Scaling a National Model of Reading Engagement (MORE)

Last registered on September 30, 2025

Pre-Trial

Trial Information

General Information

Title
Scaling a National Model of Reading Engagement (MORE)
RCT ID
AEARCTR-0016353
Initial registration date
July 09, 2025

Initial registration date is when the trial was registered.

It corresponds to when the registration was submitted to the Registry to be reviewed for publication.

First published
July 11, 2025, 6:20 AM EDT

First published corresponds to when the trial was first made public on the Registry after being reviewed.

Last updated
September 30, 2025, 6:36 AM EDT

Last updated is the most recent time when changes to the trial's registration were published.

Locations

Region

Primary Investigator

Affiliation
University of Maryland College Park

Other Primary Investigator(s)

PI Affiliation
Harvard Graduate School of Education
PI Affiliation
Harvard Graduate School of Education

Additional Trial Information

Status
In development
Start date
2025-07-15
End date
2028-12-31
Secondary IDs
Prior work
This trial does not extend or rely on any prior RCTs.
Abstract
Children who read proficiently by third grade are more likely to graduate from high school, be prepared for college and a career, and contribute to our 21st century democracy (Hernandez, 2011). In addition to basic word-reading skills, readers need background knowledge to successfully comprehend and learn from complex texts as they move through school and beyond (Anderson & Pearson, 1984; Kintsch, 2009; Pearson et al., 2020). Content literacy interventions help students build rich and connected ideas about science and social studies topics while developing the literacy skills they need to read, talk, and write about these topics. Such integrated interventions are rare, particularly in the elementary grades.

MORE is an elementary science and social studies program that builds schemas and improves academic achievement. Students engage with evidence-based teacher tools: (1) thematic lessons and texts, which build domain and topic knowledge within a particular schema; (2) digital activities, which build foundational word knowledge and language comprehension skills; and (3) the formative assessment of transfer, which indicates how well students can transfer knowledge from the focal topic to different topics within the same schema. The better students can transfer knowledge from one topic to another, the better their ability to comprehend passages on domain specific (science and social studies) passages and domain general (ELA, math) passages on end-of-grade state tests. Results from our experimental studies suggest that MORE increases students’ reading comprehension scores by improving their ability to build and leverage schemas of knowledge when reading texts across a variety of topics (Gilbert et al., 2023; Kim et al., 2021; Kim et al., 2024). Second, teacher PL activities are grounded in team-based learning (Michaelsen & Sweet, 2008) and research on the effectiveness of structured teacher adaptations (Kim et al., 2017; Kim & Mosher, 2023).
External Link(s)

Registration Citation

Citation
Blazar, David, James Kim and Ethan Scherer. 2025. "Scaling a National Model of Reading Engagement (MORE)." AEA RCT Registry. September 30. https://doi.org/10.1257/rct.16353-1.1
Sponsors & Partners

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information
Experimental Details

Interventions

Intervention(s)
MORE is a Tier 1 program that improves students’ reading comprehension outcomes by developing mental schemas—or intellectual frameworks—that help students acquire, organize, and apply science knowledge (Alexander, 2003). MORE operates over three years repeating the activities with decreasing involvement from the MORE team over time. In the first year they will lead the key (support) components, the second year there is shared responsibility for the key components, and finally in the third year, the district chooses whether to adopt the MORE teacher tools, and if they adopt them, implements the key components with minimal support from the MORE Team. These stages both enhance the likelihood of sustainability of the program after the grant and build upon READS Lab’s initial finding that a spiraled curriculum across years leads to transferring knowledge to untaught topics (i.e., state standardized End-of-Grade tests) in about three years.

Core Activities: Evidence-Based Teacher Tools. READS Lab provides its evidence-based teacher tools for Title I schools. In developing the MORE teacher tools (thematic lessons, digital activities, formative assessments of transfer) READS Lab incorporated the principle of “replicable modularity in design and speed in iteration” to conduct social validity, usability, and feasibility tests (Flyvbjerg, 2021). The result is a short-term, flexible intervention that eliminates the burden of adopting a long and cumbersome curriculum while accommodating varied instructional schedules across schools. (1) MORE’s thematic lessons consistent of 30 modular lessons (15 science and 15 social studies) fit into a school’s science or social studies block (on average between 30-45 minutes per day). Typically, these have been implemented in the Spring, but because they are modular and flexible, the partner will decide what implementation works best for them. In addition to written lesson plans, teachers have access to lesson slides that guide facilitation of equitable and content-focused student discussions. These equitable discussion practices repeat week after week, allowing teachers to refine their implementation of these practices over time, thereby giving teachers and students the cognitive space to focus deeply on the evolving content. (2) MORE’s digital activities are accessible throughout the school day. The activities incorporate principles for building evidence-based apps from a recent meta-analysis (Kim, et al., 2021) and students who are struggling with the lesson vocabulary can receive extra practice with the words through the digital activities – completing approximately two “books” before the end of the lesson. (3) Formative assessment of transfer are provided at the end of each unit and take, on average, about 30 minutes to complete.

Support Components: Professional Learning (PL) to support teacher structured adaptations leverages schools’ literacy Teacher Leaders (e.g., literacy facilitators, multi classroom leaders, that often focus on K-2 or 3-5 grade bands) to facilitate activities grounded in team-based learning (Michaelsen & Sweet, 2008) and research on the effectiveness of structured teacher adaptations (Kim et al., 2017; Kim & Mosher, 2023). (1) Teacher leader professional learning (PL): Teacher Leaders (TLs) from each participating school attend a flexible two day professional learning session to start the school year focusing on how MORE engages student emotionally and cognitively. The PL also provides training on the logistics of rolling out the digital activities and MORE’s structured discussions embedded into the thematic lesson to help get all students talking in the classroom. These TLs then participate in 3 sessions to help them lead Professional Learning Community (PLC) sessions around the three MORE teacher tools. (2) Asynchronous teacher modules: Approximately one or two weeks prior to the introduction of a teacher tool (e.g., the digital activities), teachers are asked to acquire knowledge about a tool through MORE asynchronous modules and complete a short quiz (e.g., individual Readiness Assurance Test or iRAT) before a PLC session. (3) Team-based learning leading to structured adaptations: During the PLC sessions, teachers participate in Team-Based Learning (TBL; Michaelson & Sweet, 2008) to help them (a) apply knowledge about MORE as they work in teams to address a practical improvement goal (e.g., ensuring all students’ have to time access the digital activities) and (b) use knowledge, prior experience, and local data to adapt MORE for their students. After completion of the PLC session, teachers apply what they have learned and retake the quiz to assess how their knowledge has changed (e.g., team Readiness Assurance Test (tRAT)).
Intervention Start Date
2025-08-01
Intervention End Date
2028-07-31

Primary Outcomes

Primary Outcomes (end points)
MORE Short-term Outcomes: MORE assesses student’s reading fluency, vocabulary, writing conventions and quality (3rd and 4th grade only), domain specific reading comprehension (e.g., science or social studies topics) and literacy achievement. Besides fluency and literacy achievement, which are derived from state formative assessments (e.g., MAP, mCLASS, AIMESweb), all these measures are researcher developed and have been utilized in prior published papers (e.g., Kim et al., 2024)

MORE Long-term Outcomes: Crudspa Foundation will collect the high-stakes standardized state assessment from Grades 3 through 5 on literacy and mathematics.
Primary Outcomes (explanation)

Secondary Outcomes

Secondary Outcomes (end points)
Secondary Outcomes (explanation)

Experimental Design

Experimental Design
The impact study will employ a blocked cluster (school) RCT design. All participating schools will take part in MORE and we will randomly vary which grade levels receive the treatment. Specifically, in the first year of the longitudinal study, half of the participating schools will implement the MORE treatment in grade 1 (Group A) and the other half will implement MORE in grade 3 (Group B). This approach allows each school to contribute both to the treatment and business-as-usual (BAU) control sample. In those schools randomly assigned to implement MORE in grade 1 (Group A), grade 3 will serve as the BAU control group for Group B, which implements MORE in grade 3. Similarly, in those schools randomly assigned to implement MORE in grade 3 (Group B), grade 1 will serve as the BAU control group for Group A. The study is longitudinal, meaning that students will receive treatment over several years. Early grades in Group A will continue to serve as the control group for Group B across years (and swapped for later grades).

A set of schools in rural counties across several districts and states will be randomly assigned in summer 2025, for treatment to begin over the summer and into the 2025-26 school year. An additional set of schools from several urban districts will join the trial starting in summer 2026. Random assignment will be conducted within district blocks. We will pool schools across both cohorts in our primary analyses.
Experimental Design Details
Not available
Randomization Method
Randomization done in office by a computer
Randomization Unit
School
Was the treatment clustered?
Yes

Experiment Characteristics

Sample size: planned number of clusters
55 schools
Sample size: planned number of observations
5,500
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
The sample size by treatment arm is the same as the total number of clusters. All schools will participate in the treatment, with one grade (i.e., first, third) randomly assigned to treatment and the other randomly assigned to control.
Minimum detectable effect size for main outcomes (accounting for sample design and clustering)
A power analysis was conducted using PowerUp! software (Doug & Maynard, 2013) for a two-level multisite cluster randomized trial with treatment assigned at the school level. Students (Level 1) are nested within schools (Level 2) with randomization blocks. Schools will be blocked based on district. Prior research was used to identify parameters for the power analysis. Zhu et al. (2012) report between 6 to 9.5% of the variation in student test scores was between elementary schools. They also estimate that school-level covariates account for between 38 to 50% of the between school variance. Therefore, our power analysis assumes the number of students per school after attrition (n = 100), estimate of the school-level proportion of the total variance (ICC = 0.06 and an estimate of the proportion of school-level variance explained by the school-level covariates (R2 = 0.38). With a two-tailed test with alpha set at .05, the experiment will be sufficiently powered to detect an effect size of 0.165.
IRB

Institutional Review Boards (IRBs)

IRB Name
Committee on the Use of Human Subjects at Harvard University
IRB Approval Date
2024-10-31
IRB Approval Number
IRB24-0867
Analysis Plan

There is information in this trial unavailable to the public. Use the button below to request access.

Request Information