Phonics Data

Innovation from the 2024-2025 school year included 85 kindergarten students.  Baseline data from the 2024-25 school year shows wide variation in phonemic awareness and decoding skills. Phonemic Awareness subtest scores ranged from 0 to 42, with a mean of 19.5, a median of 18.5, and a mode of 13. About 25% of students scored at or below 13, indicating limited phonemic awareness ability. A standard deviation of 9.1 reflects significant performance variability. The distribution was slightly right-skewed, with a small number of students scoring above 40, raising the average despite most students performing well below proficiency.

This initial data underscores the critical need for targeted, systematic phonemic awareness instruction, as many students entered kindergarten without the foundational skills necessary for early reading success. The wide variation in scores reinforces the importance of differentiated support to meet the diverse needs of our learners from the very beginning of the school year.

By the end of the school year, our kindergarten students demonstrated remarkable growth in phonemic awareness as compared to baseline data as well as compared to students not who moved in to the district mid-late year and did not receive our instruction prior. The data reflect significant gains across the district and a substantial reduction in performance variability.

The mean score increased to 38.85, and the median score rose to 40, indicating that most students were performing at or near mastery.

The mode shifted to 42, the maximum score, showing that a large group of students achieved full proficiency on this measure.

The standard deviation decreased to 3.95, a sharp contrast to the beginning of the year’s 9.1, demonstrating less variability in student performance and greater consistency across the district.

The range of scores narrowed from 42 points at baseline to just 23 points (scores now span from 19 to 42).

The interquartile range (IQR) decreased significantly to 3.0, compared to 12 at the start of the year, meaning the middle 50% of students’ scores were much more tightly clustered near the top of the scale.

The distribution shows a left skew (skewness = -2.67), meaning most students are clustered at the higher end of the scale, with very few outliers on the lower end.

This data illustrates the effectiveness of our targeted phonemic awareness instruction throughout the year. Where we began with a wide spread of scores and many students with significant skill gaps, we ended with most students achieving strong foundational literacy skills, positioning them for continued reading success in first grade.

A key strength of our intervention model is the natural comparison group created by students who moved into the district midyear. Their baseline scores in letter ID, sound ID, and phonemic awareness closely matched those of our kindergarteners at the start of the year. These students received the same Tier 1 instruction and, when needed, Tier 2 intervention. By year’s end, nearly all had caught up to peers, showing similar growth in phonemic awareness, letter-sound knowledge, and decoding skills.

This pattern provides a powerful built-in control group that highlights the effectiveness of our Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction. The fact that new students entering mid-year were able to make rapid gains and close gaps within a shortened time frame reinforces that it is not simply time or maturation driving student progress, but the strength and impact of our systematic, research-aligned instruction.