Longitudinal Analysis of Time, Engagement, and Achievement in At-Risk versus Non-Risk Students

Abstract

This longitudinal study investigated the effects of time spent in academic instruction and time engaged on elementary students' academic achievement gains. Three groups were compared over grades as follows: (a) an at-risk experimental group of low-socioeconomic status (SES) students for whom teachers implemented classwide peer tutoring (CWPT) beginning with the second semester of first grade continuing through Grade 3; (b) an equivalent at-risk control group; and (c) a non-risk comparison group of students of average- to high-SES. In both the control and comparison groups, teachers employed conventional instructional practices over Grades 1 through 3. Results indicated significant group differences in the time spent in academic instruction, engagement, and gains on the subtests of the Metropolitan Achievement Test that favored the experimental and comparison groups over the control group. Implications include the effectiveness of CWPT for at-risk students and the continuing vulnerability of at-risk students whose daily instructional programs provide less instructional time and foster lower levels of active academic engagement.