Four methods of identifying individual change each duplicated group-based effect sizes, with the reliable change index and growth curve approaches showing stronger consistency and predictive power (Frijters et al.)¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2013 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2016: tool and model accuracy changes quickly
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? Each of four change metrics (normalization, Jacobson-Truax index, HLM growth rates, fixed criterion) duplicated traditional group-based effect sizes; the reliable change index and growth curve approaches showed stronger consistency and predictive power. → Mary Beth Calhoon 2013
Evidence¶
Mary Beth Calhoon 2013¶
Mary Beth Calhoon, Hollis S. Scarborough, Brett Miller. (2013). Interventions for struggling adolescent and adult readers: instructional, learner, and situational differences. Read Writ 26:489–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-013-9442-7
q2 · i? · review · r2
The editorial summarizes Frijters, Morris, Sevcik, and Lovett's analysis of PHAST Reading intervention outcome data, in which individual change was characterized with four methods and compared for utility; "the reliable change index and growth curve approaches showing stronger consistency and predictive power".
"Results indicate that each method duplicated traditional group-based effect sizes, with the reliable change index and growth curve approaches showing stronger consistency and predictive power."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Reading outcomes of struggling adolescent readers were strongly related to the instructional modality of a common reading program (Calhoon and Petscher) — related
- The survey reports, citing Pavlik et al., that no single knowledge tracing model was always the best, and that a better model must consider multiple student features and the learning context. — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
four-change-metrics-reliable-change-and-growth-curve-stronger |
title |
Four methods of identifying individual change each duplicated group-based effect sizes, with the reliable change index and growth curve approaches showing stronger consistency and predictive power (Frijters et al.) |
description |
Four methods of identifying individual change each duplicated group-based effect sizes, with the reliable change index and growth curve approaches showing stronger consistency and predictive power (Frijters et al.) |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2013 |
recheck_by |
2016 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — mary-beth-calhoon-2013 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.