The Striving Readers Program

The Striving Readers Program

Order Code RL34710
The Striving Readers Program
October 14, 2008
Gail McCallion
Specialist in Social Legislation
Domestic Social Policy Division

The Striving Readers Program
Summary
Many reports have been issued in recent years summarizing what is known
about effective methods for improving adolescent literacy. These reports have also
included suggestions for school level responses, as well as recommendations for
federal and state actions to help improve adolescent literacy. These reports indicate
that for some students, reading instruction solely in the early grades is not sufficient.
This research suggests that some students need ongoing assistance in adolescence if
they are to master the skills they need to succeed in the upper grades and in college
and work settings. In particular, the research indicates that students must be fluent
readers, have sufficient vocabulary and background knowledge, be able to
comprehend complex material, and be motivated and engaged.
The most recent National Assessment of Educational Progress data on reading
are 2007 data for 4th and 8th graders and 2005 data for 12th graders. According to
these data, both 4th and 8th grade students performed significantly higher in 2007 than
in 1992, the first year the test was administered. The percentage of 4th grade students
performing at or above the Basic level in reading increased from 62% in 1992 to 67%
in 2007. The percentage of 8th grade students performing at or above the Basic level
in reading increased from 69% in 1992 to 74% in 2007. In contrast, data for 12th
graders indicate that the percentage of students performing at or above the Basic level
in reading decreased from 80% in 1992 to 73% in 2005.

In response to concerns about adolescent literacy, the Striving Readers program
was initiated through appropriations measures in 2005 to evaluate and implement
programs that have the potential to improve adolescent literacy. The U.S.
Department of Education awards Striving Readers funds for the implementation and
evaluation of reading curricula and professional development programs, as well as
other activities intended to improve reading achievement for middle- and high-school
students. Grants are awarded competitively to local educational agencies (LEAs) or
to partnerships made up of LEAs, institutions of higher education and public or
private non-profit or for-profit organizations with expertise in adolescent literacy or
rigorous evaluation.
A growing body of research indicating a need for a greater focus on adolescent
literacy issues has heightened interest in federal legislation on this issue. The
Striving Readers program was initiated as a demonstration program to provide data
on programs that are or have the promise of being successful in improving adolescent
literacy skills. Congressional consideration of reauthorizing the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act (ESEA) in the 111th Congress may include discussion of
whether this program should receive a specific authorization in the ESEA and
whether evidence from the demonstration program, in conjunction with other
research data, supports scaling up the program and converting it to a formula grant
program, or whether the evidence is insufficient to support continuation or expansion
of the program.

Contents
Overview of Adolescent Literacy Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
National Assessment of Educational Progress Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Research on Adolescent Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
The Striving Readers Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Program Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Issues for the 111th Congress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
List of Tables
Table 1. Percentage Of Students At Each Achievement Level in Reading,
Selected Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Table 2. Striving Readers Funding: 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

The Striving Readers Program
Overview of Adolescent Literacy Issues
In addition to Members of Congress, parents, reading experts, education
professionals, and state and local governments have expressed concern about the
current state of adolescent literacy. Data on college readiness indicate that many
students leave high school unprepared to handle college-level work. A 2006 ACT
report noted that
Only 51 percent of 2005 ACT-tested high school graduates are ready for college-
level reading — and, what’s worse, more students are on track to being ready for
college level reading in eighth and tenth grade than are actually ready by the time
they reach twelfth grade.1
To become a reader capable of understanding the complex material encountered
in high school and beyond, adolescents must have a variety of sophisticated skills.
These skills include the following:
how to read purposefully, select materials that are of interest, learn from those
materials, figure out the meanings of unfamiliar words, integrate new
information with information previously known, resolve conflicting content in
different texts, differentiate fact from opinion, and recognize the perspective of
the writer....2
Clearly, no single measure of a student’s literacy ability can adequately capture
all these skills. However, for simplicity, the discussion of adolescent literacy in this
report will use student achievement levels in reading as a measure of adolescent
literacy. The data relied upon here to measure reading skills are published by the
widely respected National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), also known
as the ‘Nation’s Report Card.’ NAEP is the only regular national assessment of
student reading achievement.
This report discusses the NAEP achievement levels attained in reading by 4th,
8th, and 12th graders, summarizes some of the recent research literature on adolescent
literacy, and discusses the Striving Readers program. It will be updated in response
to legislative developments.
1 Reading Between the Lines: What the ACT Reveals About College Readiness in Reading,
ACT. 2008. Iowa City, IA.
2 Reading at Risk: How States Can Respond to the Crisis in Adolescent Literacy, National
Association of State Boards of Education. October 2005. Alexandria, VA.

CRS-2
National Assessment of Educational Progress Data
NAEP measures the academic performance of students in the United States in
public and private schools in grades 4, 8, and 12. NAEP is administered by the U.S.
Department of Education’s (ED) National Center for Education Statistics, with
oversight provided by the National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB).3 The
subjects covered by these regular assessments include reading, writing, math and
science; in addition, NAEP conducts less frequent assessments in other subjects.
NAEP consists of 2 separate groups of tests. One is the main assessment, in
which test items (questions) are revised over time in both content and structure to
reflect more current views and practices. The main assessment also reports pupil
scores in relation to performance levels — standards for pupil achievement that are
based on score thresholds set by the NAGB. The performance levels are considered
to be “developmental” and are intended to place NAEP scores into context. They are
based on determinations by NAGB of what pupils should know and be able to do at
a basic (“partial mastery”), proficient (“solid academic performance”), and advanced
(“superior performance”) level with respect to challenging subject matter.4 For this
discussion, this CRS report focuses on NAEP’s main assessment data because the
data are reported in relation to performance levels. These performance levels are
useful for indicating what students should be able to do in reading at particular grade
levels.
The most recent NAEP data on reading are 2007 data for 4th and 8th graders and
2005 data for 12th graders.5 According to these data, both 4th and 8th grade students
performed significantly higher in 2007 than in 1992, the first year the test was
administered. (See Table 1). The percentage of 4th grade students performing at or
above the Basic level in reading increased from 62% in 1992 to 67% in 2007. The
percentage of 4th graders performing at or above the Proficient level increased from
29% in 1992 to 33% in 2007. The percentage of 8th grade students performing at or
above the Basic level in reading increased from 69% in 1992 to 74% in 2007. There
was no significant change in the percentage of 8th graders students performing at or
above the Proficient level in 2007 compared to 1992.
3 The National Assessment Governing Board is an independent organization whose members
are appointed by the U.S. Secretary of Education. The Governing Board provides overall
policy direction to the NAEP program. Its members include governors, state legislators,
local and state school officials, educators, business representatives, and members of the
general public.
4 The main NAEP assessments are based on subject area frameworks developed by the
National Assessment Governing Board. The main NAEP reading test assesses students on
three different contexts for reading: reading for literacy experience, reading for information,
and reading to perform a task. NAEP also includes long-term assessments that have not
changed in content or structure since they were developed in 1969. Long-term NAEP was
originally intended to allow for more reliable comparisons from year to year. For more on
NAEP, see CRS Report RL31407, Education Testing: Implementation of ESEA Title I-A
Requirements Under the No Child Left Behind Act, by Wayne Riddle.
5 The Condition of Education 2008, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for
Education Programs (NAEP), 2008.

CRS-3
In contrast, data for 12th graders indicate that the percentage of students
performing at or above Basic decreased from 80% in 1992 to 73% in 2005, and the
percentage performing at or above Proficient decreased from 40% in 1992 to 35% in
2005.6
In spite of the improvements in achievement levels of 4th and 8th graders
between 1992 and 2007, 33% of 4th graders and 26% of 8th graders continued to read
below the Basic level in 2007; that is, they had not attained the partial mastery of
grade level reading required to perform at the Basic level. For 12th graders, the
percentage of students performing below the Basic level increased from 20% in 1992
to 27% in 2005.
6 2005 data are the most recent data available for 12th graders.

CRS-4
Table 1. Percentage Of Students At Each Achievement Level in Reading,
Selected Years
(percentage)
1992a
1994a
1998a
1998b
2002b
2003b
2005b
2007b
Grade 4
Below Basic
38
40
38
40
36
37
36
33
At or above Basic
62
60
62
60
64
63
64
67
At or above Proficient
29
30
31
29
31
31
31
33
At Advanced
6
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
Grade 8
Below Basic
31
30
26
27
25
26
27
26
At or above Basic
69
70
74
73
75
74
73
74
At or above Proficient
29
30
33
32
33
32
31
31
At Advanced
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
Grade 12
Below Basic
20
25
23
24
26
NA
27
NA
At or above Basic
80
75
77
76
74
NA
73
NA
At or above Proficient
40
36
40
40
36
NA
35
NA
At Advanced
4
4
6
6
5
NA
5
NA
Source: The Condition of Education 2008, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Programs
(NAEP). 2008.
Note: NA=Not Available.
a. Testing accommodations (e.g., extended time, small group testing) for children with disabilities and limited English
Proficient students were not permitted.
b. Testing accommodations permitted. In 1998, testing accommodations were permitted for the first time. Because 1998
was a transition year, 1998 scores are reported both without testing accommodations and with testing
accommodations.

CRS-5
Research on Adolescent Literacy
Many reports have been issued in recent years summarizing what is known
about effective methods for improving adolescent reading and professional training.
These reports have also included suggestions for school-level responses and
recommendations for federal and state actions to help improve adolescent literacy.7
These reports indicate that for some students, reading instruction solely in the early
grades is not sufficient. This research suggests that some students need ongoing
assistance in adolescence if they are to master the skills they need to succeed in the
upper grades and in college and work settings. In particular, the research indicates
that students must be fluent readers, have sufficient vocabulary and background
knowledge, be able to comprehend complex material, and be motivated and
engaged.8
These reports also address the steps needed to help students acquire these skills.
A frequently cited report titled Reading Next — A Vision For Action and Research
in Middle and High School Literacy was authored by a panel of 5 experts in
education. The panel was created by the Carnegie Corporation and the Alliance for
Excellent Education to come up with recommendations to improve adolescent
literacy.9 The report includes fifteen instructional and infrastructure-related elements
that the authors believe are important components of effective adolescent literacy
programs. These 15 elements are direct, explicit comprehension instruction;
effective instructional principles embedded in content; motivation and self-directed
learning; text-based collaborative learning; strategic tutoring; diverse texts; intensive
writing; a technology component; ongoing formative assessment of students;
extended time for literacy; professional development; ongoing summative assessment
of students and programs; teacher teams; leadership; and a comprehensive and
coordinated literacy program.10
7 For recommendations for states, see Reading at Risk: How States Can Respond to the
Crisis in Adolescent Literacy, National Association of State Boards of Education. October
2005. Alexandria, VA.
8 Torgeson, J. et al. (2007), Academic Literacy Instruction for Adolescents: A Guidance
Document from the Center on Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation,
Center on Instruction.
9 Gina Biancarosa and Catherine Snow, Reading Next — A Vision For Action and Research
in Middle and High School Literacy: A Report from Carnegie Corporation of New York,
Alliance for Excellent Education (Washington DC, 2004).
10 Three of these fifteen elements were listed in the Reading Next Report as the most crucial
to building the foundation of any program to improve adolescent literacy, but the report
concluded that these three elements should be viewed as just a starting point, not a complete
program. These three elements are professional development, formative assessment
(frequent ongoing assessment of student progress), and summative assessment (data
collection and formal evaluation of program efficacy). Gina Biancarosa and Catherine
Snow, Reading Next — A Vision For Action and Research in Middle and High School
Literacy: A Report from Carnegie Corporation of New York, Alliance for Excellent
Education (Washington DC, 2004).

CRS-6
In addition, the Institute on Education Sciences of ED issued a practice guide
in August of 2008 providing information on evidence-based11 classroom and
intervention practices for improving adolescent literacy. In particular, the guide
focuses on how to improve reading proficiency. The authors categorized the
evidence of effectiveness supporting the research studies they reviewed on adolescent
literacy interventions into three categories: strong, moderate, and low. For evidence
of the effectiveness of an intervention to be considered strong, the research
supporting it must demonstrate a statistically significant finding of positive effects,
and the intervention must be generalizable.12 For evidence of an intervention to be
considered moderate, the research supporting it must demonstrate strong causal
conclusions, although it may not be generalizable, or the research must be
generalizable, but may not support strong causal conclusions. Research considered
to have low evidence of efficacy could be based on expert opinions derived from
strong findings or theories. On the basis of an extensive review of the research, the
Practice Guide recommended several actions to increase reading proficiency that are
supported by either strong or moderate evidence.13
The Striving Readers Program
The Striving Readers program was initiated to evaluate and implement effective
adolescent literacy programs. It was initiated, in part, in response to heightened
public attention and an increasing body of research focused on adolescent literacy
issues. It was first funded by the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education
FY2005 Appropriations Act under ESEA Section 1502, Title I demonstration
authority; it does not have a specific authorization in the ESEA. Section 1502 is a
broad, general authority for the demonstration of innovative approaches in the
education of disadvantaged students. The Striving Readers program is focused on
students in grades 6-12.
ED awards Striving Readers funds for the implementation and evaluation of
reading curricula and professional development programs, as well as other activities
intended to improve reading achievement for middle- and high-school students.
Grants are awarded competitively to local educational agencies (LEAs) eligible for
ESEA Title I, Part A grants, who also have significant numbers of middle-school or
high-school students reading significantly below grade level or at risk of not making
11 For research to be considered evidence-based, the report requires that “rigorous studies
have shown the practices to be associated with improvements in students’ reading
proficiency.” Improving Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention
Practices: A Practice Guide, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department Of
Education (Washington, DC, 2008).
12 The Guide defines generalizable research as including “... studies that in total include
enough of the range of participants and settings on which the recommendation is focused
to support the conclusion that the results can be generalized to those participants and
settings.” Adolescent Literacy: Effective Classroom and Intervention Practices: A Practice
Guide, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department Of Education (Washington DC,
2008).
13 See [http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practiceguides/adlit_pg_082608.pdf].

CRS-7
adequate yearly progress requirements. Grants may also be awarded to partnerships
made up of LEAs, institutions of higher education and public or private non-profit
or profit organizations with expertise in adolescent literacy or rigorous evaluation.
State educational agencies may apply on behalf of eligible LEAs. Awards may be for
up to 5 years, and to the extent feasible, are equally divided between projects that
serve middle-school students and those that serve high-school students.
Because the program is new and relatively small, the emphasis is on funding
projects likely to expand and improve the existing body of research data on effective
adolescent literacy programs. Funded grantees are to focus on practices and
programs that are having success in improving adolescent literacy or on innovative
programs that are likely to improve adolescent literacy. All funded projects must
include the following:
(1) supplemental literacy interventions targeted to students who are reading
significantly below grade level; (2) cross-disciplinary strategies for improving
student literacy, which may include professional development for subject matter
teachers and use of research-based reading and comprehension strategies in
classrooms across subject areas; and (3) a strong experimental evaluation
component.14
The Striving Readers program was adopted in response to an Administration
budget proposal. The Administration requested funding of $100 million for the
program in FY2005, its first year of funding; the program received funding of $24.8
million. For FY2009 the Administration has requested $100 million in funding for
the program. Table 2 shows the entire funding history for the program.
Table 2. Striving Readers Funding: 2005-2009
Fiscal Year
Budget Request ($)
Appropriation ($)
2005
100,000,000
24,800,000
2006
200,000,000
29,700,000
2007
100,000,000
31,596,000
2008
100,000,000
35,371,000
2009
100,000,000
Source: U.S. Department of Education budget justifications, selected years.
14 See [http://www.ed.gov/programs/strivingreaders].

CRS-8
Implementation Status
The first awards under this program were made to eight grantees in February of
2006.15 Each grant was awarded for a five-year period. Appropriations from
subsequent years have been used to fund continuation grants for these award
recipients. The first school year in which these programs were implemented was
2006-2007; the final school year of funding for these grantees will be 2010-2011.
ED established two absolute priorities for the first round of Striving Readers grants:
(1) grantees will use program funds only to serve students who attend schools
eligible to receive funds under Part A of Title I and who are in grades 6 though
12; and (2) grantees will (a) implement school-level strategies designed to
increase reading achievement by integrating enhanced literacy instruction
throughout the curriculum and the entire school, (b) implement an intensive,
targeted intervention for students reading at least 2 years below grade level, and
(c) carry out a rigorous, independent evaluation of the project that must include
an evaluation of the targeted intervention and must use an experimental research
design.16
Both the intensive, targeted interventions (focused on students reading two or
more years below grade level), and the school level activities, are to be in place each
year of the grant. The school level activities are to serve all the students in grades 6-
12 who attend the school(s) benefitting from the grant.17
Program Performance. Grantees are required to submit annual performance
reports to ED. In addition, grantees are required to hire independent evaluators to
conduct implementation and impact evaluations of their programs. Implementation
reports based on data for the school year 2006-2007 were to be submitted to the
Department by September of 2008. These reports are available on ED’s Striving
Readers website.18 Grantees are also required to submit an impact report to ED in
2009. In addition to data on the program’s impact, these reports are to include
updated information on the implementation (for years 1 and 2) of the project.
Grantees are also required to provide a final evaluation report at the end of the grant
that includes comprehensive impact and implementation data.
ED’s Institute of Education Sciences issued an adolescent literacy guide in
August of 2008; it also intends to issue two reports (in 2010 and 2011) analyzing the
15 The current grantees are District #299 of the Chicago Public Schools, Kentucky’s
Danville School District, Oregon’s Multnomah County School District #1, Newark, New
Jersey Public Schools, the Ohio Department of Youth Services, the San Diego Unified
School District, Massachusett’s Public Schools, and Memphis City Schools.
16 U.S. Department of Education, Fiscal Year 2009: Justifications of Appropriation
Estimates to the Congress.
17 For example, if a grant is for a middle school serving grades 6-8, then the school level
activities must serve all three grades.
18 Per conversations with Marcia Kingman, Striving Readers Program Officer.
Implementation reports are available at [http://www.ed.gov/programs/strivingreaders/
performance.html].

CRS-9
evidence provided by the current grantees’ projects. And, the Administration has
stated that at its FY2009 funding request ($100 million), there would be sufficient
money to begin an independent evaluation of the program.
Thus far, the only performance data available on the program are based on ED’s
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measures. Striving Readers
currently has two performance measures — the first is a measure of the intensive
targeted intervention, the second is a measure of the whole school program:
(1) the percentage of adolescent students reading significantly below grade level
who demonstrate a gain in their reading achievement at a minimum of one grade
level or its equivalent after participating in an intensive literacy intervention over
an academic year.
(2) the increase in the percentage of students participating in the Striving Readers
program who score at or above Proficient on the State’s assessment in
reading/language arts.
Data on these measures are currently only available for the first year of the
program’s implementation (for 7 of the 8 grantees). At the end of the 2006-2007
school year, 30% of the students participating in an intensive, targeted intervention
had gained at least one grade level in reading achievement. The percentage of
participating students scoring at or above Proficient in reading/language arts
increased from 59% in the spring of 2006 to 61% in the spring of 2007.
Issues for the 111th Congress
Congressional interest in legislation focusing on adolescent literacy is based in
part on the growing body of research indicating that for some students reading
instruction in the early grades is not sufficient to ensure that adolescents will be
proficient in the reading skills they need for high-school-level work and beyond. The
Striving Readers program was initiated as a demonstration program to provide data
on programs that are or have the promise of being successful in improving adolescent
literacy skills. During reauthorization of the ESEA,19 Congress may consider
whether this program should receive a specific authorization in the ESEA and
whether the current demonstration program, in conjunction with other research data,
supports scaling up the program and converting it to a formula grant program or
whether the evidence is insufficient to support continuation or expansion of the
program.
Many existing federal programs can support, among other things, reading
instruction for adolescents. However, Striving Readers is the only program solely
devoted to this purpose. Other federal education programs that include reading
programs as part of the services that can be provided are ESEA Title I-A, the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and ESEA Title III, Language Instruction
19 The ESEA authorization expired with FY2008. Reauthorization may be considered by
the 111th Congress.

CRS-10
for Limited English Proficient and Immigrant Students. The Literacy Through
School Libraries program (ESEA Title I-B, Subpart 4) provides competitive grants
to help LEAs provide up to date library services. Finally, ESEA Title II authorizes
programs for teacher training, although the emphasis is on mathematics and science.
Among the issues Congress may grapple with in conjunction with an ESEA
reauthorization is whether existing programs can adequately address adolescent
literacy issues or whether a dedicated adolescent literacy program with sufficient
funding is necessary to help foster improvements in adolescent literacy.