How do school leaders implement recovery interventions, and how do those choices affect student achievement growth?
In this report, Tim R. Sass studies a large school district in the metro-Atlanta area that took a decentralized approach to COVID-19 recovery. For school year (SY) 2022–23, the district recommended elementary schools dedicate a portion of the school day—or “intervention block”—to focus on helping students who had been negatively impacted by the pandemic. The district gave elementary school leaders discretion over the frequency and duration of the intervention block periods, as well as how to use the time. Some middle schools in the district also adopted a supplemental intervention block. In addition, some schools chose to provide tutoring services (mostly outside of normal school hours), employing retired teachers and community volunteers as tutors.
Using rich individual-level administrative data and responses from a survey of principals, Sass analyzes the factors associated with intervention block and tutoring duration. While there was considerable variation across schools, duration of each intervention was not systematically related to either prior student learning loss or the characteristics of principals. Sass also compares achievement growth across students. He finds that increases in the duration of intervention blocks are associated with modest improvements in both math and reading achievement growth for struggling students. However, increases in the weekly duration of tutoring sessions did not boost math or reading achievement for struggling students.
The lack of significant achievement gains from tutoring is likely due to two factors. First, the tutoring groups were probably too large to be effective. Less than 12% of elementary/middle schools offered small-group tutoring with one to three students per tutor. Second, while past research finds tutoring is most effective when offered during the school day, nearly two-thirds of elementary/middle schools only offered tutoring outside of normal school hours. The analysis also brings forth two broader recommendations. First, districts should consider building better monitoring systems when they roll out interventions. Second, while school leaders know the needs of their students better than district-level leaders, centralized recovery initiatives may be more effective since district administrators know more about the efficacy of potential intervention strategies and may be better at tracking student participation.
To learn more, please download the policy brief and the report and its appendix below.