The evidence base for Accelerated Reader with adolescent learners is thin: only 2 of 318 reviewed studies met WWC standards¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r3 · q3
Currency · newest study 2010 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Of 318 studies reviewed, only one met WWC evidence standards (an RCT) and one met standards with reservations (a quasi-experiment); the remaining 316 did not meet standards or eligibility screens. → Accelerated Reader™ 2010

Evidence¶

Accelerated Reader™ 2010¶

Accelerated Reader™. (2010). WWC Intervention Report: Accelerated Reader™, Adolescent Literacy. What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. http://www.renlearn.com/ar/

q3 · i? · review · r3

The report's literature search covering documents publicly available by July 2009. The WWC characterizes the extent of evidence as small for reading fluency and medium to large for comprehension; no qualifying studies examined alphabetics or general literacy achievement.

"A total of 318 studies reviewed by the WWC investigated the effects of Accelerated Reader ™ on adolescent learners. One study (Bullock, 2005) is a randomized controlled trial that meets WWC evidence standards."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Accelerated Reader has no discernible effects on reading fluency or comprehension for adolescent learners — related
• The extent of evidence for Reading Plus® on adolescent learners is small, resting on a single study that met WWC standards with reservations — related
• The evidence base for PALS in the Adolescent Literacy review rests on a single randomized trial of 120 students across 12 schools, rated as meeting standards with reservations — related
• Bullock (2005) RCT found no statistically significant Accelerated Reader effects on comprehension (STAR and 4J Vocabulary) — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• Bullock (2005) RCT found no statistically significant Accelerated Reader effects on reading fluency (DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency) — related
• The evidence base on dual language programs is thin: only two of 122 identified studies met WWC standards — related
• The evidence base for the Lovaas Model is small: only two of 58 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• The evidence base for Reading Mastery with adolescent learners is small: only 2 of 175 reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• No rigorous evaluations of trauma-informed approaches in schools met inclusion criteria in a comprehensive systematic review search — related
• Of 130 studies of school-based OST programs reviewed, 22 studies of 18 different programs met WWC standards or met them with reservations — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The guide's recommendations rest on a screened evidence base of 15 studies meeting WWC group design standards drawn from more than 2,800 citations — related