Claims

Students receiving 40 or more Air Reading tutoring sessions showed stronger reading impacts (effect size +0.17)

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · associational r? · q3 · i1 small
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i1 In the Texas randomized study, impacts were stronger for students who received at least 40 tutoring sessions than for the overall sample. → Air Reading 2025

Evidence

Air Reading 2025

Air Reading. (2025). Air Reading program description and outcomes review. https://www.evidenceforlearning.org.au

q3 · i1 · associational · r?

Dosage analysis within the 2023-2024 Texas randomized study (nearly 400 grade 1-6 students): the article reports that for students with "40 or more tutoring sessions, impacts were even stronger (effect size = +0.17)" compared with the overall +0.12.

"For students who received 40 or more tutoring sessions, impacts were even stronger (effect size = +0.17)."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
type claim
id air-reading-dosage-40-sessions-effect
title Students receiving 40 or more Air Reading tutoring sessions showed stronger reading impacts (effect size +0.17)
description Students receiving 40 or more Air Reading tutoring sessions showed stronger reading impacts (effect size +0.17)
status review
evidence_strength moderate
newest_evidence 2025
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-09
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content
sources 1 — air-reading-2025

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.