acr baseline report

IREAD 2 BASELINE REPORT: ALL CHILDREN READINGJuly 2013

# ##

#2

www.worldreader.org facebook.com/worldreader

Twitter: @worldreaders

Worldreader is a US 501(c)(3) public charity, EIN 27-2092468##

Table of Contents Executive Summary .............................................................. 3

Background .......................................................................... 4

Objectives of the Report ........................................................ 4

Methodology ......................................................................... 4

Demographic Findings .......................................................... 8

Key Findings: Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) Baseline Results ................................................................................ 10

Additional Activities ............................................................. 15

Moving Forward .................................................................. 16

Appendices ......................................................................... 17

# ##

#3




Executive Summary

This report outlines findings of the iREAD 2 baseline study, conducted in eight primary schools in Ghana (four control and four treatment schools), in an effort to track the effects of Worldreader’s programs on reading skills in early grade primary school students (P1- P3). The study finds little difference between the treatment and control schools in terms of average student age, gender ratio, and languages spoken at home. However, the treatment sample is nearly 100 students larger than the control, which does lead to some biases. The treatment and control group scores score comparably on reading comprehension and oral fluency. However, the baseline found differences in EGRA scores between treatment and control groups in the more basic reading skill categories. At this writing of this report, the treatment schools have already begun the program, and as such school selection cannot be changed. However, since our focus will be on comparing how much the two groups improve, relative to each other, we believe that the initial difference in scores can be mitigated. In addition to carrying out the baseline assessment, there are a number of other important activities going on in treatment schools that should be mentioned, including teacher training workshops and support visits to mentor teachers on phonics-based literacy instructions, the development of “out of classroom experiences” to encourage children to become avid lifetime readers and the establishment of a School Management Committee to oversee and monitor the project.

# ##

#4




Background Building on the demonstrated successes of the iREAD Ghana Study 2011-2012 (iREAD 1), Worldreader began the iREAD Ghana Study 2012-2014 (iREAD 2) program at the start of the 2012 school year. iREAD 2, which is funded with an All Children Reading grant sponsored by USAID, World Vision and Australian Aid, targets Ghanaian primary school students in grades one to three. The program aims to improve literacy skills among Ghanaian primary students by providing convenient, immediate access to a wide range of culturally relevant teaching and learning materials through e-reader technology. iREAD 2 has deployed low-cost, connected e-readers to 574 students in four under resourced public schools. The program’s efforts are supported with phonics instruction training for teachers (provided through a partnership with the Olinga Foundation for Human Development), device training, and the development of reading opportunities outside the classroom (“Out of Classroom Experience” (OCE)). To assess the impact of Worldreader’s programs on these schools, the study is also following four control schools, which have not received e-readers, phonics instruction or additional OCE resources. Objectives of the Report The primary objective of this report is to summarize baseline Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) data collected from control and treatment schools in January 2013. Additionally, the report will provide an analysis of the data collected, summarize demographic information for the treatment and control schools, outline challenges in collecting and interpreting data, and detail plans for moving forward with the study, based on these findings and lessons learned. Methodology Schools were selected from the Suhum and Ayensuano Districts after they formally applied for the Worldreader program. This helped ensure a higher sense of ownership and accountability from the schools. Twenty schools applied for the program, and of these 12 were selected based on a number of selection criteria, including gender balance, whether the school has access to electricity, and whether teachers are familiar with the students’ mother tongue (Akuapem Twi).

# ##

#5




Of the 12 schools selected, eight were then chosen and paired with each other based on their similarities in four areas, however two main areas were ultimately used: i) Educational performance, as measured by Basic Education Certificate Education (BECE) test results for the junior high schools which the selected primary schools fed into, and (ii) Participation in the educational opportunity program.1 Worldreader initially tried to pair schools based on two other criteria, number of students enrolled and female-male student ratio, however these criteria were disregarded because they could not be predicted in the incoming P-1 classes. Within each pairing, one school was randomly assigned to receive the treatment (Worldreader programs), and the other was assigned as a control. See Table 1: Treatment and Control Schools for the final pairings. Table 1: Treatment and Control Schools Pair One Pair Two Pair Three Pair Four Total

Treatment Group

Amanase Presby Primary B P1: 51 P2: 54 P3: 54 159 Students Total (28%) (33) P1 -11 P2 – 11 P3 - 11

Marfokrom Anglican D/A P1: 38 P2: 54 P3: 48 141 Students Total (24%) (30)

Asuboi Methodist Primary P1: 39 P2: 43 P3: 42 124 Students Total (22%) (26)

Suhum D/A Stream “C” P1: 48 P2: 50 P3: 52 150 Students Total (26%) (31)

P1: 163 P2: 190 P3: 188 574 Students Total (51.7%) (119)

Control Group

Okorase Presby Primary M/E P1: 42 P2: 52 P3: 53 157 Students Total (29%) (32)

Otoase D/A Primary P1: 28 P2: 30 P3: 45 103 Students Total (19%) (22)

Okroase MA (DA) Exp Primary P1: 42 P2: 49 P3: 46 138 Students Total (26%) (29)

Suhum Methodist Primary A P1: 42 P2: 49 P3: 46 137 Students Total (26%) (29)

P1: 129 P2: 152 P3: 170 535 Students Total (48.3%) (111)

########################################################1#The opportunity program is driven by the Student and Youth Travel Organisation (SYTO) Ghana. According to our liaison from Suhum GES, the program provides selected schools selected with a Television set, DVDs, and learning materials for grades 1 to 6. Participation in this program ensures that a school has access to electricity. #

# ##

#6




*Numbers in this table reflect the total number of students enrolled in grades P-1 through P-3 at treatment and control schools, not the baseline sample size. 540 students from treatment schools and 451 students from control schools were assessed for the baseline.

# ##

#7




To administer and collect both demographic and EGRA data, we hired and trained 40 enumerators in January 2013 (four enumerators and one supervisor per school). The enumerators were required to be proficient in both Akuapem-Twi and English, and also have some background conducting reading assessments. Data collection took place over two and a half days, and data was input over February and March. Table 2 outlines the format of Worldreader’s EGRA. Table 2: Worldreader’s EGRA – Format and Timing

English Twi

Section Time Max.

#Correct Section Time Max.

#Correct

Letter Sound Knowledge 60 100 Letter Sound Knowledge 60 100 Invented Word Decoding 60 50 Familiar Word Decoding 60 50 Oral Reading Fluency 1 60 60 Oral Reading Fluency 60 68 Reading Comprehension Untimed 5 Reading Comprehension Untimed 5 Oral Reading Fluency 2 120 38 Listening Comprehension Untimed 5 Reading Comprehension Untimed 5

!

# ##

#8




Demographic Findings

Main Findings

Key Figures Average Student Age 9.42 years Most Common Language Spoken At Home Akuapem-Twi Total Female Students 487 Total Male Students 504

The data collected demonstrate relative demographic consistency between control and treatment groups when it comes to age, gender and language(s) spoken at home. Table 3 shows overall age averages and the gender breakdown or treatment and control groups, while Table 4 shows languages spoken in the homes of the students. For more detailed information, see Appendix I: Detailed Demographic Information by School Pairing. Table 3 – Average Age and Gender Breakdown, by Grade and Treatment/Control

Average Age Treatment Control Average

P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 9.42 years

8.2 9.5 10.61 8.11 9.34 10.14 Gender Distribution Treatment Control Total

Gender P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3

Male 94 91 92 75 75 77 504

Female 69 99 96 54 76 93 487

Subtota l 163

students 190

students 188

students 129

students 151

students 170

students 991 Total Students

#

# ##

#9




Table 4- Languages Spoken with Family, by School

Languages and Local Dia lects Spoken with Fami ly* Pair One Amanase Presby Pr imary (T) Okorase Presby Pr imary M/E (C) English 0.6% 8% Akuapem-Twi 68% 64% Other 45% 39% No response 1% 0% Pair Two Marfokrom Angl ican D/A (T) Otoase D/A Pr imary (C) English 4% 1% Akuapem-Twi 83% 83% Other 43% 34% No response 0% 0% Pair Three Asuboi Methodist Pr imary (T) Okorase MA (DA) Exp Pr imary (C) English 3% 5% Akuapem-Twi 64% 90% Other 44% 48% No response 0% 0% Pair Four Suhum D/A C Pr imary (T) Suhum Methodist Pr imary A (C) English 8% 6% Akuapem-Twi 77% 57% Other 27% 35% No response 1% 3% *Percentages do not add up to 100, as a number of students speak multiple languages at home.

Limitations and Concerns While the data presented above provide a basic picture of the demographic make-up of the treatment and control schools, data was gathered on a number of other variables encompassing reading habits, household make-up, and household resources. Unfortunately, the data collected on these variables appears to be less reliable; much of the information received was incomplete (that is, data on these variables were not collected for all students in the treatment and control groups). Worldreader staff is currently making note of and correcting inconsistencies in demographic data, and expects to have more complete data for a wider range of demographic variables in the future. #

# ##

#10




Key Findings: Early Grade Reading Assessment (EGRA) Baseline Results

Main Findings Qualitative observations of both iREAD classrooms and control schools reveal variation in reading abilities among students of all grade levels, from students who can barely read to those who are proficient in both Twi and English. As Table 5 demonstrates, baseline EGRA data average higher for treatment than control schools, in both English and Twi, and in nearly all sections of the exam. For more detailed information on test scores by treatment/control pair, Appendix II: Average Test Scores by School Pairing (and Grade) and Appendix III. There are larger discrepancies between treatment and control groups when it comes to more basic reading skills, and the discrepancies in scores are smaller for the test sections focused on more advanced reading skills. Table 6 demonstrates that girls generally outperform boys in both control and treatment schools, particularly in more basic reading skills. In most cases boys and girls reach parity or near parity when it comes to more advanced reading skills. ############

A Worldreader enumerator administering the EGRA to a student.

# ##

#11




#Table 5: Average Test Scores by grade level, school and language

Language Skill Treatment Groups Control Groups

English P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall

Letter Sound Knowledge (number of correct sounds)

12.9 22.5 27.6 21.4 5.8 13.8 18.1 13.2

Invented Word Decoding (number of correct made-up words)

2.9 8.9 13.1 8.5 0.8 3.9 7.4 4.4

Oral Reading Fluency 1(number of correct words)

2.8 14.0 23.1 13.7 0.6 6.9 12.6 7.4

Oral Reading Fluency 2 (number of correct words)

2.2 10.9 15.5 9.9 0 4.0 6.6 3.9

Reading comprehension 1 (number of correct answers)

0.1 0.7 1.1 0.7 0.01 0.5 0.9 0.5


0.1 0.7 1.2 0.7 0 0.2 0.6 0.3

Akuapem-Twi P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall


16.6 24.5 30.4 24.1 5.6 10.5 16.1 11.5

Familiar Word Decoding (number of correct words)

4.9 13.0 16.7 11.8 1.3 5.8 9.4 6.0

Oral Reading Fluency (number of correct words)

4.7 20.3 23.7 16.3 2.3 5.1 11.2 7.1

Reading comprehension (number of correct answers)

1.4 1.9 2.0 1.7 0.1 0.3 1.3 0.6

Listening Comprehension (number of correct answers)

0.2 0.6 1.1 0.7 0 0 2.6 1.1

# ##

#12




Table 6: Average Test Scores by Gender, Grade, Treatment and Control Groups (where B

= Boys and G= Girls) Language Skill Treatment Groups Control Groups

Engl ish P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overa l l

B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G Letter

Sound Knowledge (number of correct sounds)

11.3

15.1

21.1

23.8

26.8

28.4

19.6

23.2

4.1

8.0

11.5

15.7

15.4

20.7

10.7

15.9


2.5

3.4

8.1

9.7

13.6

12.6

8.0

9.1

0.6

0.9

3.5

4.2

7.2

7.6

4.1

4.8


2.5

3.3

12.3

15.5

22.9

23.4

12.4

15.1

0.7

0.3

6.2

7.4

7.4

17.6

4.9

10.0


1.8

2.7

10.8

11 15.0

16.0

9.1

10.6

0 0 3.3

4.6

4.8

8.3

2.8

5.0


0.1

0.1

0.6

0.8

1.1

1.1

0.6

0.8

0.03

0 0.8

0.2

0.7

0.2

0.5

0.5


0.03

0.1

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.3

0.6

0.8

0 0 0.2

0.2

0.5

0.8

0.2

0.4

Akuapem-Twi P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overa l l



12.8

21.8

23.5

25.4

29.5

31.3

21.8

26.6

5.2

6.7

9.3

11.4

12.9

19.3

9.4

13.5

# ##

#13





4.5

5.5

12.6

13.4

16.6

16.7

11.1

12.5

0.9

2.0

5.7

5.9

8.2

10.5

5.1

6.9


5.1

4.3

19.3

21.2

25.2

22.3

16.0

16.6

1.5

3.5

5.7

4.6

7.3

15.4

5.1

9.2


1.6

1.0

1.9

1.9

2.3

1.8

1.9

1.6

0.1

0.1

0.3

0.3

1.0

0.3

0.5

0.8


0.1

0.2

0.4

0.7

0.7

1.5

0.4

0.9

0 0 0 0 1.6

3.6

0.7

1.5

# ##

#14




Limitations and Concerns While all efforts were made to match schools appropriately, the Worldreader team anticipates that the discrepancy between control and treatment exam results is driven by the following factors: A larger student sample in treatment schools (540 students versus 451 in control schools) skewed the results to an extent. One control school (Otoase DA) discontinued the exam for every student, which drives down test score averages for the control group slightly.2 However, removing Otoase and it’s paired treatment school from the analysis closes the gap between the treatment and control groups only slightly. As such, both schools remain in the sample. The BECE test, which is given in the third year of Junior High School, was used as a proxy for school performance. This test may not represent reading skills at the early grade levels. Because several primary schools feed into one junior high school, individual primary schools can only influence the junior high school BECE pass rates so much. Moreover, a positive selection bias exists because only those students who make it to junior high school take the BECE test; those students who fail to learn the basic reading skills assessed by the EGRA are likely to drop out before they are required to take the BECE. Students may not be taught to read in the manner in which the EGRA assesses them. As such, the EGRA format – particularly, asking to sound out individual letters, and to read non-words – would be unfamiliar to most students. This is compounded by the EGRA’s focus on phonics-based decoding skills rather than reading comprehension. Enumerators, who were also teachers, generally felt that the EGRA assessment was difficult for the students. The different methods used to teach reading in the eight schools may explain why certain schools scored lower on the earlier parts of the exam. Finally, data input appears to be a particular issue, with inconsistencies found throughout the data of a number of schools (i.e. incorrect numbers marked in certain columns, blank columns, etc). Efforts were made to correct these inconsistencies, however students’ scores were omitted where these issues could not be resolved. Efforts are currently being made to uncover the root of these inconsistencies. #

########################################################2 “Discontinued” means the exam was not completed by the student, due to inability to answer the required questions. In the case of Otoase, all students discontinued the exam.

# ##

#15




Additional Activities

In addition to carrying out the baseline assessment, there are a number of other important activities going on in treatment schools that should be mentioned. Through teacher training workshops, refresher workshops, and biweekly, onsite teacher check-ins, literacy specialists from the Olinga Foundation are supporting iREAD 2 teachers in implementing effective literacy instruction techniques involving the e-reader, particularly in the area of phonics. Additionally, in partnership with schools, Worldreader is developing what we call “out of classroom experiences” to encourage children to become avid lifetime readers. We are creating activities that encourage after-school or leisure time reading, and are working with junior high students to create fun, weekly reading events with the primary school students. Lastly, Worldreader helped create a School Management Committee to oversee and monitor the project. The committee is comprised of head teachers from the four treatment schools, a member of each school’s Parent-Teacher Association, a Worldreader team member and a Ghana Education Service (GES) representative. During the its first meeting in March, the committee set these goals: Ensure that 20 percent of students can read and write in both English and Twi by end of the current academic year. A test will be designed by Worldreader, the local District Education Office, Municipal Assembly and Olinga Foundation to assess this. The first of such assessments has already been scheduled for the first week of July. Have 80 percent of students effectively using the e-readers by end of year. #

# ##

#16




Moving Forward

In the immediate term, Worldreader staff is combing through baseline data to correct inconsistencies. If any large discrepancies are discovered that alter the numbers presented in this report, amendments will be made to all figures and tables. However, Worldreader does not anticipate any major changes. A “Difference-in-Differences” approach will be used to measure changes from the baseline data in treatment schools. This method looks at the rate of change in a control group over the evaluation period, assuming that the same rate of change would occur in the treatment group without the intervention. In this way, we can assess whether the iREAD program has had an effect on the progress of reading skills development in treatment schools. This method will better control for the discrepancies between treatment and control school baselines than an absolute comparison between school pairs, and will allow Worldreader to use the baseline as a foundation for comparison of schools’ future performance. For the mid-term and end of year evaluations, Worldreader is also exploring the methodology of assigning a higher weight to the reading and listening comprehension test scores, in order to balance the natural bias of the EGRA towards decoding skills. Worldreader will also be using Tangerine, a mobile EGRA tool, to administer and collect data for future evaluation periods. The Tangerine application will be loaded onto touch screen tablets, and enumerators will be trained in the use of this new software prior to the mid-term evaluation. Finally, in future studies, Worldreader will explore the possibility of implementing the EGRA baseline to pre-selected schools before determining control and treatment groups, in order to better pair schools with similar academic performance when it comes to specific reading skills .

# ##

#17




Appendices

APPENDIX I: Detailed Demographic Information for Baseline Sample, by School Pairing

Average Age By Pair Pair One Amanase Presby (T) Okorase M/A (C) Average P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 9.69

9.02 10.2 10.7 8.3 9.34 10.58 Pair Two Marfokrom Anglican D/A

(T) Otoase D/A (C) Average

P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 9.15 7.9 9.51 11 7.45 8.55 10.5

Pair Three Asuboi Methodist (T) Okorase MA (DA) Expo (C) Average P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 9.87

8.7 9.97 11.4 8.57 10.13 10.45 Pair Four Suhum D/A EXP (T) Suhum Methodist A (C) Average P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 8.63

7.21 8.34 9.34 8.12 8.55 10.14 Gender

Pair One Amanase Presby (T) Okorase M/E (C) Total P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 Boys: 131

Girls: 150 Male 29 19 25 22 18 18 Female 21 30 27 18 25 29 Subtotal Boys: 73; Girls: 78 Boys: 58; Girls: 72 Pair Two Marfokrom Anglican D/A

(T) Otoase D/A (C) Total

P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 Boys: 115 Girls: 99 Male 21 27 26 7 11 23

Female 13 28 21 13 8 18 Subtotal Boys: 73; Girls: 61 Boys: 41; Girls: 39 Pair Three Asuboi Methodist (T) Okorase Presby (C) Total P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 Boys: 126

Girls: 103 Male 22 20 17 22 16 29 Female 12 19 22 13 22 15 Subtotal Boys: 59; Girls: 53 Boys: 67; Girls: 50 Pair Four Suhum D/A EXP (T) Suhum Methodist A (C) Total P-1 P-2 P-3 P-1 P-2 P-3 Boys: 132

Girls: 135 Male 22 25 24 24 7 30 Female 24 22 26 10 31 22 Subtotal Boys: 71; Girls: 72 Boys: 61; Girls: 63

# ##

#18




Appendix II: Average Test Scores Results by School Pairing (and Grade) Where T denotes the school that received treatment and C the Control Pair 1: Amanase Presby B and Okorase Presby M/E Language Skill Amanase Presby B

(T) Okorase Presby M/E

(C) English P-

1 P-2 P-3 Overall

P-1

P-2 P-3 Overall


7.7 21.3 25.1 17.9 8.2 23.9 36.1 23.5


1.9 8.7 13.4 8.0 1.5 8.02 20.4 10.5

Oral Reading Fluency 1(number of correct words) 2.5 11.7 23.9 12.8 0.3 15.5 29.7 15.9


1.9 12.8 19.4 11.3 0 2.1 6.4 9.9

Reading Comprehension 1 (number of correct answers)

0.1 0.6 1.2 0.6 0.1 0.4 1.9 0.8

Reading Comprehension 2 (number of correct answers) 0.1 0.9 1.5 0.8 0.0 0.6 1.9 0.9

Akuapem-Twi P-1

P-2 P-3 Overall P-1

P-2 P-3 Overall


6.9 20.9 24.8 17.5 6.6 15.3 31.7 18.5


2.9 10.0 15.0 9.3 0.9 9.0 24.3 12.0


2.7 12.0 26.1 13.6 1.3 3.7 15.4 7.2


0.1 0.9 2.0 1.0 0.0 0.2 2.3 0.9

*There are no data on Listening Comprehension for Pair 1.

Pair 2: Marfokrom Anglican D/A and Otoase D/A

Language Skill Marfokrom Anglican D/A (T) Otoase D/A (C)

English P-1

P-2

P-3 Overall P-1

P-2

P-3

Overall


3.6 8.0 12.0 8.3 0 0 0 0


0 0.9 2.1 1.1 0 0 0 0

Oral Reading Fluency 1(number of correct words) 0 0.1 2.5 0.9 0 0 0 0


0 0.5 1.9 0.9 0 0 0


0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2 0 0 0 0

Reading Comprehension 2 (number of correct 0 0.1 0.02 0.05 0 0 0 0

# ##

#19




answers)

Akuapem-Twi P-1

P-2

P-3 Overall P-1

P-2

P-3

Overall


8 9.1 13.4 10.3 0 0 0 0


1.8 1.6 3.6 2.9 0 0 0 0


0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 0


0.1 0.7 0.4 0.4 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

*The test was discontinued for every student at the control school, thus all scores are zero.

Pair 3: Asuboi Methodist and Okorase MA (DA) Exp #Language Skill Asuboi Methodist (T) Okorase MA (DA) Exp

(C) English P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall


14.0 26 29.2 23.5 10.5 18.6 21 17.1


1.8 5.2 7.7 5.1 0.9 3.7 6.6 4.0

Oral Reading Fluency 1(number of correct words) 0.03 7.7 12.9 7.2 1.3 3.4 8.1 4.6


0.1 3.9 8.6 4.4 0 0 3.4 1.3


0.03 0.5 0.5 0.4 0 0.05 0.3 0.1


0 0.5 0.7 0.4 0 0 0.2 0.08



12.0 26.0 27.8 22.4 11.6 15.1 17.5 14.9


1.2 7.7 8.0 5.8 3.6 7.9 10.8 7.7


0 3.5 0 1.2 5.2 10.1 12.9 9.7


0 3.8 9.7 4.7 0.4 0.8 1.1 0.8


0 0.2 0 0.06 0 0 0 0

#

# ##

#20




Pair 4: Suhum D/A EXP and Suhum Methodist A Language Skill Suhum D/A Stream “C”

(T) Suhum Methodist A (C)

English P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall


24.8 38.0 43.8 35.8 1.3 4.2 13.5 7.3

Invented Word Decoding (number of correct made-up words) 6.9 21.6 27.3 18.9 0.2 1.2 2.1 1.3


7.3 37.2 49.6 31.9 0.4 3.7 10.8 5.8

Oral Reading Fluency 2 (number of correct words) 5.8 26.7 29.7 21.1 0 0.8 5.7 2.6


0.2 1.4 2.5 1.4 0 1.1 1.4 0.9

Reading Comprehension 2 (number of correct answers) 0.2 1.5 2.5 1.5 0 0.02 0.4 0.2



37.0 44.9 53.1 45.2 2.5 5.5 13.6 8.1


12.3 33.8 36.5 27.8 0.4 2.9 2.1 1.9


10.1 45.1 38.3 31.5 0 2.4 10.8 5.3


0.5 2.4 2.7 1.8 0 0 1.4 0.6


0 0 0 0 0 0 2.75 1.2

#

# ##

#21




Appendix III : Average Test Scores by School Pairing, Grade and Gender Where T denotes the school that received treatment and C the Control

Pair 1: Amanase Presby B and Okorase Presby M/E Language

Skill Amanase Presby B (T) Okorase Presby M/E (C)

Engl ish P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall



8.4 6.7

19.2

22.7

30.4

20.3

18.6

17.3

5.5

11.3

20.7

26.1

34.9

36.8

19.6

26.5


2.7 0.9

7 9.8 14.8

12.2

7.9 8.1 1.3

1.6 6.8 8.9 21.1

20.0

9.3 11.4


3.8 0.8

9.6 13.1

25.8

22.3

12.7

12.8

0.5

0 14.4

16.3

22.4

34.2

11.8

19.2


2.2 1.6

11.2

13.9

19.7

19.1

10.4

12.2

0 0 11.2

12.8

14.6

17.5

8.1 11.3


0.1 0.1

0.5 0.7 1.4 0.9 0.6 0.6 0.1

0 0.4 0.5 1.7 2 0.7 1.0


0.03

0.1

0.7 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.9 0 0 0.6 0.6 1.8 2 0.8 1.0




6.1 7.9

18.6

22.5

29.5

20.6

17.2

17.8

5.9

7.2 14.2

16.1

31 32.1

16.5

20.1

# ##

#22





3.2

2.5

8.4 11.1

16.8

13.3

9.1 9.4 0.9

0.9 9.4 8.7 22.5

25.4

10.4

13.3


2.8 2.5

9.1 13.9

31.4

21.5

14.1

13.3

1.3

1.2 1.2 5.6 9.2 19.3

3.7 9.9


0.03

0.1 0.8 1.0 2 2.0 0.9 1.1 0 0 0.4 0.1 1.8 2.7 0.7 1.1

*The Listening Comprehension section was not administered in Twi for Pair 1. Pair 2: Marfokrom Anglican D/A and Otoase D/A Language

Skill Marfokrom Angl ican D/A (T) Otoase D/A (C)*

Engl ish P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overal

l B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G


2.9 4.8

10.7

5.5 8.9

15.7

7.9 8.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 1.7 0.3 1.4 2.9

1.1 1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0.1 0 2.0 3.1 0.8 1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 1.0 0 1.4 2.8 0.9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


2.9

4.8 10.7

5.5

8.9 15.7

7.9

8.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 1.7 0.3

1.4 2.9 1.1

1.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Akuapem-Twi P-1 P-2 P-3 Overall P-1 P-2 P-3 Overal

# ##

#23




l B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G


2 18.5

11.1

7.1

15.0

11.1

9.9

10.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0.5

4.1 2.1 1.1

4.3 2.5 2.4

2.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0.2 0 0.2 0 0.1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

*The test was discontinued for every student at the control school, thus all scores are zero.

# ##

#24




Pair 3: Asuboi Methodist Primary and Okorase MA (DA) Exp Language

Skill Asuboi Methodist Pr imary (T) Okroase MA (DA) Exp Pr imary (C)




15.1

12

22.7 29

27.8

30.3

21.3

25.7 6.5

17.4

16.8

19.9

22.6

17.9

15.9

18.7


2.4 0.8 4.7 5.7 8.1 7.4 4.8 5.3 0.6 1.5 3.7 3.7 8.4 3.1 4.7 3.0


0.04 0 7 8.4

14.3

11.9 6.5 7.9 1.3 1.4 3.9 3.1 6.3

11.4 4.1 5.2


0.1 0 2.4 5.4 10.1 7.4 3.8 5.0 0 0 0 0 3.3 3.5 1.4 1.1


0.04 0 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.6 0.2 0.5 0 0 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1


0 0 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.5 0 0 0 0 0.1 0.5 0.04

0.1




14.1

8.1

24.6

27.5

23.2

30.6

20.2

24.6

14.1

17.5

14.3

15.6

17.1

18.4

13.5

16.9

Familiar Word Decoding

1.5 0.7 7.9 7.6 7.6 8.2 5.3 6.3 1.5 7 8.3 7.6

10.9

10.8 7.2 8.4

# ##

#25




(number of correct words)


0 0 0.7 6.4 0 0 0.2 2.2 1.5 8.8 12.8 8.1

12.9

12.9 9.6 9.7


0 0 5.0 2.7 5.1 12.6 3.1 6.4 0 0.6 0.8 0.8 1 1.4 0.7 0.9


0 0 0.4 0 0 0 0.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

# #

# ##

#26




Pair 4: Suhum D/A Stream “C” and Suhum Methodist A Language

Skill Suhum D/A Stream “C” (T) Suhum Methodist A (C)




19.5

29.7

32.6

44.0

41.8

45.7

31.7

39.9

1.8

0.2

3.8

4.5 5.7

18.9

3.6

10.9


4.9 8.8 18.3

25.3

29.4

25.4

17.9

19.8

0.3

0 2.1

0.5 1.4

2.6 1.1

1.5


5.4 9.0 30.6

44.7

48.6

50.5

28.9

34.9

0.6

0 3.5

3.9 4 15.4

2.5

8.9


0.04

0.3 1.2 1.8 2.3 2.7 1.2 1.6 0 0 2.5

0.09

1.4

1.4 1.1

0.7


0.1 0.4 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.7 1.3 1.7 0 0 0 0.04

0.4

0.4 0.1

0.2


0.1 0.4 1.3 1.8 2.3 2.7 1.3 1.7 0 0 0 0.04

0.4

0.4 0.1

0.2




30.7

42.7

39.8

50.7

49.2

56.7

40.2

50.2

3.3

0.6

5.4

5.6 5.7

18.9

4.7

11.4

Familiar Word Decoding

13.0

11.6

30.8

37.2

35.3

37.6

26.8

28.8

0.5

0 3 2.9 1.4

2.6 1.5

2.3

# ##

#27




(number of correct words)


12.6 7.8

40.8

49.9

36.9

39.6

30.7

32.2 0 0

2.9 2 4

15.4

2.1 8.3


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 10.8

2.4 5.3


0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2.1

3.2 0.7

1.6

acr baseline report

Documents