Taylorsville, UT – A newly released meta-analysis, encompassing 38 independent, peer-reviewed studies and covering 48,000 children over 10 years, confirms that Waterford.org’s early learning programs significantly improve reading and math outcomes for young learners across demographics.

Evaluated by experts and spanning a decade of data, the analysis found that children using Waterford’s PreK-2nd grade programs consistently outperform expectations, on average achieving more than a year of academic growth beyond what would be expected.

Key Findings:

  • Reading: Average *effect size of 0.46, exceeding the threshold for educational significance.
  • Math: Average effect size of 0.42, demonstrating strong learning gains.
  • Broad Impact: Effective for children across demographics including multilingual backgrounds, families experiencing poverty, and those receiving special education services.

“This research validates what we have seen for years—Waterford programs give all children the strong academic foundation they need to thrive, regardless of where they learn or their background,” said Matt Hill, CEO of Waterford.org.

Why This Matters

  • Proven Results: Waterford’s research-backed programs close opportunity gaps in early education.
  • Adaptability: Learning gains are found regardless of where children use the program – at home, school and community settings. 
  • Long-Term Impact: Studies show students continue to outperform their peers in later grades.

Detailed insights into the meta-analysis research methods are available in the executive summary and full report.

About Waterford.org:
Waterford.org is a national early education nonprofit that provides research-backed PreK through 2nd grade reading, math and science programs that children can use wherever they learn. Our tailored programs help children reach critical milestones by third grade, laying the foundation for future success for every child.

*Effect size is used to measure the effectiveness of a program. Anything above 0.25 is considered educationally significant according to the National Institute for Direct Instruction (NFDI). An effect size of around 0.4 is commonly used as a benchmark for a year of academic growth, based on John Hattie’s research in Visible Learning for Teachers. However, this value can vary depending on factors such as subject, grade level, assessment type, and educational context. Therefore, while 0.4 serves as a general guideline, interpreting effect size requires careful consideration of specific educational settings and assessment methods.