Academic recovery approaches split between acceleration and remediation |
School districts armed with hundreds of billions of dollars in federal recovery aid are considering whether challenging students with accelerated grade-level work is more effective at catching them up than remedial strategies. Research from nonprofit education group Zearn, which operates one of the most widely used math instruction programs for K-8 students in the country, suggests that challenging kids with accelerated grade-level work is more effective in catching them up than remedial strategies that focus on skills they should have mastered in previous grades. However, students in majority Black, Latino and low-income schools, the research also shows, are more likely to be remediated, even when they demonstrate the same level of success with grade-level work as students in majority white and high-income schools. Researchers found that when a student is consistently accelerated, they complete twice the amount of grade-level lessons and struggle less in their math learning. When a student was remediated, the data shows, he or she had a 44% likelihood of struggling on the next grade-level lessons, whereas when a student experienced learning acceleration, he or she only had a 36% likelihood of struggling on the next grade-level lesson. “It's really a striking finding because the intent of remediation is to reduce struggle, but we see the opposite happening,” says Billy McRae, director of research and strategy at Zearn. “Students’ rate of struggle increases significantly and students are more confused when remediated.”