In an Anchorage RCT with severe differential attrition, Earobics® effects on alphabetics were not statistically significant and one subtest showed a substantively important negative effect¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · quant-synthesisr2·q2·i1small
Currency · newest study 2009 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · 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.
q2 i? Rehmann (2005) found the overall Earobics® effect across three of four alphabetics measures was not statistically significant. → What Works Clearinghouse 2009
q2 i1 For Nonsense Words Fluency, the WWC determined the negative effect (effect size –0.35) was substantively important. → What Works Clearinghouse 2009 (2)
Evidence¶
What Works Clearinghouse 2009¶
What Works Clearinghouse. (2009). WWC Intervention Report: Earobics®. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. https://www.earobics.com
q2 · i? · review · r3
RCT at a Title I school in Anchorage, Alaska, with severe differential attrition (14 of 80 discontinued), leaving 66 students; intervention was Earobics® Step 1 for 20 minutes, three days a week, for 10 weeks. Study average effect size was –0.01.
"Rehmann (2005) found that the overall Earobics® effect across the three of four alphabetics measures of beginning reading (DIBELS: Initial Sound Fluency, Letter Naming Fluency, and Phoneme Segmentation Fluency) was not statistically significant."
What Works Clearinghouse 2009 (2)¶
What Works Clearinghouse. (2009). WWC Intervention Report: Earobics®. U.S. Department of Education, What Works Clearinghouse. https://www.earobics.com
q2 · i1 · quant-synthesis · r2
Grade 1 subsample (n = 35) in the same trial; Appendix A3.1 reports a mean difference of –9.50 and an effect size of –0.35 favoring the comparison group on DIBELS Nonsense Words Fluency.
"For one subtest (Nonsense Words Fluency), the WWC determined that the negative effect was substantively important (that is, an effect size with an absolute value of at least 0.25)."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Alphabet Knowledge and Print Awareness — outcome: instruction changes it
- Phonological Awareness — outcome: instruction changes it
Related Claims¶
- In a Los Angeles RCT, Earobics® plus Open Court improved phonological awareness but not letter knowledge, phonics, or fluency — related
- Lexia Early Reading shows no significant advantage over Earobics on alphabetics, with several negative effects substantively important — related
- In a Florida RCT, Earobics® outperformed no-supplement control on several DIBELS subtests but showed no significant advantage over Lexia Early Reading — related
- In a Chicago quasi-experiment, Earobics®'s overall effect was not significant, but the CTOPP Sound Matching subtest showed a significant positive effect — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
earobics-rehmann-2005-null-and-negative-effects |
title |
In an Anchorage RCT with severe differential attrition, Earobics® effects on alphabetics were not statistically significant and one subtest showed a substantively important negative effect |
description |
In an Anchorage RCT with severe differential attrition, Earobics® effects on alphabetics were not statistically significant and one subtest showed a substantively important negative effect |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2009 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — what-works-clearinghouse-2009, what-works-clearinghouse-2009-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.