Cost-Effectiveness Research

Given the competing demands on education budgets at the federal, state, and local levels, it is important to address literacy learning in cost-effective ways. To date, however, no cost-effective analysis comparing alternative early literacy interventions has been conducted (for example, small-group instruction with one-to-one instruction).

In Reading Recovery, the long-term benefits of literacy achievement may significantly outweigh the short-term cost of instruction and teacher preparation. By intervening early, Reading Recovery reduces referrals and placements in special education, limits retention, and has lasting effects. The local cost of providing Reading Recovery services for 12 to 20 weeks will be substantially less than those for retention and special education, particularly when the majority of Reading Recovery children sustain their learning gains.


Cost Effectiveness Analysis as a Decision Tool in Selecting and Implementing Instructional Interventions in Literacy. (July 2010). B. Hummel-Rossi & J. Ashdown. Reading Recovery Council of North America online document.

The Long Term Costs of Literacy Difficulties, 2nd edition. (2009, January). Every Child A Chance Trust.

What is Cost-Effectiveness Analysis? J. Ashdown & B. Hummel-Rossi. (2002). The Journal of Reading Recovery, 2(1), 44-46.

Measuring the Cost of Reading Recovery: A Practical Approach. F.X. Gómez-Bellengé. (2002). The Journal of Reading Recovery, 2(1), 47-54.

2005-06 National Data Preview: Measuring the Impact of Reading Recovery. F.X. Gómez-Bellengé. (2007). The Journal of Reading Recovery, 6(2), 53-56.

 

Some information in this section first appeared in What Evidence Says About Reading Recovery. (2002). Columbus, OH: Reading Recovery Council of North America.