Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Aug 9.
Published in final edited form as: J Policy Anal Manage. 2016 Summer;35(3):509–532. doi: 10.1002/pam.21909

Table 4.

Impact of BIC on ELA and math achievement.

Grades 4–5
Pre–post
Grades 6–8
Pre–post
Grades 4–5
Cumulative days
Grades
6–8Cumulative days
ELA Math ELA Math ELA Math ELA Math
Post-BIC adoption: school with < 25% coverage −0.004
  (0.009)
−0.004
  (0.011)
0.008
(0.010)
0.009
(0.013)
−0.002
  (0.003)
−0.003
  (0.004)
0.001
(0.003)
0.002
(0.005)
Post-BIC adoption: school with > 25% coverage, not full −0.012
  (0.015)
−0.019
  (0.019)
−0.019
  (0.010)
0.010
(0.017)
−0.005
  (0.004)
−0.006
  (0.005)
−0.005
  (0.003)
 0.007*
(0.004)
Post-BIC adoption: full school −0.043
  (0.026)
0.023
(0.037)
−0.016
  (0.019)
−0.005
  (0.034)
−0.008
  (0.009)
0.013
(0.010)
−0.006
  (0.004)
0.013
(0.009)
Count of program schools
 With <25% coverage 115 114 85 83 115 114 85 83
 With >25% coverage, not full 52 52 42 41 52 52 42 41
 Full school 28 28 16 15 28 28 16 15
Observations 717,486 744,934 1,097,593 1,126,258 717,486 744,934 1,097,593 1,126,258

Notes: Standard errors robust to clustering at the school level shown in parentheses (*P < 0.05). All models include student covariates, grade-by-year, and school effects. Covariates include lagged z-score, gender, race/ethnicity, low income status, LEP, immigrant, and special education status. Low income is measured by eligibility for free or reduced price meals or enrollment in a Universal Free Meal school. Excludes charter school students and students attending citywide special education schools (District 75).