This report evaluates the effects of Lexia® Core5® Reading on the reading achievement of students in grades 3–5 during the 2021–2022 academic year. The authors compared the students in the study school district with similar students in similar schools across the United States that did not use Core5. Students who used the program experienced larger average reading achievement gains, but the analysis cannot rule out selection bias.

Cover: Students Using Lexia® Core5® Reading Show Greater Reading Gains Than Matched Comparison Students
Read Online

Students Using Lexia® Core5® Reading Show Greater Reading Gains Than Matched Comparison Students

by John F. Pane, Dorothy Seaman, Christopher Joseph Doss

Download Free Electronic Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 1.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Research Questions

  1. How do reading achievement gains of students who used Core5 compare with those of a matched comparison group of students who did not use Core5 during the 2021–2022 academic year?
  2. How do estimated effects of Core5 vary for subgroups of students based on grade, gender, race/ethnicity, or baseline levels of achievement?
  3. How do estimated effects of Core5 vary depending on whether students met usage targets set by the program?

This report evaluates the effects of Lexia® Core5® Reading (Core5) — a product of Lexia Learning Systems — on the reading achievement of students in grades 3–5 during the 2021–2022 academic year. Core5 is a program that focuses on various student literacy skills, such as fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. This report represents the first study in a broader effort to develop independent and rigorous research evidence about the effects of Core5 on student achievement.

The authors compared the performance of students in a school district that used Core5 with similar students in similar schools across the United States that did not use Core5. The analyses estimated that students who used Core5 experienced larger reading achievement gains, on average, than their counterparts in the matched comparison group. Differences in outcomes measured in this study are likely to have been caused by Core5 use, but the methods used cannot unambiguously rule out selection bias to establish that causality. Moreover, study results might not generalize to all grades in which Core5 is offered or to all U.S. schools.

Key Findings

Core5 students and all examined subgroups outperformed their comparison group counterparts

  • The standardized effect size of about 0.11 is equivalent to having about 54 percent of Core5 students outperform the comparison group median on the spring 2022 reading assessment.
  • Core5 results by grade level and by gender closely track the overall Core5 estimate. When examining race/ethnicity subgroups, White students are estimated to have experienced gains of 0.15 relative to the comparison group, whereas Black and Hispanic students experienced gains of 0.05 and 0.06, respectively.

Core5 students who met usage targets experienced larger gains than students who did not

  • High-usage students outperformed their comparison group peers by 0.16 on the standardized effect scale, which translates to 56 percent of such students surpassing the median of their comparison group counterparts.
  • By contrast, Core5 students who were not in the high-usage subgroup were estimated to experience effects of only 0.06.

Core5 students also made gains relative to national norms

  • Students in grade 3 began the 2021–2022 academic year performing significantly below national norms, but, by the following spring, they were performing significantly above national norms.
  • Students in grades 4 and 5 started the year already performing above norms but also experienced gains during the study period.
  • In all three grades, the comparison group experienced smaller gains or losses relative to national norms.

Table of Contents

  • Chapter One

    Study Background

  • Chapter Two

    Study Findings

  • Chapter Three

    Conclusions

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was sponsored by Lexia Learning Systems, LLC and conducted by RAND Education and Labor.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation Research report series. RAND reports present research findings and objective analysis that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.