Fluency Formula™ shows a negative but statistically non-significant effect on second-grade reading comprehension (effect size –0.28, improvement index –11)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr?·q3
Currency · newest study 2007 · 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 i? In the same randomized controlled trial, Fluency Formula™ students scored lower than comparison students on the Woodcock-Johnson III Passage Comprehension subtest, with an effect size of –0.28 that was not statistically significant. → Fluency Formula™ WWC Intervention Report 2007
Evidence¶
Fluency Formula™ WWC Intervention Report 2007¶
Fluency Formula™ WWC Intervention Report. (2007). What Works Clearinghouse, U.S. Department of Education. http://teacher.scholastic.com/products/fluencyformula/pdfs/FF_EffectivessReport.pdf
q3 · i? · causal · r?
Randomized controlled trial (Sivin-Kachala & Bialo, 2005), 128 second-grade students; WWC-computed comprehension effect size on the Woodcock-Johnson III Passage Comprehension subtest was –0.28, "ns", improvement index –11 (Appendix A3.2).
"The WWC did not find a statistically significant difference between the groups. However, the effect was negative and substantively important (that is, an effect size of at least –.25)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Fluency effects of Fluency Formula™ differ by initial ability: positive for low-ability students (effect size 0.66) and negative for high-ability students (effect size –0.21), both non-significant — related
- Fluency Formula™ shows a positive but statistically non-significant effect on second-grade oral reading fluency (effect size 0.26, improvement index +10) — related
- The evidence base for Fluency Formula™ consists of a single small randomized controlled trial, with no studies addressing alphabetics or general reading achievement — related
- Students in the Readable English intervention group showed significant improvements in reading fluency and comprehension compared to the control group — related
- The online vocabulary intervention did not significantly improve reading comprehension — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
fluency-formula-negative-nonsignificant-comprehension-effect |
title |
Fluency Formula™ shows a negative but statistically non-significant effect on second-grade reading comprehension (effect size –0.28, improvement index –11) |
description |
Fluency Formula™ shows a negative but statistically non-significant effect on second-grade reading comprehension (effect size –0.28, improvement index –11) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2007 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-07 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — fluency-formula-wwc-intervention-report-2007 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.