© 2025 Vista Higher Learning Vista’s Bridges: A Study of Reading Growth in MLs 17 The results for grades 6 and 8 were comparable to the larger total group results, while the grade 7 results showed a virtual tie between the treatment and control group performance. Again, caution should be used here given the smaller grade 7 sample (analytic sample n=82). The results by grade level are illustrated in Table 8. Table 8 Comparison of Bridges and Control Group Reading Scores by Grade Level: Mean iReady Reading Skills Posttest Scores, Adjusted for Initial Reading Level Grade Treat N Treat Mean Treat SD Control N Control Mean Control SD F Significance Grade 6 95 534.53 61.77 93 516.25 42.77 F=4.11 p=.044 Grade 7 40 543.50 66.48 42 543.71 46.00 F=1.50 p=.225 Grade 8 98 568.96 52.32 93 556.38 70.04 F=4.21 p= 042 Total 233 537.68 58.74 228 550.55 60.75 F=9.53 p=.002 Students in the Bridges program scored higher than those in the control group in grades 6 and 8, while grade 7 results were nearly identical, reflecting the same pattern seen in the overall analysis. Reading Growth by Student Background Factors Question 3: Do grade 6–8 ML students in specific population subgroups show greater growth in English reading skills when receiving instruction incorporating Bridges (treatment group) than the level of growth achieved by a comparable group of students in those population subgroups receiving instruction NOT incorporating Bridges (i.e., following traditional instructional practice) (comparison group)? (Interaction e ects) We then looked to see if the treatment was more effective for any of the study’s designated subgroups: sex, race, ethnicity, and economic status. When a treatment is not more effective for a subgroup, this indicates that the treatment is effective regardless of student background. Specifically, we used ANCOVA to examine the difference between the groups, reflecting the interaction of the treatment and control groups (independent variable), background group membership (independent variable), and end of year reading skills growth (posttest dependent variable), adjusting for any differences in the beginning of year reading skills level (pretest covariate). Comparison by Sex The main effect for study group was reconfirmed, with the treatment group using Bridges outperforming the control group (F=8.95; df=1/461; p=.003). There was no significant interaction between study group membership and student sex (F=1.52; df=1/461; p=.219).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjUyNzA0NQ==