EIR® produced statistically significant positive effects on first-grade alphabetics outcomes (segmentation and blending, vowel sounds)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · causal r2 · q3 · i3 large
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In a randomized controlled trial, the study authors found, and the WWC confirmed, statistically significant positive effects of EIR® on both alphabetics measures. → Early Intervention in Reading® 2008 q3 i3 The WWC-calculated effect sizes were 0.80 for segmentation and blending and 1.39 for vowel sounds, both favoring EIR®. → Early Intervention in Reading® 2008 (2)

Evidence¶

Early Intervention in Reading® 2008¶

Early Intervention in Reading®. (2008). WWC Intervention Report, What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. http://www.earlyinterventioninreading.com

q3 · i? · causal · r2

The WWC report describes the Taylor et al. (1991) randomized controlled trial of first-grade teachers in two Midwestern suburban schools. The report states the study authors found, and the WWC confirmed, "statistically significant positive effects on both measures" of alphabetics; no effect size appears in this sentence.

"When the EIR® group was compared with the comparison group, the study authors found, and the WWC confirmed, statistically significant positive effects on both measures."

Early Intervention in Reading® 2008 (2)¶

Early Intervention in Reading®. (2008). WWC Intervention Report, What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. http://www.earlyinterventioninreading.com

q3 · i3 · causal · r2

WWC calculations for the Taylor et al. (1991) randomized controlled trial (Appendix A3.1) report a segmentation-and-blending mean difference of 3.89 favoring EIR®, an "effect size" of 0.80, statistically significant, with an improvement index of +29.

"Segmentation and blending Grade 1 12/56 14.30 (4.09) 10.41 (5.41) 3.89 0.80 Statistically significant +29"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• EIR® showed large alphabetics effect sizes and improvement indices of +29 to +42 percentile points in the one qualifying study — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• EIR® had a positive, substantively important but statistically non-significant effect on first-grade reading comprehension — related
• The evidence base for EIR® is small: only one of seven reviewed studies met WWC evidence standards — related
• Training effects were larger on outcome measures aligned with the trained skill (blending, segmenting) than on less aligned measures — related