDM requires that many systems features are already in place, but the conditions under which DBDM for students with persistent academic difficulties (e.g., DBI) is successful have not been thoroughly explored.…”