CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1Education during COVID-19 pandemicSchool Choice and PerformanceGlobal Educational Reforms and Inequalities

Impacts of Academic Recovery Interventions on Student Achievement in 2022 to 2023

Carbonari, Maria V., DeArmond, Michael, Dewey, Daniel, Dizon-Ross, Elise, Goldhaber, Dan, Kane, Thomas J., McDonald, Anna, McEachin, Andrew +4 more·2026·Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
DOI 10.3102/01623737251400377
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic caused large, persistent declines in student achievement. This paper examines 2022–2023 recovery efforts across eight districts, including tutoring, small-group instruction, after-school, extended year, double-dose, digital learning, and expert teacher interventions. The study includes 12 math programs and 15 literacy programs (three covered both subjects). Most served fewer students and provided lower dosage than planned. Using value-added models, we find positive, robust effects in just five subject-intervention pairs: one subject-specific tutoring program (+0.22 SD math, +0.22 SD reading), a small-group reading intervention (+0.33 SD), and assignment to “expert” teachers (+0.06 SD math, +0.11 SD reading). Results highlight the promise of intensive interventions while underscoring the difficulty of scaling them to meet recovery needs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/01623737251400377

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 34 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 13

  1. Barry S. S. Sass T. R. (2022). The impact of a 2021 Summer School Program on student achievement. Georgia Policy Labs. https://doi.org/10.57709/FAJ9-8597 · DOI
  2. Checkoway A., Gamse B., Velez M., Linkow T. (2013). Evaluation of the Massachusetts expanded learning time (ELT) initiative: Final study findings. Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness.
  3. Fahle E. M., Kane T. J., Patterson T., Reardon S. F., Staiger D. O., Stuart E. A. (2023). School district and community factors associated with learning loss during the COVID-19 pandemic. Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University.
  4. Fahle E. M., Kane T. J., Reardon S. F., Staiger D. O. (2024). The first year of pandemic recovery: A district-level analysis. Center for Education Policy Research at Harvard University.
  5. Kuhfeld M., Diliberti M., McEachin A., Schweig J., Mariano L. T. (2023). Typical learning for whom? Guidelines for selecting benchmarks to calculate months of learning (Research brief). NWEA.
  6. Lewis K., Kuhfeld M. (2022). Progress toward pandemic recovery: Continued signs of rebounding achievement at the start of the 2022–23 school year (Research brief). NWEA.
  7. Lewis K., Kuhfeld M. (2023). Education’s long COVID: 2022–23 Achievement data reveal stalled progress toward pandemic recovery (Research brief). NWEA.
  8. Lewis K., Kuhfeld M. (2024). Recovery still elusive: 2023–24 Student achievement highlights persistent achievement gaps and a long road ahead (Research brief). NWEA.
  9. Özek U., Mariano L. T. (2023). Think again: Is grade retention bad for kids?. Thomas B. Fordham Institute.
  10. Raudenbush S. W. (2009). Analyzing effect sizes: Random-effects models. In Cooper H., Hedges L. V., Valentine J. C. (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp. 295–315). Russell Sage Foundation.
  11. Ready D. D., McCormick S. G., Shmoys R. J. (2024). The effects of in-school virtual tutoring on student reading development: Evidence from a short-cycle randomized controlled trial (EdWorkingPaper No. 24-942). Annenberg Institute at Brown University.
  12. U.S. Department of Education. (2021). Education in a pandemic: The disparate impacts of COVID-19 on America’s students. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights.
  13. U.S. Department of Education. (2023). Digest of education statistics: 2023. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Carbonari, M. V., DeArmond, M., Dewey, D., Dizon-Ross, E., Goldhaber, D., Kane, T. J., McDonald, A., McEachin, A., Morton, E., Muroga, A., Salazar, A., & Staiger, D. O.
Affiliations
  • Harvard University (US)
  • American Institutes for Research (US)
  • Northwest Evaluation Association (US)
  • Dartmouth College (US)
Corresponding author
Morton, Emily
ORCID
Venue
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Publisher
American Educational Research Association (AERA)
Published
2026-02-10
Volume
48
Issue
3
Pages
1045-1072
ISSN
  • 0162-3737 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1062
DOI
10.3102/01623737251400377
OpenAlex
W7128516997
Semantic Scholar
97ae31bc30aa2a5ffe2700ebbe2e9c4f5d1480d0
Cited by
0
References
34
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis (publishedVersion)
Funders
AIR Equity Initiative: Educational Equity through Policy Implementation (AIR Equity Initiative: Educational Equity through Policy Implementation, 256843-5124839)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Education during COVID-19 pandemic
  • Social Sciences › Education › School Choice and Performance
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Global Educational Reforms and Inequalities
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, academic performance, tutoring, small group instruction, after-school programs, extended school year, online learning, literacy programs

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review